[Owasp-board] Request for Comment - New Event Profit Split Policy

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Tue Jul 17 21:13:20 UTC 2012


Sure there are other ways to raise revenue, but that's not really the
point.  The point is that a chapter should be able to raise the operational
funds it needs via whichever method it desires.  Membership revenue is
limited and will in all likelihood not make up that gap.  And not every
chapter is fortunate to be able to land a big company to sponsor them.
Also, chapters having a little bit more money than they need is not
necessarily a bad thing and is a reward for running a successful event.
Having some extra funds available also breeds innovation.  As an example,
it's having extra funds that got the Austin Chapter to start doing these
monthly webinars as part of our meetings and that translates directly to a
wider reach for the OWASP organization.  Perhaps the compromise here is to
take the chapters annual budget minus the money currently in the chapters
account?

~josh

On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Dave Wichers <dave.wichers at owasp.org>wrote:

> The target is done in advance, not after the event. We use the U.S. event
> as the date after which we figure out next year’s targets because it is the
> biggest single revenue source for OWASP, so it affects the entire next
> year’s budget in a significant way.****
>
> ** **
>
> However, I could see that we could come with an estimate for each event
> right after the previous event, and then potentially adjust it right after
> OWASP AppSec USA, with the goal that it NOT be adjusted if possible. That
> way conference planning generally know almost a year in advance the revenue
> target primarily based on the revenue generated the previous year.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regarding the $5K threshold, I think some potential for adjustment above
> $5K is reasonable to consider for the larger chapters. I might not agree to
> have the 10/90 go up to their entire target budget, because chapters raise
> revenue in other ways  too, like encouraging memberships, etc. And if they
> go way over their target, then the chapter could be significantly
> overfunded because they get 40% of the overage too. And we should also
> consider the amount of $ the chapter already has in their account as well.
> I.e., if you plan to spend $10K but have $5K already there, then maybe $5K
> is a more appropriate target. ****
>
> ** **
>
> The good news, from your reply is that you seem to be OK with the entire
> policy except for this one specific point, which I think is BIG progress.
> Hopefully others feel similar so we are approaching closure on this.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks for reviewing this.****
>
> ** **
>
> -Dave****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* owasp-board-bounces at lists.owasp.org [mailto:
> owasp-board-bounces at lists.owasp.org] *On Behalf Of *Josh Sokol
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 17, 2012 3:35 PM
> *To:* Sarah Baso
> *Cc:* OWASP Foundation Board List; OWASP Chapters Committee;
> global_conference_committee
> *Subject:* Re: [Owasp-board] Request for Comment - New Event Profit Split
> Policy****
>
> ** **
>
> 1. The point about when the profit target is determined is unclear.  Does
> this mean for the US event that we are determining the target after the
> event has taken place or is this for the next year's event?  Why are we
> using the US event to determine the timing for other events.  IMHO, we
> should be able to set the profit target for the following year's event
> within 60 days of the completion of the current year's event.
>
> 2. I am fine with the percentage splits here, but do not agree with the
> $5,000 value at which they happen.  This is more than enough for a smaller
> chapter holding an event, but for a larger chapter, such as my Austin
> chapter, our event would have to profit $18,750 in order for us to raise
> our annual budget of roughly $10,000.  In other words, this $5,000 number
> does not allow us to scale profit splits well as chapter sizes grow.  My
> suggestion would be to make $5,000 the base number here UNLESS a chapter
> running an event has submitted a budget showing annual expenses greater
> than that amount, in which case they are allowed up to that amount at the
> 10/90 split.  A subtle change, but one which I believe is necessary in
> order for this policy to scale appropriately.
>
> 3. I agree that the Chapters committee should be responsible for
> monitoring chapter accounts, budgets, and expenses as necessary.
>
> 4. I agree that the Chapters committee will need to establish new
> guidelines similar to those of the Conferences committee for local and
> regional events held by the chapters.
>
> ~josh
>
> ****
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Sarah Baso <sarah.baso at owasp.org> wrote:*
> ***
>
> Global Conferences and Chapters Committee Members (and other interested
> community members) -****
>
> ** **
>
> Kate Hartmann and the Board of Directors have drafted a proposed policy
> for profit sharing and financial oversight of future OWASP events. A copy
> of this drafted policy is attached (for those of you without google docs)
> and also available here:
> https://docs.google.com/a/owasp.org/document/d/159bD2oeAmM2yfPNeq5wHvIvHcl10Hl-c3Um2GXAW81Y/edit
>  ****
>
> ** **
>
> The Board intends to finalize this policy at their next meeting (scheduled
> for August 13, 2012), and have requested that you submit any comments,
> questions, or concerns for their consideration by that time.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thank you in advance for taking the time to read and review this document!
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> -- ****
>
> Sarah Baso****
>
> Director****
>
> OWASP Foundation****
>
> sarah.baso at owasp.org
> +1.312.869.2779
>
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120717/ebdd81fe/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list