Vendor Sponsored BASH Activities

[MesquiteMan]

Yes, you are correct IF you were assuming that a contest sponsorship would be $1000! Plus, your analogy is wrong as the people who are providing the sponsorships in the home building gig are not the builders but rather the suppliers and are not providing the entire house. The participants in the tournaments are typically teams from various builders and the sponsor is getting their name in front of those builders just like it would be here. The sponsors are the folks such as the HVAC guy who always bought the top level sponsorship. The average price on the HVAC system for a $200,000 house is $6-8k.

 

[ed4copies]

The higher you set the bar, the more small vendors you will eliminate.

So, it becomes a question of how many contests do we want "sponsored". As the "prize distribution guy", I am in favor of EVERY contest having a sponsor who will not need me to hold his hand.

If this develops in that manner, the trivia prizes could be nicer, or we could develop other small, daily contests. Trivia has about 100-150 entries a day---and a "banter" develops, I believe it is extremely healthy for the IAP. I'm sure we could develop more such attractions!!

As with most products, I believe starting with a modest fee and encouraging participation and diverse vendors will lead to the best long term results. Prices can always be raised if demand is outstripping supply. (I will be SHOCKED if this is the case)

Ed

 

[maxwell_smart007]

I have trouble with the idea of selling sponsorships, personally, in the same breath that I'm asking for donations and preaching community support...

I just have trouble linking the two concepts in my head...I'm sure it's done all the time, but it's a bit of a deviation from what we've done up to this point.

 

[mredburn]

(ED) The first year I agree, there is little time to promote sponsorship and each day makes that window of opportunity smaller. Plus Roy has already made his donation known. Will he be allowed to sponsor an additional event when this is announced? If he is donating 25 $30.00 prizes he has shown he will donate 750.00 worth to an event. The sponsor of a contest will be put in front of 13,000 plus members, a couple thousand of them active, plus lurkers. A target rich environment. Plenty of room for large and small sponsor ships and BOB donations as well.

 

[mbroberg]

Lots of good ideas flowing. Thanks!

A sponsorship fee, minimum valued prizes, or both a sponsorship fee and minimum value prizes are all OK with me. But (don't you love "But") I would like this concept to survive into the future. I'm worried that if we start high we may not get a good response. Remember last September when I surveyed out catalog vendors about Vendor Sponsored Activities? Only 2 of them bothered to voice an opinion. One was for it, the other wouldn't rule it out. Now keep in mind that they were asked about Vendor Sponsored Activities in general, not specifically during the Bash.

I am skeptical that there will be much of a response to this at the level we are discussing. I think requiring minimum value prizes or a flat fee based on the contest would be fine but I don't think we should start right off the bat charging both. I'd rather make it super affordable for them to let them try it out a hopefully, realize the benefit.

I readily admit that I have no experience in this. I may be way off.

Roy took the initiative and proposed a new contest (i.e., one that has not been done for several years). Ed has proposed a new contest as well and will be sponsoring that. So, those are our 2 largest vendors (I think) right there. I talked to Mike and Linda at the Columbus Pen Show. Mike told me that IPD was gravitating away from handcrafted pens and concentrating more on restoration and sales of vintage pens. Mr. has made some recent posts but Mrs hasn't posted since early October. I don't know if they would sponsor or not.

In my uneducated opinion I think we need to attract the smaller vendors, get them hooked then raise the rates after they experience the benefit.

Hopefully, by tomorrow afternoon (my morning is shot), I will suggest tiers to the contests and make some suggestions about values and fees based on the data from Mike and Ed that we can all discuss and revise.

Edit in: Dummy me typed this at the conclusion of the first page without reading the second page. I could have just said, I agree we should try and attract smaller vendors!

 

[mredburn]

I would think that this year as you (meaning Andrew) inquire about prize donations it can be mentioned that sponsorships are available and the details can follow. I would expect this year to be an introduction to the idea. Let them have a year to think on it an see the benifts. Then next year Andrew has some ground work already done and may need to start contacting vendors earlier to line up sponsors.

 

[PR_Princess]

Andrew, it's even possible that the big vendors (thinking PSI, Berea, Delta, Jet etc) who might have not done much in the past, may now see a sponsorship as something that they might be more interested in....I certainly would take a closer look at it if I were in their shoes!

Actually, this might be a great thing to put into full swing for the 10th!

 

[Displaced Canadian]

Wondering if it might be better to talk to, dare I say non IAP members with this idea because IAP vendors don't really need the exposure and the lesser known vendors may see a better return on investment.

 

[maxwell_smart007]

Wondering if it might be better to talk to, dare I say non IAP members with this idea because IAP vendors don't really need the exposure and the lesser known vendors may see a better return on investment.

The only issue with that is that it's way too late to have a big non-IAP vendor commit to a sponsorship in this short timeframe.

Non-IAP vendors take a long time to consider donating - and longer, I'm sure, to consider buying advertising. I usually have to wait a month before I get a response from places like Lee Valley and the like..

 

[mbroberg]

I have attached a proposal that tiers the contests in order of perceived importance and provided suggestions for sponsorship by either donation of minimum value prizes and by flat sponsorship fee. I only want to do one, not both. I want to keep the cost low to get a good response. Remember, we will still be awarding prizes obtained by Andrew in all of the contests. We can adjust things after this bash. That's what I want. What do you want?

As I was playing with the numbers I came to the opinion that a flat sponsorship fee would be much easier to administer, in my opinion. I have not closely read PayPal's rules but I know they do not allow their service to be used for donations. This is not a donation. People are actually buying something (sponsorship) so I think the fees could be collected via payPal without violating PayPal's rules.

I also can't think of a reason why we shouldn't allow more than one vendor sponsor a contest. If 2 or more vendors want to sponsor the Freestyle contest and all of the vendors are willing to pay the sponsorship fee then they will have their name attached to the contest in the order in which the fees are paid.

The Freestyle Contest - Sponsored by Vendor A, Vendor B and Vendor C.

This would be more difficult to do if we do minimum valued prizes instead.

Tear it apart, but hurry. I want to get the announcement made but I want to be able to tell people what it will cost. This doesn't have to be perfect. It just needs to be functional. We can fine tune it in a couple of months after we see how it goes.

 

[ed4copies]

As I understand this, one of the benefits will be that the sponsor is giving the prizes and will be responsible for the delivery, tracking, etc.

If there are 2 or 3 sponsors for a contest, does that mean there will be 3 first prizes that all go to one winner?

Might it be a better plan to see if we can get one sponsor for each contest BEFORE we allow 2 sponsors for the "freestyle" and none for casting (just an example)?

(in spite of the software saying your word doc was never opened, I DID open and read it, Mike!)

 

[PR_Princess]

Mike (putting my vendor hat on for a second here) as a potential sponsor, I'm not sure that I would be too fond of paying a multi hundred dollar sponsorship fee (advertizing) only to later find that out that my competitors prizes were being given away in that contest.... As a vendor, that just seems a bit counterproductive to me.

As an a side, I think paypal is fine with donations. https://merchant.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=merchant/donations
It's anything that even remotely looks like gambling that they seem to have a problem with. (raffles etc)

 

[mbroberg]

Keep in mind that everything is still hypothetical and in the planning stage.

As I understand this, one of the benefits will be that the sponsor is giving the prizes and will be responsible for the delivery, tracking, etc.

Yes, but if we go with a straight sponsorship fee then the vendors will be paying cash, not donating prizes. Therefore, if we go that route nothing will change for the prize distribution team. The primary benefit should be more quality prizes for the membership.

If there are 2 or 3 sponsors for a contest, does that mean there will be 3 first prizes that all go to one winner?

If we go the Minimum value prize route then there could be if we let it. For Example, Freestyle Contest: 1st prize is a Wonderful Thing from Vender A, an Awesome Thing from Vendor B, so on. That happens now with the donated prizes doesn't it? Of course if we do go this route we could limit it to 1 sponsor per contest. Of course that means fewer prizes for the participants in that contest.

Might it be a better plan to see if we can get one sponsor for each contest BEFORE we allow 2 sponsors for the "freestyle" and none for casting (just an example)?

Might be. That is what this thread is about, to try and come to a consensus. There are many ways to do it and there will be pros and cons to them all. I'm trying to find at least a short term solution now that we can perfect after the Bash for the 10th. The order of stakeholder importance, as far as who should realize the most benefit from what we do, to me is 1) Member, followed closely by 2) Vendor and lastly 3)IAP because without members and vendors there is no IAP.

(in spite of the software saying your word doc was never opened, I DID open and read it, Mike!)

Which would explain how you know what it said.:biggrin:

 

[mredburn]

From a business stand point your minimum levels are Cheap enough. If nothing else they can use gift certificates in that amount as prizes. In fact I would strongly suggest you consider that the way to do it for the Pen making related contests. You will have 9 to 10 pen making related contests depending on how many Jonathon decides on.

 

[mredburn]

One idea for the trivia contest would be to leave it unsponsored and use member donations of BOBs and other stuff as the daily prizes. That lets members get their name up there. "Todays trivia prize is a BOB from DaleCamino" etc. That lets the membership at large feel connected to the bash.

 

[mbroberg]

Mike (putting my vendor hat on for a second here) as a potential sponsor, I'm not sure that I would be too fond of paying a multi hundred dollar sponsorship fee (advertizing) only to later find that out that my competitors prizes were being given away in that contest.... As a vendor, that just seems a bit counterproductive to me.

Then am I correct in interpreting this as a desire on your part to go the minimum valued prize route, with only one sponsor per contest? If a vendor sponsors a contest through a sponsorship fee then the vendor will not be donating a prize (that is, if I get my way, which is either or, not both, at least not during this Bash). We would be using prizes obtained by Andrew or purchasing prizes with the sponsorship fees.

As an a side, I think paypal is fine with donations. https://merchant.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=merchant/donations
It's anything that even remotely looks like gambling that they seem to have a problem with. (raffles etc) I think you are right.

Thanks

 

[mbroberg]

From a business stand point your minimum levels are Cheap enough. If nothing else they can use gift certificates in that amount as prizes. In fact I would strongly suggest you consider that the way to do it for the Pen making related contests. You will have 9 to 10 pen making related contests depending on how many Jonathon decides on.

Do you think the contests are assigned to the correct tiers?

I think gift certificates would be easier on anyone especially since they can be delivered electronically. If someone wins Blanks, or a Tool, that must be shipped immediately. Gift certificates give the winner a choice of items to pick from. The only complaint I have heard about receiving a gift certificate is that the member winner then has to pay shipping as most gift certificates cannot be applied to shipping (or tax if applicable).

 

[mbroberg]

One idea for the trivia contest would be to leave it unsponsored and use member donations of BOBs and other stuff as the daily prizes. That lets members get their name up there. "Todays trivia prize is a BOB from DaleCamino" etc. That lets the membership at large feel connected to the bash.

My wife works with a guy named Bob. I sure as heck don't consider him any type of prize. What is your definition of a Bob?

 

[ed4copies]

box of blanks???

 

[maxwell_smart007]

BOB = box of blanks

One idea for the trivia contest would be to leave it unsponsored and use member donations of BOBs and other stuff as the daily prizes. That lets members get their name up there. "Todays trivia prize is a BOB from DaleCamino" etc. That lets the membership at large feel connected to the bash.

My wife works with a guy named Bob. I sure as heck don't consider him any type of prize. What is your definition of a Bob?

 

[mredburn]

Box of Blanks, Yes the prize levels look ok to me. Personally I think there should be the one contest that is the top tier contest for the glory but Im fine with 3 top level contests. Im just used to competing in other areas and there is usually 1 event that is the major one with smaller events leading up to it. Having 3 top tier events isnt wrong just what Im not used to. Doesnt make it wrong for us here.

 

[mbroberg]

When the Russ Fairfield Contest was introduced it was done so with the intent of making it the Top Contest. Russ did much for the penmaking community. I have no problem with specifically making that the top tier contest and bumping the rest of them down one. anyone have any other comments or suggestions about that schedule before I revise it?

 

[Displaced Canadian]

No disrespect to Russ, but the Russ Fairfield contest is all in all a modified slimline contest. I would say the headliner should be the freestyle contest.

 

[mredburn]

I would have thought the freestyle because of the very advanced skill level would be your top tier contest. It may be that both would serve well on top. 1 for the skill level and 1 for dedication to the pen making community. I dont have a problem with the 3 contests sharing top billing. You will have to sort it out from there.:biggrin:

 

[mbroberg]

the argument would be that not everyone has the ability to compete in the Freestyle Contest but everyone can make a slimline.

 

[PR_Princess]

Mike (putting my vendor hat on for a second here) as a potential sponsor, I'm not sure that I would be too fond of paying a multi hundred dollar sponsorship fee (advertizing) only to later find that out that my competitors prizes were being given away in that contest.... As a vendor, that just seems a bit counterproductive to me.

Then am I correct in interpreting this as a desire on your part to go the minimum valued prize route, with only one sponsor per contest? If a vendor sponsors a contest through a sponsorship fee then the vendor will not be donating a prize (that is, if I get my way, which is either or, not both, at least not during this Bash). We would be using prizes obtained by Andrew or purchasing prizes with the sponsorship fees.

As an a side, I think paypal is fine with donations. https://merchant.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=merchant/donations
It's anything that even remotely looks like gambling that they seem to have a problem with. (raffles etc) I think you are right.

Thanks

Yep.

Borrowing Curtis's analogy for a second (OMG I cant believe I'm doing that), it would be like Bush sponsoring the beer cart, but giving away bottles of Cours from the cart.

I have no issues with the muti vendor thing, as long as all parties were in agreement going in. But all that could make things quite a bit more sticky - and time consuming. So, for a first year yes, one vendor per sounds like a better way to see how this plays out.

 

[mbroberg]

Mike (putting my vendor hat on for a second here) as a potential sponsor, I'm not sure that I would be too fond of paying a multi hundred dollar sponsorship fee (advertizing) only to later find that out that my competitors prizes were being given away in that contest.... As a vendor, that just seems a bit counterproductive to me.

Then am I correct in interpreting this as a desire on your part to go the minimum valued prize route, with only one sponsor per contest? If a vendor sponsors a contest through a sponsorship fee then the vendor will not be donating a prize (that is, if I get my way, which is either or, not both, at least not during this Bash). We would be using prizes obtained by Andrew or purchasing prizes with the sponsorship fees.

As an a side, I think paypal is fine with donations. https://merchant.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=merchant/donations
It's anything that even remotely looks like gambling that they seem to have a problem with. (raffles etc) I think you are right.

Thanks

Yep.

Borrowing Curtis's analogy for a second (OMG I cant believe I'm doing that), it would be like Bush sponsoring the beer cart, but giving away bottles of Cours from the cart.

I have no issues with the muti vendor thing, as long as all parties were in agreement going in. But all that could make things quite a bit more sticky - and time consuming. So, for a first year yes, one vendor per sounds like a better way to see how this plays out.

Do you have any comments / opinions about the schedule of events and prize value attached to post 50?

 

[PR_Princess]

You are asking a woman for her opinion? Jeez Mike...How much time do you have??? :biggrin:

I agree with Mike R that the prices are cheap, but I also understand your desire to keep this reachable. Can a vendor voluntarily increase the amounts should they choose, or are these amounts set?

...........oh, and I like the name of the new proposed contest!

 

[mbroberg]

You are asking a woman for her opinion? Jeez Mike...How much time do you have??? :biggrin:

I agree with Mike R that the prices are cheap, but I also understand your desire to keep this reachable. Can a vendor voluntarily increase the amounts should they choose, or are these amounts set?

...........oh, and I like the name of the new proposed contest!

Dawn,

I have been told what your days are like so I am sure I have more time to listen then you have to talk!:biggrin:

The answer to your question is yes. The values listed are minimums. I made that a little clearer in the latest revision of the announcement which will be posted in several minutes.

If you like the name then that is what it will be called.

 

[mbroberg]

Here is the latest incarnation of the proposed announcement.

The prize values listed are cheap. Maybe too cheap, I dunno. I do want to get as many vendors as possible involved int sponsoring a contest. As far as quality of prizes go remember, at least for this year Ed and his team will still be distributing the prizes obtained by Andrew as allocated by Mike. So when you look at the$150.00 1st place prize in a Tier 1 Contest that will be in addition to the $250.00 or so prize supplied by Andrew.

I would like to keep it at one vendor per contest for the time being. Because of the way the contests are being assigned (1st PM to me) it is possible that one vendor who has quick fingers would send me a PM that says he wants all of them. That is an extreme example that probably wouldn't happen, but it is possible if we allow more that one contest be sponsored by one vendor.

I think Curtis makes some excellent points and from my perspective it would be much easier to collect an up front sponsorship fee then it will be to keep track of prizes, double check values and deal with complaints that could possibly result from slow delivery of the prizes by the vendor. I'm sure Ed would argue that. Based on what he has said, from his perspective it would be much easier to let the vendors handle all aspects of awarding prizes and delivery. Dawn makes a good point also about competing products being given away in a sponsored contest. So, for this year at least, minimum value prizes supplemented by IAP prizes, and a one sponsor rule is the best way to go.

I left three contests in the top tier. If we were to limit it only to the Freestyle contest then only members capable of making a unique freestyle pen (star ships, piccolos, cannons, etc.) would be able to compete for a top tier prize. Keeping three in the top tier, ranging from slimline to something incredible gives more members an opportunity to go after a top tier prize.

Please take a slow, careful look at the attachment. Comments, criticism and suggestions are welcomed.

 

[mredburn]

I would limit it to a max of 3 compititons by a vendor not one and they must be in different competition areas. Casting, pen making, etc. You have a very short response time.
You could also have Vendors pick 1st 2nd and 3rd choices in case they dont get their first choice. You could always open the sponser ships up for those vendors that want to sponser more than one after all the vendors that will do one has subsided if you have left over events.

 

[mbroberg]

I would limit it to a max of 3 compititons by a vendor not one and they must be in different competition areas. Casting, pen making, etc. You have a very short response time.

Anyone else care to comment on this idea?


You could also have Vendors pick 1st 2nd and 3rd choices in case they dont get their first choice. You could always open the sponser ships up for those vendors that want to sponser more than one after all the vendors that will do one has subsided if you have left over events.

I think I will do that.

Thanks!

 

[mbroberg]

Version 4, only one change from version 3. Prize levels are still open for debate.

 

[mredburn]

Your prize levels are fine for a start up. You can review them next year and adjust if necessary. One thing. though, You have listed all the pen making events, but shoved all the casting and photo contests into a single entry. I believe Jonathan's last post was he was holding at 3 casting contests. The photo contests last year had 3 events as well. I take it you were going to change that before going public with it.

 

[mbroberg]

I will break those out. We will probably be adding crosswords as well.

 

[MesquiteMan]

Knowing the vendors on this site and how petty some can be, you may want to reconsider how you label the different tiers. To look like a big shot, some may choose a tier one contest since it will be perceived to be a more important contest based on the tiers but only has one category. Their minimum donation would be a value of $475 yet someone who sponsors the photo contest for example, a tier 3 contest that has 3 different categories with 1st-3rd place and an overall best of prize, would be paying $585. This assumes $75 for overall best, $75 for 3 first places, $60 for 3 second places, and $35 for each 3rd place. I don't know how to handle this other than coming up with a total prize cost and allocating the tiers that way. This may not be an issue but after dealing with all the vendor crap over the years, I have a little bit jaded view!

 

[MesquiteMan]

Ah, just re-read Mike R's post above and I believe he and I are on the same page. Personally, as the photo contest chair, I would rather have the entire photo contest sponsored by one vendor rather than have each category sponsored by different vendors. Thus the reason for my post above. Not sure if that is the intention, though.

 

[mbroberg]

Ah, just re-read Mike R's post above and I believe he and I are on the same page. Personally, as the photo contest chair, I would rather have the entire photo contest sponsored by one vendor rather than have each category sponsored by different vendors. Thus the reason for my post above. Not sure if that is the intention, though.

Curtis

Can i call you tomorrow?

Sent from my DROID4 using Forum Runner

 

[MesquiteMan]

You can call me tonight if you are still up! I will be up until midnight central time. If not, then tomorrow after 10 or so would be fine. 512-738-0775. Am I in trouble?

 

[mbroberg]

Not with me. Are you feeling guilty about something?