Re: Hotel situation

["Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Ray for clarifying things.  I know that setting this meeting up has
been a lot of effort due to currency problems, locations not wanting to
make long term commitments to the iETF, etc.

And to be fair, YOU and IAOC DID warn us that rooms would be limited at
the Hilton.  

You're also right that BA is more like Dublin, as I attended both ICANN
Dublin and ICANN BA this past year, and the ICANN attendees where very
much split up between hotels.   In both places it worked well for ICANN
and they are 2-3 times as big as an IETF. Though I suspect they are much
less sensitive to event pricing as the IETF is.  The fact they don't
charge any attendance fee, reflects the difference in funding level ICANN
enjoys.   Attendees were spread out between many hotels in BA and it
seemed to work, at least I didn't hear much in the way of complaints.
There also seemed to be a lot of good hotels in the area at different
price points.  

In BA taxi's as John L. noted are cheap, though they can be hard to find
at times, and they didn't use Uber (there was some other taxi app that I
need remember before we go down there).  That should hopefully make it
much easier for people not at the venue hotel to move between their hotels
and the venue both quickly, comfortably, and safely.


Unfortunately for the IETF, there are a lot of competing large groups all
looking for meeting space+rooms, and it isn't likely to get better for a
while. Which is good because it means the economy is continuing to improve
and that will help support more participation, but it's bad because it
means pressure to pay more to make the IETF more attractive than other
groups, and a lot of those other groups are playing with much bigger
budgets.

Spending more isn't necessarily the only option, and it would change the
IETF.  Sure we could be more attractive, and get massive room blocks if we
just spent a lot more money, but one of things I think that helps the IETF
continue to be so successful, is that it's run as a pretty lean ship. It
has let the IETF continue during tough years like 2008-2010 without making
major changes.  People should look at the IAOC's presentation on the IETF
budget, there is a lot of good info there. Compared to nearly every
organization of it's size, the IETF is run very effectively on a lean
budget, THAT"S A GOOD THING and something that I know Ray and IAOC work
hard to maintain. Thank you BTW.    At the same time: We enjoy
comparatively cheap registration fees compared to most other week long
technical events. PLUS We get great cookies and even ice cream at breaks,
and cokes at breakfast! PLUS We have solid sponsors who have treated us to
great socials. PLUS BEST OF ALL: We get great meeting rooms and the best
network and wifi anywhere.  So like many things, all could be fixed by
spending more $$$$, but that's the easy way out, but not necessarily the
best way.


    

A couple of suggestions that may alleviate some of the frustrations:

1.  Can an weekly update count of block rooms and nights available be
maintained, perhaps weekly on the IETF meeting site?  This would help
people making reservations
    know when they can skip trying a hotel because it is sold out.   I
know this is hard to keep 100% current, because some people will book &
then cancel, but any info is helpful.

2. Is it cost feasible to run some sort of shuttle between the venue and
the overflow hotels?  It may not be, but it would help with the distance
and safety concerns.

3. A longer term solution is to perhaps increase our bargaining power by
building longer term relations with a few locations. I see that we do some
of this already, perhaps formalizing it might be an option.

So instead of spending more $$$, one solution might be to change from
having such a wide variety of places we hold meetings to having a small
set of locations, which have hotels which will give us enough space,
including nearby overflow hotels, and good meeting space.  That way we
could build multi-year relationships with individual venues and hotels.

We could still do the 1:1:1 rotation, but with perhaps 2 or 3 favored
locations in each of the 1:1:1 regions.  Having a couple in each region
gives us a fall back if something isn't available and a better negotiating
position.      

This might look like:   Vancouver/Japan/Honolulu/? for AP,
Berlin/Paris/Prague/? for EU and San Diego/Vancouver/Boston/Philadelphia/?
for NA.



-glenn



On 12/16/15, 3:24 PM, "Ray Pelletier" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Glenn,
>
>> On Dec 16, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)
>><[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>>    Q- Whatąs the room block size we are getting at the recent venues
>> compared to what we got at previous ones like Vancouver, or Berlin?
>
>There are many hotels in Buenos Aires but they do not have many rooms.
>
>When we announced on 10 December that registration would open on 16
>December 
>we said:
>
>Registration and hotel reservations for IETF 95 in Buenos Aires will
>open at 1500 UTC Wednesday, December 16. Hotel reservations will include
>the headquarters hotel and the contracted overflow hotels available
>at that time.
>
>Because hotels in Buenos Aires have a limited number of guest rooms,
>the IETF has been negotiating contracts with ten hotels.  Hotels not
>available on December 16 will be announced when available.
>
>On 16 December we said:
>
>1. Hilton Buenos Aires (Headquarters Hotel, block of 300 rooms)
>2. Holiday Inn Express Puerto Madero (30 rooms)
>3. Sheraton Buenos Aires (140 rooms available)
>4. InterContinental Buenos Aires (150 rooms)
>5. Sheraton Libertador Hotel (70 rooms)
>
>Buenos Aires is not Vancouver, Berlin, London, Paris or San Francisco.
>It's more like Dublin, if you recently attended the ICANN conference
>there.  
>
>> 
>>    Q - Are hotels artificially limiting availability of the IETF block
>>by
>> only releasing parts of it to the web booking?
>>        Iąve seen hotels do this for other events.  While the whole block
>> maybe 500 rooms, they release them in 50 room blocks as the
>>        reservation block fills.  This creates the lucky 10th caller
>> scenario, where if you hit it at just the right time you win.
>
>That's not the case here, or anywhere we have negotiated agreements.
>
>We strive to contract for 600 on a peak night at the so-called
>headquarter's hotel,
>but it depends on where we are. If we are in an area surrounded by
>hotels, and
>at lower price points, we might contract for 400 on a peak night, and
>overflow
>hotels for another 200 - 300 rooms on peak to get 780 rooms on peak.
>
>Typically if we don't get our target room block it's because there's
>another group
>at the hotel, or sometimes it's because the hotel is concerned about the
>risk 
>of setting aside 70 - 90% for a group they've never done business with.
>This concern
>is also typically reflected in the cancellation provisions for guest
>rooms they will 
>sign up to, and/or when they start cutting back the number of rooms in
>the block.  
>All of which is evident in our first meeting in Latin America and Buenos
>Aires.  
>
>For those who managed to make a reservation outside the IETF block, but
>at a 
>higher price, we are trying to get you in the block at the IETF rate.
>
>Another 4 or so IETF contracted hotels are in the works and will be
>announced 
>as soon as they are ready.
>
>Ray
>
>
>> 
>> -glenn
>> 
>> 
>