[Owasp-board] Meeting Today

Kate Hartmann kate.hartmann at owasp.org
Mon Dec 5 16:50:00 UTC 2011


We CAN do anything.  The challenge with this is to quantify an individual's
contributions.  We had taken a stab at "O Points" but I'm not sure that was
well received.

If we are going to try and do something like this again for the 2013 summit,
I would suggest jumping on this idea sooner rather than later to avoid a
frenzy of participation right before the summit to qualify for funding, as
well as to allow enough time to make sure the criteria is agreed upon as
fair by the community to which it would apply.

Kate Hartmann
Operations Director
301-275-9403
www.owasp.org 
Skype:  Kate.hartmann1


-----Original Message-----
From: owasp-board-bounces at lists.owasp.org
[mailto:owasp-board-bounces at lists.owasp.org] On Behalf Of Jim Manico
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 11:39 AM
To: Mark Bristow
Cc: OWASP Foundation Board List
Subject: Re: [Owasp-board] Meeting Today

Can we dial down "complete" sponsored travel for all but the most active
OWASP contributors? Or at least control those costs in some way?

--
Jim Manico
(808) 652-3805

On Dec 5, 2011, at 5:52 AM, Mark Bristow <mark.bristow at owasp.org> wrote:

> Eoin,
>
> Some comments re conferences inline:
>
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 6:34 AM, eoin keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I can not make it to today's meeting unless you are willing to move 
>> it either way by 1 hour.
>>
>> Comments below are in relation to the spreadsheet in googledocs "2012 
>> Budget"
>> Some, you may disagree with but, it is our job to challenge ad make 
>> robust our strategy and financial position.
>>
>>
>> Expenditures:
>> Summit 2013 - $100K - Should this be in 2012 budget? I believe we 
>> need to do additional fundraising to achieve this funding goal.
> The reason that the GCC put this into the 2012 budget is to amortize 
> the losses of a summit over multiple years.  $100 was roughly "half"
> the expected funding needed for a 2013 summit.  Also note that the 
> summit is being planed for Q1 of 2013 currently so there will be many 
> expendatures actually dispensed in 2012.
>
> I agree that additional fundraising is needed.  Please see the three 
> options I proposed @ USA. (sorry can't access google docs from the
> office) all of them include sponsorship projections however the nature 
> of the summit will be a financial loss to the organization (and always 
> has been) mainly due to the large number of sponsored travel 
> arrangements that is key to summit success.
>
>> The current revenue stream is related to "keeping the lights on".
>> If we want a summit in 2013 I believe we should think of options to 
>> promote the event and seek corporate sponsorhsip, starting this now 
>> means we have a year to do it.
>> Do we pay for a 2013 summit from 2012 revenue?
>> We should should offer corporate members the option of sponsoring the 
>> summit as part of the membership fee? (Say an extra $1000 guarantees 
>> them a ticket to the event, this has obvious benefits for an
organisation).
> This is one idea being entertained, however I would say $1000 is 
> groosly undervaluing a sponsorship of the summit and no where near the 
> types of funding needs we have.
>
>> We should offer individual members the option of donating to the 
>> summit when signing up for membership (say $10 for a change to win a 
>> summit ticket for OWASP Summit 2013).
> This is a cool idea.
>
>> We should approach the large corporates (IE, Goog, Moz, IBM etc) now 
>> via the conferences committee (or board) to ask for summit support 
>> citing what was achieved at the last summit and "how they can help 
>> change the face of application security" by supporting such an event.
> We absolutely need to do this and I think having the board support 
> this is important.
>
>>
>> Connections committee:
>> I believe $21K for connections is very expensive? What did it cost 
>> last year? $1000 per month for marketing seems rich unless such funds 
>> are earmarked and there is a plan for it?
>>
>> Membership Committee:
>> I think this budget needs to be increased given membership is a 
>> direct revenue source. We need membership: corporate, individual, 
>> barter-in-trade, the more the better and a strategy in getting more 
>> members and funding behind this activity.
>>
>> Conferences Committee:
>> Do we need $5K for cameras? Stats show that very few people look at 
>> recorded events!! Sure AppsSec EU videos were not even released even 
>> thought expensive transport costs for the equipment was paid for.
> The idea here was to expand our pool of cameras to make them available 
> to smaller events while continuing to support our marquee events with 
> inexpensive video capture.  This is also intended to look into 
> additional equipment to allow live streaming.  This saves us tons of 
> $$ as filming a single 3-4 track event costs more than $5000.  Also, 
> some of the cameras we have need replacement supplies.
>
>> What does event sponsorship support do? why does it cost $10K. 
>> Sponsorship is meant to make money!! :)
> This is to hire a part time resource to do support capture.  The plan 
> is for this to be a net positive but we are in high need of a 
> "marketing" person.
>
>> Should we continue to support loss making conferences? To what 
>> extent. Do we have a cap of exposure?
> This was in my proposed budget as regional "loss-leader" budgets but 
> did not make the final budget.  Now that some basic processes have 
> been put in place (OCMS) the plan is to be more stringent with 
> budgets, signature authorities, and expendatures next year.
>
>> Lets increase conference ticket fees and training by 10%
> Currently there is no way to implement this.  Event planners set their 
> own pricing.
>
>>
>> Chapters:
>> Should we consider a chapter "Summit Tax" which shall help fund the
summit?
>> May chapters out there (including my one) have lots of money and 
>> don't seem to spend it!!
>>
>> Training:
>> I believe and after talking to Seba, We need to roll out a training 
>> roadshow across USA/EU This will work on the 40/60 split but can 
>> yield significant revenue for the foundation. ($50K-$100K per 
>> region).
>> This is ala SANS model and needs to be considered.
>>
>> Membership:
>> Lets increase membership by $10 and corporate membership fee by 10%!!
>> Industry is looking to increase corp membership by 10% ($18K) does 
>> the 2012 budget reflect this?
>>
>> -ek
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Global Board Member (Vice Chair)
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Owasp-board mailing list
>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mark Bristow
> (703) 596-5175
> mark.bristow at owasp.org
>
> OWASP Global Conferences Committee Chair - http://is.gd/5MTvF OWASP DC 
> Chapter Co-Chair - http://is.gd/5MTwu AppSec DC Organizer - 
> https://www.appsecdc.org 
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
_______________________________________________
Owasp-board mailing list
Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board




More information about the Owasp-board mailing list