[Owasp-board] Suggested OWASP Membership Fee changes?

dinis cruz dinis.cruz at owasp.org
Fri Jun 20 12:00:05 UTC 2008


I know what Jeff is trying to do, but I think Dave's proposal is better
(Dave, I would only make one change on the vendor's numbers and make them
2k, 10k, 20k and 50k)

The main reasons are:

  - Ultimately OWASP membership is a 'show of support' for OWASP and we have
to be flexible on the options given to these companies
  - Remember that we must have a worldwide cover, and 2k for a Portuguese
company is equivalent to 20k). In the past we talked about adding a GNI
filter to the prices, but it might be easier to have multiple prices which
can be adjusted to local realities
  - Another reason for the multiple pricing model is that eventually (when
we actually get around to it) we will allocated a % of the membership to the
local chapter, and again 20% of 2k (400 USD) for the portuguese chapter will
go a long way over there
  - The reason why I feel we need to have higher values is that it is easier
for companies to a say 'I will join at the 50k membership plan' than it is
to  say 'I will do a 25k membership plan + 25k of donation'
  - We also should play the game of 'equivalent to money' memberships. So if
Microsoft says we will join at 10k or 20K and allocate an internal resource
to it, we should say that that is equivalent to a '50k membership'
  - ultimately we need to make a stronger case for memberships, but with the
new crop of projects (and its improved level of professionalism), our
conferences (and Summits), books and Working groups, it should be easier and
easier to get those memberships on board (that said we also need to be more
proactive in chasing them, namely at our conferences)
  - One area that we need to change is the logos on the home page, and the
solution is probably to have a rotating gif/flash movie with more 'air time'
given to the most expensive memberships. We should also find other ways to
reward these members with exposure, maybe with a special mention at our
conferences.

The final point is that I much prefer to have an incremental change on our
model (Dave's proposal) than a radical change (Jeff's model) without a full
debate and approval from our community (SPECIALLY the chapters since they
are the ones on  the front line)

Dinis

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Jeff Williams <jeff.williams at owasp.org>
wrote:

>  The reason that the membership prices are fairly high is that when we put
> them in place, we didn't have the bandwidth to go after a lot of members.
> We may now have that bandwidth if we wanted to focus on a membership drive.
>
>
>
> I'm not at all sure that raising the prices will increase revenue.  I think
> it's very possible that lowering them would increase overall revenue.  In
> 2007 we received $72K in memberships, which is pretty low in my opinion.
> Could we get >36 memberships if we priced them at $2K?  I think so.
>
>
>
> So I would be interested in exploring a *simpler* less-expensive model…
>
>
>
> ·        Individual, Education, Non-Profit – $100
>
> ·        Company - $2K
>
> ·        Sustaining Member - $25K (front page logo)
>
>
>
> We may want to get to this over time - encouraging people to join with
> price cuts.
>
>
>
> We may also have to do something about the logos on the front page. They
> are seriously affecting page load speed.  Replace with Flash scroller?  Make
> a single image from them?
>
>
>
> --Jeff
>
>
>
> *From:* owasp-board-bounces at lists.owasp.org [mailto:
> owasp-board-bounces at lists.owasp.org] *On Behalf Of *Dave Wichers
> *Sent:* Monday, June 09, 2008 12:20 PM
> *To:* owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> *Subject:* [Owasp-board] Suggested OWASP Membership Fee changes?
>
>
>
> We've had the same fee structure for the past 2+ years and it seems
> reasonable to change it to help generate more revenue for OWASP. Do you
> think its appropriate to adjust them now or in the near future? I have some
> suggestions below.
>
>
>
> We could put these prices in place right away, or announce that they will
> increase on some date, like Oct 1 or Jan 1.
>
>
>
> *Membership Category*
>
> *Description*
>
> *Annual Membership Fee*
>
> Individual Members
>
> Individuals who support OWASP's mission and would like to provide financial
> support to our efforts.
>
> $100 USD
>
> Educational and Non-Profit Members
>
> Accredited <http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html> educational
> institutions <http://www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation/Search.asp> and
> government-approved non-profit organizations that would like to use OWASP
> materials in their courses, research, or other educational purposes.
>
> $250 USD
>
> End-User Organization Members
>
> End-user organizations that use OWASP Materials within their organization.
> Organizations with 100 or more employees are considered large.
>
> Small (<100) - $2,000 USD *
>
> Large (100+) - $7,000 USD *
>
> Consulting Organization Members
>
> Organizations with employees that provide information security consulting,
> training, or auditing services and use OWASP Materials in their services or
> marketing. Organizations with 10 or more consultants are considered large.
>
> Small (<10) - $3,000 USD *
>
> Large (10+) - $8,000 USD *
>
> Vendor Organization Members
>
> Software vendors that market security products or other software and use
> OWASP Materials in their products or marketing.
>
> $9,000 USD *
>
> * Renewal discount of 10% applied if processed prior to membership
> expiration.
>
>
>
> Here are some proposed price changes from me. Please suggest alternatives.
> We don't want to price people out of the market. I.e., the idea is to get
> more revenue and more members, not less.
>
>
>
> Individual Members – Same Price
>
> Edu-NonProfit - $500
>
> End User – Small (<100), Medium >100, large > 1000, very large > 10,000) -
> $2K, $7K, $10K, $20K
>
> Consulting – Small < 10, Medium <50, Large > 100, very large > 500) - $3K,
> $7K, $10K, $20K
>
> Vendors – Small annual revenue < $50M, Large > $50M annual revenues  -
> $10K, $20K
>
>
>
> Also, should we remove the language 'and use OWASP Materials in their …
> from the Consulting and Vendor Org
>
>
>
> -Dave
>
>
>
> p.s. Dinis – I know you want Microsoft to contribute more than $9K. They
> are talking about contributing $9K plus  ¼ of a full time developer plus
> some significant content. That's worth more like the $50K you are hoping
> for, but it's not all cash, which to me is fine.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20080620/ff60e0fa/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list