Re: ever more hypothetical Hotel situation

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 10 January 2016 19:17 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 555431ACEAD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:17:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.664
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.664 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1shEhILqz3rc for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:17:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 252181ACEB8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:17:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 10301 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2016 19:17:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 10 Jan 2016 19:17:22 -0000
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:17:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20160110191700.42703.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: ever more hypothetical Hotel situation
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.01.1601100939050.27780@rabdullah.local>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/29Ar5eNCV3KzMjSzD6sm5IllbcY>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:17:25 -0000

>gamble," but I do agree with John: I very much doubt we would actually
>impact the cash flow of the casino, it's not like they would close it
>to outsiders ;-)

True, and by Vegas standards, the IETF is a pretty small meeting.  The
recent CES had 170,000 attendees and 3800 booths.  I have no love for
Las Vegas, but on a quick peek at the city's meeting planner site I
asked for hotels with at least 1000 rooms, 40K sq ft of meeting space,
and a meeting room that can hold 1500, and it immediately found 19
different hotels that could do that.

On the other hand, some hotels really do tell meetings to go away if
the people are low spenders.  My father used to run a company that
gave short technical courses, several running at once each with 20 to
50 people for 3-5 days.  They'd been using the same hotel for years
until one day the hotel told them we love you, but your people don't
drink enough so you'll have to find another place.

R's,
John