Here are all the posts from the Open Discussion forum that are recoverable. It is pretty much just a database dump. The parent_id will let you figure out which message it is in response to. There will be conflicts between the id numbers here and those appearing on the live forum.
hth david
+------------+--------+-----------+------------------+--------------------------+------------------------------------------------
message_id | thread | parent_id | author | from_unixtime(datestamp) | subject body| +------------+--------+-----------+------------------+--------------------------+------------------------------------------------
7a - changes to the pre-election and election deadlines - FOR Why? It is necessary to make publication in JUGGLE. 7b - letter of support for work visa - STILL CONSIDERING/INVESTIGATING THIS Why? Because so far I have found no information on the internet about this group or group members and have asked other IJA members if they know anything about this group so we (the board) can make an informed decision. The IJA is being asked to vouch for this group's abilities and the quality of those abilities. We verify something of which we have no knowledge. 7c - Lower Youth Packge prices - AGAINST...I feel this change this late will cause more problems than solutions Why? Changing prices at this time creates more problems than solution. This should have been debated by those who find it a problem back in September or even October, not 5 months later. 7d - Youth be expanded - AGAINST at this time but would vote yes to honor this idea beginning 2008 Why? Prices and policies for prices have been set and are in print and have been distributed. At least 2 of my jugglers would benefit from this idea this year, so I like the idea. I just don't agree with the timing of the idea. That is why I said I would be happy to consider this idea for 2008. I want to discuss the idea with our fest director. 7e - Money for DVD purchase - FOR Why? It's an experiment, but an experiment I think worth trying. It will give the IJA an opportunity to offer non-IJA DVD's to our members for member prices which (in a way) helps to provide more member benefits. 7f - IJA Policy for posting budget, etc - FOR Why? First, the motion specifies "IJA yearly budget." Second, chain of command in an organization is important in keeping things organized. Every non-profit I have worked with has had an advisory board. We need some sort of written policy for the progression of releasing information to the general membership. This is what I have proposed and what has worked well with other organizations. 7g - (this correction to read 7g needs to be made prior to the meeting) - Creation of Awards committee - FOR Why? It needs to be done. The same process that was followed for our yearly volunteer positions is proposed here. I will not be returning to the awards committee since it could be viewed as a conflict of interest. Kim |
Dave, I'm sorry I didn't read this post prior to posting my why's to my vote decisions. Please reread some of your posts calling me a "liar" over and over again, calling the board "dysfunctional," and being just plain rude to board members and other IJA volunteers. Those were out of line. I have received two complaints today alone about your inappropriate behavior on the forum and calling for action. That doesn't even count the ones I have received prior to today. So, please look back at your posts and take a long look in the mirror. You have made it abundantly clear that no matter what I say or what I do or what physical evidence I have to prove myself against your accusations that it just doesn't matter in your eyes. That's ok. People who know me know better...they know the truth. As far as an investigation into my work in the IJA, I would welcome an outside investigation. I have absolutely nothing to hide. I would have never answered the "why's" post if I had first read this. As far as running for re-election, to be VERY clear, I have not announced my decision either way. Kim |
Kim Laird Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Please reread some of your posts calling me a > "liar" over and over again, .... Kim, You play the victim very well. I am sure that many people feel sorry for you. Yes, I have accused you of lying. Yes, the board is dysfunctional. I am prepared to prove my accusations. Let's review, here is what you wrote about me: > Nomination Deadline - This change is being > announced in advance unlike last year where it was > an afterthought because our leader at that time > forgot to put the call for nominations into the > magazine on time. There is very little truth in your words. Last year the nominations date was not changed as "an afterthought because our leader at that time forgot to put the call for nominations into the magazine on time." We did extend the deadline but the reason was because we had zero nominations by the March 15th deadline. For those that don't remember, please read this: http://www.juggle.org/forum/read.php?6,2006,2006#msg-2006 Your summary of events does not correspond to what really happened. You were, once again, making false accusations about me, and I am tired of it. Please stop pretending to be the victim. If you don't want to be thought of as a liar, then don't lie. If I misinterpreted your post and it wasn't a distortion of the truth, then please point that out. But don't play the helpless female card. I have too much respect for you to allow that. If you are going to keep making these vindictive attacks against me, don't act hurt that I call you on it. |
I guess I have talked to enough of the really diehard members that are the organization's core. When or at what number it will stabilize is difficult to perfdict. I have always maintained that the IJA does have a core like this. These are the same folks that will attend the fest no metter where it is held. Bob Neuman |
I think that is a great idea - but we'd need some volunteer responsible for putting it together, storing it and shipping it and making sure it is returned. Bob Neuman |
Dave - thank you for clarifying your concerns about 7a. I guess I would side with the idea of better early than late (but of course excessively early maybe a problem). Recent history seems to indicate that the IJA has a difficult time finding a large number of candidates - I'm not sure the deadline really has much of an effect on this, but I certainly could be wrong. 7g - While my memory is pretty good - no two witnesses ever see an event competely the same. All communication is liable to be misunderstood by one of the parties or readers/listeners. Its just a fact. I made many comments as to how the awards committee was being run in 06 and shared my ideas. No one spoke up to say they were incorrect or bad for the IJA at that time. I took that to mean there was some agreement. But, it may have been that people were busy with other projects and did not realize I may have taken the silence or lack of oppostion as agreement. I will re-evaluate the Awards Committee after this year again and make recommendations for the future. I may find that 06 was a "fluke' and things need to be changed! 7b- I am unable to find enough out about the performers requesting this to feel comfortable recommending a special work visa to the government. As to the general "whys" behind my stances - I hesitate to post them many times because it just reopens the debate and most of the time no new information is provided. I try to weigh all of the arguments for and against and base them my decisions on that and any other relevant information I may come across. Yes, I do have to trust the people and the information I am receiving when the topics are unfamiliar to me. But then, who do I trust, one can ask (and I weigh that too on any given issue)? I am not naive enough to think that there are not people out there with their own agendas or just a plain old "axe to grind." I have found that even people with a tremendous amount of expertise, sometimes differ in their solutions to problems. Martin is but one of the voices I listen too (actually read - I rarely talk on the phone to any of the IJA members/volunteers/BOD members - about IJA business. I feel much more comfortable with posting and e-mails). In another post you (Dave) wrote about having a big change like before within the IJA leadership. If the members want that - then I am all for it! It does not strike fear into my heart or make me rethink my positions! I do what I think is right for the IJA and what the majority of the members want (I hope). If I am wrong, I should not be in a leadership position - I want to represent the average member. By the way - I am still considering whether to run for re-election. Most of that decision is going to be based on the amount of time I have available for IJA work. I find myself wanting to be involved in other projects and organizations. There is only so much Bob to go around (and probably some think that's already too much)! Finally - its Tuesday and I STILL have not made up my mind about youth pricing! Sorry. No - I will not share all of the "give and take" and reflection that is going on within my mind (I don't want to bore the average reader). Hope this helps - hey, and its a long post (for me). Bob Neuman |
Dave - sorry - I too responded (sort of) in another topic (about the agenda for the BOD meeting). I don't know whether I will run again for re-election. I want to be very clear on this. It is not because of the contentious give and take of the forums. I do not take most of it personally. I do not feel personally attacked by most of it. I believe we all want what is good for the IJA. Many of us differ on goals, methods, etc. As much as I wish some styles of posting would be different - it is clear that some think my style should be different too. We can agree to disagree... I am not trying to be coy or Machilvellian (sp?) or underhanded - whatever. I really am in a jam deciding. In one way - many of my goals for the IJA have been achieved. The books and banking are nearly straightened out. We have a Treasurer/accountant. We decide the future fest site a year in advance (or more). We kept a magazine (a controversey, to be sure). We are going to try a DVD/magazine - something new. I also wanted to make sure that there was always a Renegade show at the IJA fest. On the other hand, I am involved in other hobbies/sports and professional organizations. I would like to devote more time to some of these interests. I will not bore the reader with my list of things I want to do.... Lets be honest - being on the BOD requires quite a bit of time (and work) to do the job properly. And some would argue that I am NOT doing the job properly - but I have put in a LOT of time in attempting to improve the IJA. I think any future candidate should be aware that it is very time consuming (and have some thick skin). BUT - it has been rewarding and and honor to serve an organization that has brought me so much joy! I have met so many great folks by being on the IJA BOD. in 1990 I bought the Klutz book on juggling and taught myself. My wife got tickets to see the Flying Karamazo Bros. that same year and I was hooked after that show. In 1991 I attended my first IJA fest and haven't missed one yet. Last year I was on the BOD with Tim Furst - life is funny! Serving on the BOD can be frustrating but it has also been so rewarding. Bob Neuman |
Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 7b- I am unable to find enough out about the > performers requesting this to feel comfortable > recommending a special work visa to the > government. I agree with Bob on this one. We can't recommend someone if we don't know who it is. I had assumed someone (Don?) did know them or this motion never would have been made. A web search makes it appear that these are circus art performers (other than juggling) and as such, we probably are not the right organization to foster them. That said, I am not opposed to writing a general "we support the arts" letter, but that would be far short of a recommendation and probably of little help to them. Any such letter must make it very clear that we are not familiar with their work. |
At least one of these performers (David Aiken) has been and may still be an IJA member. He has attended and performed at many IJA festivals. Seems like we would be the appropriate organization to support him and perhaps he knows the other performers on the list. |
I have read up on the type of visa they are trying to get and I just don't know enough about them. There are several jugglers among them - but many do appear to be circus performers and there is a different visa that applies to circus employees/visa. They would ike a letter of recommendation for the whole troupe. I am not sure they meet the visa requirements (they are lengthy) and I would hesitate to recommend them if they do not. Bob Neuman |
Please run again Bob. (If real life allows) I think you have done a good job. Richard |
Dave: ... A wiki can be a good thing, but if the purpose of the wiki was to further exclude the membership, then this is yet another step backwards. Don: There are some things it does not make sense to share with everyone. The procedures for creating festival election ballots and show tickets are good things to have on the wiki so that the programming does not get lost. Making the procedures publically available would simply compromise the election to no benefit. |
I think we can state that any of the jugglers in the group that are or have been members of the IJA are known to us as performers. It is stretching things a bit to validate performers that are beyond our area of knowledge. I don't know the group, although some of the names seem perhaps familiar (which is a far cry from an endorsement). |
Timing is everything. You get large numbers of student age people at a festival when the festival is at a school, and school is in session. Mid summer, there are a huge number of things competing for attention, not the least of which is summer jobs. In Montreal, when we run a festival in May after university and college exams, the attendance is perhaps a third lower than doing it a month earlier. Unfortunately, access to facilities we can afford tends to set the date. |
Well done Andrew. I tried to do something similar a while ago, but got bogged down in other projects. I think I recall someone, years ago, postulating that the critical travel distance decision equated to a single day drive. |
It would be interesting to know what percentage does drive and how many fly to the fest. I would imagine the costs of flights and ease of travel (non-stop, close airport, etc) would also have an effect on those that do fly. Bob Neuman |
Don Lewis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dave: > ... A wiki can be a good thing, but if the purpose > of the wiki was to further exclude the membership, > then this is yet another step backwards. > > Don: > There are some things it does not make sense to > share with everyone. The procedures for creating > festival election ballots and show tickets are > good things to have on the wiki so that the > programming does not get lost. Making the > procedures publically available would simply > compromise the election to no benefit. Okay, lets explore this. First off, who actually is using this this wiki? It has been up for months, I would bet large sums of money that Martin Frost is using it, but who else? Who can read this wiki? Recently Martin managed to be wrong about declining membership and his paypal analysis, who is using a critical eye to check what is being entered in this wiki? What do I need to do to get wiki access? (Please consider this an official request.) There is nothing intrinsically wrong with a wiki. And I think it great that Martin or whoever is using it. But I don't understand the alleged danger of procedures being compromised. In the examples given, I don't think either of these are secret. Our election procedures are publicly announced every year. Our ticket procedures are obvious once you look at a ticket. Yes, a color copier and a little effort could easily be used to forge tickets. But really it is easier to just buy a ticket. In general, I am a fan of open source, but regardless, I really don't think the IJA has any secrets to protect. On a related note, we have both a "board" and a "boardplus" forum and email group. In my years on the board it was very rare that anyone posted/emailed anything to either of those areas that shouldn't have been posted openly. We need to establish open procedures and practices. "Boardplus" should be disbanded. Directors need to learn how to make open posts. Note: When the "boardplus" advisory group was being formed in a past year. People whose opinion I valued (Greg Phillips, Andrew Conway) wrote that they didn't want to get the extra emails. They said to only bother them if it was relevant to their areas. Currently "boardplus" is an advisory board of one person (Martin). If we are going to have this layer of government within the IJA, we need to establish rules for it. Please also consider this an official request for me to become a member of this advisory board (if you form it by passing the motion tonight). Note #2: When this wiki was originally set up, we were told it was going to be opened up to everyone once it got past the test phase. What changed? When was it, and more importantly who, decided that information in the wiki was confidential? |
Good morning everyone. Here is a brief list of cities within 350 statute (straight line) miles of Lexington, Kentucky--the site of the 2008 IJA Festival. Augusta, GA 346 mi Akron, OH 262 mi Ann Arbor, MI 292 mi Atlanta, GA 296 mi Chicago, IL 313 mi Cincinnati, OH 76 mi Charleston, WV 155 mi Columbia, SC 334 mi Decatur, AL 278 mi Detroit, MI 308 mi Durham, NC 337 mi Grand Rapids, MI 346 mi Indianapolis, IN 150 mi Johnstown, PA 336 mi Kalamazoo, MI 298 mi Knoxville, TN 196 mi Lansing, MI 332 mi Louisville, KY 71 mi Lynchburg, VA 291 mi Nashville, TN 182 mi Roswell, GA 277 mi St Louis, MO 316 mi Terre Haute, IN 186 mi Wheeling, WV 246 mi Winston Salem, NC 267 mi Youngstown, OH 293 mi Sandy |
If I may add a few more comments/suggestions about tonight's agenda. Regarding the two youth pricing motions: Guestimating using last year's attendance I figure this year's substantial youth price hike will only result in about $900 in extra income. The negative PR is not worth it. The new youth group discount plan probably will "cost" the IJA about the same and also will likely bring negative PR to the IJA. This festival is probably going to make tens of thousands of dollars in profit, why are we milking the youth? One major youth group leader (Art) already posted that he is not in favor of this, why are we doing it? It isn't the money. It better not be the principle. Why? Regarding the "boardplus" motion: I would recommend that we remove the boardplus section of this motion. "Boardplus", the so called "advisory" board, does not exist and we shouldn't pretend it does. If someone wants to advise the board, we already have two good ways to do it. 1) run for the board (it isn't like we have too many candidates). or 2) post on this forum. I think it is time that we realize that the IJA already has a better advisory board. It is this forum. I do agree that we need to stop withholding information from this forum. Seeing the budget (including the festival budget) is critical to understanding the above youth pricing motions. By withholding the budget and other information, the value of this advisory forum is being compromised. Simply put, the rule should be that any information the board has should be passed on unless the board votes to make it confidential. If we applied this rule then the board would be forced to act in a more open fashion (or spend all their time repeat posting their behind-the-scenes efforts). |
To add the last piece of this stastical puzzle: how many IJA members do we have in these cities? |
Dave, the roster will help with that statistic, if you'd like to take the tally, or maybe the membership database. Sandy |
Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Finally - its Tuesday and I STILL have not made up > my mind about youth pricing! Sorry. No - I will > not share all of the "give and take" and > reflection that is going on within my mind (I > don't want to bore the average reader). Perhaps this will convince you. Go back through all the posts on this topic. There isn't a single post that I can think of that actually presents a reason for why we are raising youth pricing. A lot of posts have pointed out why not to raise prices. There really isn't a good case to support raising the youth (or the adult) prices. About the best argument I can think of (if I had to represent that side of the argument) is that it seems likely that more income can be raised. Historically we know that the prices of four years ago generated about $70,000 more in revenue (see footnote). But the IJA got very little value from that extra revenue. More importantly, we also now know that higher prices do keep jugglers away from the festival. We have hundreds more jugglers attend than we did before. What is the goal of the IJA? Are we trying to make a profit? If so, for what? To subsidize the magazine? Or are we trying to expose as many jugglers to a great festival as we can? I think the answer is obvious. We should lower both the youth price (and the adult price) and try to expose more jugglers to the festival. I concede that festival prices can be raised a lot ($100+) and many of the same people will still come. But every price raise is likely to exclude a few more jugglers. True, if a dozen of two jugglers don't come this summer that otherwise would have, those that do come will probably never know the difference. But there is an important difference. Both to the jugglers who won't be there and to those of us who won't get to pass clubs with them. * * * footnote: The historical evidence is not 100% conclusive. It isn't certain that raising prices will result in higher revenues. While it is true that raising prices is generally a valid way to increase short-term income, it is also true that raising prices can be devastating in the long run. To the extent that the IJA is a monopoly, we can raise prices and likely gain income. But if we raise prices too much, then jugglers will start looking for options. EJC, IJA, BJC, to name a few, are all viable options for jugglers limited vacation time and money. Right now the IJA is the major North American festival. It is not a given that it will remain that way. |
Mapquest.com shows the travel distance from Chicago to Winston-Salem as 759.03 miles Cincinatti directions as 423.96 miles; not the 76 miles listed above Kalamazoo is 710.89 not 298 St. Louis 722.96 So the straight line numbers may be accurate for fliers, but the driving distances are much greater than given above. |
Dave: In the examples given, I don't think either of these are secret. Our election procedures are publicly announced every year. Our ticket procedures are obvious once you look at a ticket. Don: No, they aren't secrets. But there is absolutely no advantage to the IJA to put the tools out in the public domain either. Frankly, the average IJA member has absolutely no need-to-know how ballots and tickets are formatted. There used to be howls of misadventure about the elections. Now that we have a stable process, I have no intention of inviting hoards of ballot clones into the ballot box. |
Dave W., My experience in attending east coast fests is people on the east coast are willing to drive higher than average distances for a fest. The Chicago to WS distance you got from mapquest also says it's just under a 12 hour drive. We drove from NE Pennsylvania to the last Montreal IJA fest. My group also drove from NEPA to the Davenport fest and that was a 13 and 1/2 hour drive (if we had driven stright through rather than making food and rest stops). That was 838 miles! I'm not familiar with midwest and west coast driving tendencies to juggling festivals so I am not speaking for them. Just making an observation based on what I've seen (and done). Kim |
Dave: "Mapquest.com shows the travel distance from Chicago to Winston-Salem as 759.03 miles Cincinatti directions as 423.96 miles; not the 76 miles listed above." Dave, the distances I stated are to LEXINGTON, not Winston-Salem. Sandy |
My mistake: I thought the festical was in Winston-Salem. |
Well said, Kim and Bob. I support your work for the organization and I'm glad that you feel successful. If you did decide not to run, it would be full of honor, having served a good term and helped the IJA. Not to say that I don't want you to run again, of course. I just understand that this job, like everything, is for a time, and if your time is ending, I want to support you in that. Will |
2007 is Winston-Salem. 2008 is Lexington, KY. Kim |
I think just looking at the mileage and/or hours to drive is not the solution. Nor is the number of members nearby - since some only join to attend the fest. I think another factor might be the location where the fest is held and who (guests/performers) is going to be there. Families may plan a vacation around the fest if there are other things to do and see. Bob Neuman |
Well, I voted against lowering the prices for Youth. I think ALL of the prices should have been raised this year. I see nothing wrong with subsidizing the magazine partially from other profits. I view the magazine as a service to our members. Many of our members want a magazine. The fest is a bargain - the housing and meals associated with the week are the expensive items (and many times the travel costs). If a potential attendee is serious about wanting to come - the slight increase in the registration can be made up in creative ways. Don't eat out as much or, to me the more extreme - sleep in your vehicle (I've actually known a few people that go that route). The IJA must make a profit to try new experiments and projects - few of which are guaranteed to be profitable or even successful. But it would be nice to have enough "cushion" to try new things. It would be great to not have to worry about taking chances. I do agree that we must work to keep the IJA fest reasonable in cost (but we may differ on just what reasonable is). The key is to offer a quality fest for the money. A "bare bones" fest is easier to offer and may draw a larger crowd. But a quality fest that offers more, yet costs more, also has its supporters. Larger is not always better. And, sometimes, the more expensive fest may draw the larger crowd. Lets face it - I'm not sure there would be a huge increase in attendance even if we cut the fees in half. There are many other factors/costs involved with attending the fest. Bob Neuman |
I'll post the decisions made at last night's meeting until David L. has a chance to post the audio and the minutes. Thank you to all board members, John, Martin and Holly for attending and contributing such great input. We had a lot of good discussion! 7a - changes to the pre-election and election deadlines...passed 7b - letter of support for work visa...rejected 7c - Lower Youth Packge prices...rejected 7d - Youth be expanded...rejected 7e - Money for DVD purchase...passed 7f - IJA Policy for posting budget, etc...withdrawn 7g - Creation of Awards committee...passed 7h - purchase of UPC coding for DVD's...passed Kim |
Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well, I voted against lowering the prices for > Youth. This tells me that the motion probably passed. Bob always votes with the majority. > I think ALL of the prices should have been > raised this year. [b]WHY?[/b] Bob's post goes on to argue that we can probably get away with raising prices but it (nor anyone else's post) explains why it is better to have a more expensive festival. Bob does say that such profits might be used to fund other activities, but there is no explanation of how much extra funding is needed or what it will be used for. Remember we were only talking about one or two thousand dollars here. How much is the festival budgeted to make? Let's say $30,000. Would only making $29,000 and not raising prices have been worse? Isn't $29,000 still enough to pay for the bad magazine contract mistake and allow other new projects? > I do agree that we must work to keep the IJA fest > reasonable in cost (but we may differ on just what > reasonable is). The key is to offer a quality fest > for the money. A "bare bones" fest is easier to > offer and may draw a larger crowd. But a quality > fest that offers more, yet costs more, also has > its supporters. Larger is not always better. And, > sometimes, the more expensive fest may draw the > larger crowd. This is getting dangerously close to scare tactics. We shouldn't scare the membership into being worried that prices are too low and quality will suffer. There are no facts to support this. What is a "bare bones" festival? How much does a "quality" festival cost? What is the difference between the two? More importantly, did the board look at any of this? I doubt it. My guess (and at this point it is just a guess) is that the board did some rather shallow reasoning. Their posts hint that they are assuming most people will be willing to pay a little more and that the extra cash will likely come in handy. All true, but just because you can, in the short-term, get away with raising prices, doesn't mean you should. To my mind, the questions remains. Youth prices have been raised up to 45% in two years. Why? Two years ago we made over $20,000 on the Davenport festival. Was that a quality festival? I thought so. Was $20,000 not enough profit? How much of a profit do our directors think we need to make? How many attendees are they willing to lose to make it? |
Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I see nothing wrong with subsidizing the magazine > partially from other profits. I view the magazine > as a service to our members. Many of our members > want a magazine. Bob, why should the members who DO want a festival and DON'T want a magazine be forced to subsidise the members who DON'T want a festival and DO want a magazine? |
Bob brings up a good point -- people attend fuestivals and join for a variety of reasons; Distance from home, other activities in the area, cost, special guest(s), finances, etc. The best way to learn how these numbers affect attendance is to send out a survey and then compile the data. |
Andrew Conway Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bob, why should the members who DO want a festival > and DON'T want a magazine be forced to subsidise > the members who DON'T want a festival and DO want > a magazine? Andrew's post triggered the following thought. Since our current member services (magazine) costs the IJA nearly the same as we spend on a festival, perhaps we should swap them. If so, then your $30 memberships gets you a free festival, and those members who want a magazine can pay an extra $149 to $195 to get the magazine. Is that model more absurd than our current model? We need an affordable magazine option, or we will soon have no magazine. We need to keep the festival affordable or that will go away also. |
I think that the special guests are going to be a huge attraction: * Viktor Kee * Peapot Jugglers Maksim Komaro and Ville Walo * Peter Davison * Yuri Pozdniakov and two of his best Kiev circus school students - Scott (hoping to one day be invited as a guest. |
Scott Seltzer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think that the special guests are going to be a > huge attraction: > * Viktor Kee > * Peapot Jugglers Maksim Komaro and Ville Walo > * Peter Davison > * Yuri Pozdniakov and two of his best Kiev circus > school students > > - Scott (hoping to one day be invited as a guest. I've never got a good handle on how many people come to see the special guest(s). Every IJA is the biggest collection of juggling talent in North America that year, so star gazers (to the extent that the juggling world has them) should alway try to make it. Go any year, and you will see some great talent and emerging talent. I think that this year's list is strong. But let me add that of the names on the above post, the one I would personally most like to see is Scott Seltzer. (And yes, I think he would make a good guest, if we must have special guests.) I don't know to what degree I match the norm (probably not much) but to me, the guests at IJA that are the most important are our members. Scott is a great guy. Fun to talk with, Fun to juggle with. Whether people know it or not, it is people like Scott (our members) that make the IJA (and almost every festival) so worthwhile going to. Let me take this opportunity to re-suggest a suggestion that I make almost every year. I think we should have a page publicly listing who is registered to the come to the festival. I think the biggest draw to get anyone to come would be seeing a couple of your friends names on that list. |
One way to save a bit of money might be to have a survey ready for attendees at the fest. If it is short and to the point I think most people would be willing to help and fill it out. But this does require volunteer effort (and more than one person). Bob Neuman |
I can only speak for myself in regards to how much thought individual BOD members gave to the issue. I have been thinking and brainstorming about the different types of festivals that are possible and their respective costs for a long time. I started looking into alternatives back with Davenport and have discussed it with various BOD members, attendees and at other fests with folks that aren't members of the IJA. I have also tried to interest a city near where I live to bid (with no luck). As to raising the prices for the fest. I would like to see the IJA be able to try some new projects. Maybe be able to send a representative to a few regional fests, maybe even a performer, how about a person to put on some workshops? These all will costs money (at least start-up money). Even if the magazine broke even - we'd still need money from somewhere to try these projects, or ones like them. I was not trying to scare anyone! I think the fest is fine the way it is. But the IJA costs will increase as do prices across the board for most things. If the IJA would like to try for different locations - they too maybe a bit more expensive. Bob Neuman |
So does the IJA only provide services to jugglers that are self paying? Bob Neuman |
I agree with Dave when he says there are just too many factors to offer a prediction. As to lodging - while "official" hotels may be more expensive (and they tend to fill up very fast) cheaper alternatives are always close-by - especially for those who drive. I was able to find cheap alternatives when I drove to Reading and Davenport (granted they were 10-15 mins away). I do think that this fest is going to be great and have good attendance. The special guests are a "draw" for many and the "60th" is also a "draw." Bob Neuman |
I do give credit to Bob for posting but would it be too much to ask that a board member actually answer a question instead of twisting the words and citing vague platitudes? Yesterday I wrote: This is getting dangerously close to scare tactics. We shouldn't scare the membership into being worried that prices are too low and quality will suffer. There are no facts to support this. What is a "bare bones" festival? How much does a "quality" festival cost? What is the difference between the two?More importantly, did the board look at any of this? I doubt it. My guess (and at this point it is just a guess) is that the board did some rather shallow reasoning. Bob's response was: ------------------------------------------------------- > I can only speak for myself in regards to how much > thought individual BOD members gave to the issue. > I have been thinking and brainstorming about the > different types of festivals that are possible and > their respective costs for a long time. This response did not answer the question. Bob, what is a "bare bones" festival? It was your term from your post, please tell us what you mean by a bare bones festival? What is a "quality" festival? Again this is your term, please tell us what you mean by it. You distinguish between the two, what difference are you talking about? Which has the IJA been putting on? I'm sorry, but Bob's previous posts, and this one, are meaningless. His statements fit the very definition of platitudes. (Platitude - A thought or remark which is flat, dull, trite, or weak; a truism; a commonplace.) What are we to conclude from "I have been thinking and brainstorming about the different types of ______ that are possible and their respective costs for a long time." This is the same statement a thousand politicians have made about a thousand topics. In reality it tells us nothing. > As to raising the prices for the fest. I would > like to see the IJA be able to try some new > projects. Again Bob has twisted my statement/questions and in the process avoiding giving us a meaningful answer. Here is what I wrote: Remember we were only talking about one or two thousand dollars here. How much is the festival budgeted to make? Let's say $30,000. Would only making $29,000 and not raising prices have been worse? Isn't $29,000 still enough to pay for the bad magazine contract mistake and allow other new projects? Bob answered none of that. Bob is hoping to focus on the point everyone agrees on, i.e. that funding new projects is a good thing. But Bob is avoiding the real question, (the question of degree) which I asked above and which are still unanswered. > I was not trying to scare anyone! I think the fest > is fine the way it is. Here Bob undermines what he said earlier. If he thinks the fest is fine the way it is, then why is he claiming to spend so much time "thinking and brainstorming about the different types of festivals that are possible and their respective costs"? If Bob isn't trying to scare us, then why use undefined terms like "bare bones" versus "quality" festival? > But the IJA costs will > increase as do prices across the board for most > things. If the IJA would like to try for different > locations - they too maybe a bit more expensive. Bob's statements again are meaningless, and worse yet, in this case Bob is misleading us. Everyone knows that prices increase "across the board". But so what? If the board had just approved a 3% price increase, I wouldn't be posting this. But the IJA has increased the at-the-door youth festival package price by 45% in two years. I haven't looked it up, but I will bet that is way over the inflation rate. The board has repeatedly refused to allowed us, the members, to see the festival budget so that we can determine if these price hikes are justified. That is a violation of the open meeting rules of the IJA. I don't know if Bob is trying to scare us, but this board, and their tactics, scares the beejeebees out of me. |
David Davis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Location - I think the location is a good one. In > is in the South which was overdue for a festival, > yet it is still relatively close to our high > density juggler areas (The Northeast). If location > was the only factor I would expect attendance to > be more than Davenport but less than Buffalo. In > other words high, but not a record high. Based on my distance analysis I would agree with this. I'm going to predict the preregistrations will total 450, plus or minus 30. Let's see if we get that right. Lexington works out to be a bit better - only slightly worse for the North East, and better for the Midwest, so I'm predicting preregistration of 455 plus or minus 30. Note that I am still testing a theory here, so these figures should not be used for planning purposes. Hmmm, I just plugged Pittsburgh into the model and got a prereg number of 527. Hey, this is fun... Los Angeles 365 New Orleans 346 Chicago 488 Denver 340 Altanta 407 Toronto 489 (But this is wrong because it assumes you can drive straight across the Great Lakes). Vancouver 322 Miami 344 Baltimore 534 New York 540 OK, this analysis is interesting, once again, these figures are from an untested model, so assume they are wrong until proved otherwise. Also, we should not always go where we will get the largest attendance. The juggling community as a whole beneifts if the festival moves to parts of the country where different people can attend. |
Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So does the IJA only provide services to jugglers > that are self paying? > Bob Neuman Again I thank Bob for posting but again Bob is avoiding answering the questions asked of him. Andrew had asked, "Bob, why should the members who DO want a festival and DON'T want a magazine be forced to subsidise the members who DON'T want a festival and DO want a magazine?" I had asked, "... Is that model more absurd than our current model?" Bob answers neither but instead responds with an irrelevant and trite question. Andrew, Bob, myself, and probably most everyone else on the planet agree that it is okay to have some projects that are not self-financed. But Bob is hoping to ignore or shift focus away from the magnitude or degree that the new magazine contract is draining the organization. Bob, or someone on the board, needs to explain why they have agreed to this new business model. What hope do they see at the end of the tunnel that I am missing? Or has the board not looked that far ahead yet? Bluntly our current new business model appears to be unsustainable. There is little evidence that the board has any clue what is going on. Bob's posts do not show that Bob or the board realizes the complexities or magnitude of the situation. |
Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So does the IJA only provide services to jugglers > that are self paying? > Bob Neuman The IJA should only provide services to jugglers that are self paying or can be financed by the membership fee. We should not be running the festival or DVD sales as a profit center in order to subsidise other services that already consume the entire membership fee, simply because the board thinks they are a good idea. |
Andrew Conway Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > OK, this analysis is interesting, once again, > these figures are from an untested model, so > assume they are wrong until proved otherwise. The deltas seem about right to me. It is pretty cool to see these numbers, even if they aren't guaranteed. Thanks Andrew! > Also, we should not always go where we will get > the largest attendance. The juggling community as > a whole beneifts if the festival moves to parts of > the country where different people can attend. Very true. It is both a curse and why I like our association. By contrast, WJF is for profit. What are the numbers for Hartford, Connecticut? I suspect Hartford is the right move for the WJF, but I am glad we chose Winston-Salem. |
David Davis Wrote: > What > are the numbers for Hartford, Connecticut? 497 |
I waited to respond to this because I wanted to focus my limited energies and time on the items in this week's board meeting. But I do think this meta-issue is very important. Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well, Dave, where to start. Bob has asked this question on a few occasions. Here is my answer: Start by addressing/answering the points/questions that were brought up in the post you are responding to. Quote the relevant section of the previous post, and state where you agree or disagree and why. Bob has expressed frustration that "long" posts tend to cover the same issues over and over. This is true of both long and short posts. But the primary reason for repeating posts is that the previous posts were not responded to. This board in general (Bob is actually better than most directors) does not respond to forum posts. Even where "responses" are made, they are often like Bob's response here, tangential to the real issue and avoiding the points/questions that have already been posted/asked. The issue/question here is whether the board holding meaningful discussions behind-the-scenes about the issues? Or are they just rubber stamping the opinions of a few (whoever) that are making the real decisions? Or is the board just taking the easiest option and no one is making a real decision? To support my position that no meaningful discussion is taking place, I cited a number of "facts". I will repeat them here: --- start quote --- Bluntly their is much evidence that no meaningful discussion is taking place. Some examples: How much meaningful discussion could there have been about the insurance plan when ... ... no one ever looked to see what the policy covered? ... the directors didn't know that the 150 needed minimum requirement was significant and unlikely? How much meaningful discussion could there have been about the new magazine contract when ... ... the lead negotiator went for months without knowing the amount of the contract? ... the advise of the "committee" was ignored without being countered? ... directors didn't realize that membership is down significantly and that this contract is a significant departure from the previous break-even policy of the magazine? --- end quote --- Combined I think this makes a powerful argument to support my position. Bob's "response" does not counter any of my points. Is he conceding them? Nor does Bob offer any evidence that I might be wrong. Bob concludes his post asking us not to just take his opinion, but he never offers anything other than his opinion. * * * For completeness here are my responses to the rest of Bob's post > If I pervceive that there is meaningful and > thoughful discussion on issues - you can say that > I may be incorrect or mistaken - but I think > calling that a half-truth is somewhat in error (it > really wasn't clear to me if THIS was a > "half-truth" you were talking about, but I assumed > so). The half-truths (plural not singular) I was talking about I've referenced in several posts and will not repeat all of them unless requested. Here was the most recent "half-truth" I quoted. Bob wrote: > There is very meaningful discussion on the issues > - but, you are correct - it rarely involves every > BOD member. Bob admits here and elsewhere that some directors are not "involved". The true part of this quote is that it is rare that the entire board is involved in discussions. It also is probably true that some directors engage in some meaningful discussions. Perhaps by phone, or with Martin. But those don't count as BOD discussions, as many directors will never learn of them. I still dispute that there is "very meaningful discussion on the issues" among the BOD for the reasons cited above. > I have admitted that not all of the members of the > BOD are as engaged in every issue. Does that mean > that those that were interested did not try and > have meaningful discussions? The key word here is "try". I will concede that directors "try" as much as they think they can within their time constraints and level of expertise. As people, I think directors like Kim and Bob, deserve much credit for their efforts. I think the record is clear that they try. I respect them for that and think others should also. Unfortunately, when it comes to leadership or management, "trying" is not enough. I've known many managers who try hard to do a good job, but still needed to be let go. When judging the IJA's leaders/managers I do take "trying" into account. But ultimately I also look at the results. (I also want leaders that share with me similar goals and objectives.) I believe that all of our current directors have been trying to help the IJA. But I also believe that the IJA has moved backward this last year. I believe that the directors do not understand (even those that try) the complexities of the issues facing the IJA. I believe the board agreed to a poor magazine contract and have agreed to bad festival decisions. I don't think they are trying to hurt the IJA, but that is the result of their leadership/management (in my opinion). > To evaluate your BOD members feelings on issues - > you may want to look at their votes (but of course > this does not refelect their involvement at all). Not only does it not reflect their involvement, but in reality it also doesn't even reflect their beliefs. I know I allowed motions to pass that I did not support. Other than "for the record" their would have been little benefit in me voting my objection. If one knows that you can't stop a motion, the greater good is often helped by trying to support it. I suspect Bob has voted opposite of his true feelings for pragmatic reasons on more than one occasion. Looking at the recorded vote is better than nothing, but only barely. Votes tell you about the board, not the director. > You may want to look at their posts on subjects. > But this too may not represent the whole story. As > regular readers know - the forums do get > contentious and some may choose to avoid that > (yet, still be fully engaged in an issue). Posts are much better, but even here directors are often disingenuous. (disingenuous: lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness) For example, Bob posted that he was considering the youth pricing motions up to the last minute. But Bob has also repeated stated that he is for festival prices being raised. That brings up the interesting question, why was Bob pretending to be undecided on raising festival prices when he is known to support that? Bob can correct me, but the most obvious reason is that Bob realized that raising youth prices is a foolish P.R. move, even though he supports it. But getting all that from Bob's posts requires a lot of reading between the lines. > I am not sure what system you can come up that > reflects an individual member's involvement with > any given issue. A person may read all of the > postings and give a lot of thought to an issue, > yet not be very "verbal." True, only three of our seven directors post their opinions. Sandy, Jerry, Will, and Jim all post very rarely. As a result, we (the members) have no way to distinguish between them. Worse yet, we have no way to know if we agree with their reasoning or not. We have no way to know if we want to support them getting re-elected, or if we need to find replacements. |
What is our five year plan? |
Andrew, If you are going to reply to my overly generalized opinions with an honest and rational question, I'm going to have to start feeling guilty - and neither of us want that... Given the resources (or lack there of), I would say that re-recording the voice over would be a big step. This is just an opinion, but the footage looks much better to me now, a week later, if I turn the sound off. I would think that you could get some good feedback if you simply talked to people in your target audience, showed them the video, and asked them what they thought. In general, I would hope that the promotional material the IJA publishes would be as passionate and emotional as the members that are already part of the organization. Steven Ragatz |
5 year plan? I haven't seen one. Bob Neuman |
I would argue that there are certain elements of the fest that do not pay for themselves, yet the package purchaser is forced to subsidize them. Should all events at the fest be self sustaining? Bob Neuman |
No - I thought I made it clear. I was undecided about the Youth pricing and e-mailed the Board about that. BECAUSE I felt that just raising the Youth prices was not enough - all prices should have been raised. I know this isn't in line with the "why" you'd like to read - but it is my reason. Why, then did I vote for it? Because politics is compromise and partailly raising the fee was better then not raising it at all - IMO. Again, not the most popular reason or the one many might expect. I also believe that the raise was not an impediment to youth attending. I realize, Dave, that you do not care for my replies. I am not going to change that just for you. There does not seem to be a large membership outcry to back you wanting me to change how I answer questions. So, I will continue to answer when and how I want to. I am reluctant to answer more often or more quickly because they are not the answers you seek or are satisfied with. So, why should I bother? I know, I know - if I'd just do it your way, to please you, the IJA would be a better place, you think. Bob Neuman |
Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I would argue that there are certain elements of > the fest that do not pay for themselves, yet the > package purchaser is forced to subsidize them. > Should all events at the fest be self sustaining? Bob, you are not forced to buy a package to attend the festival. You can just buy a gym pass with no show tickets, or you can buy show tickets with no gym pass. At the festival you do not have to pay for services you do not want. Let me repeat my question, because you haven't answered it yet. I'd also like to see answers from the other board members on this. Why should the members who DO want a festival and DON'T want a magazine be forced to subsidise the members who DON'T want a festival and DO want a magazine? |
First I have to say I have yet to meet any IJA member who does not want a print magazine, besides the one or two people on this forum who have expressed their position. Secondly, it's part of belonging to a group. I guess it's plausible to have various tiers of membership...fest but no print magazine, no fest but receive a print magazine, fest and print magazine, no fest an no print magazine just store discounts...the list, I'm sure, could go on and on. The logistics of such a tiered membership system are a nightmare and not realistic. The bottom line is we (the board) need to do what we feel the MAJORITY of the IJA members want. This is based on what board members hear from IJA members through the forums, email, phone conversations, and at regional/local fests. These thoughts come to mind when thinking about this topic. Approximately 25-30% (or more) of our members attend the yearly fest. How many of those members attend every year? How many attend when they can or when geographical location allows? It would be interesting to find out how many of our members have attended the IJA fest over the last 3 years. How many repeat attendees? How many only one year? How many TOTAL members have attended the IJA fest over the last three years? How many of those attending the fest do want a print magazine? How many do not want a print magazine? How many want any magazine at all in any format? We can speculate all we want here on the forums. We need to do an email survey to know what a majority of our members really want. We have a majority of members' emails at this time. I'm not proposing a sample group...I'm proposing emailing every member for which we have an email. I'm sorry I didn't really answer your question, Andrew. Instead I raised more questions. I would rather hear how a majority of our members feel and, I'm sorry but a majority of our membership (over 1,000 members let's say) don't even read the forums. Until I hear otherwise from a majority of our IJA members, I want to stick with what has worked for the IJA in years. Kim |
At the Quebec City festival, there were several university students doing surveys. I spent about half an hour answering questions about juggling, circus, and how all that fit into the arts scene and what other sorts of things had influenced me. It was quite detailed, and I hope to see the results some day. I guess the trouble with holding a festival in the summer, is that grad students are probably off doing other things, or getting paid to do other things. There must be a researcher somewhere who would find our clientele fascinating ??? |
Kim: Until I hear otherwise from a majority of our IJA members, I want to stick with what has worked for the IJA in years. Don: I think that is probably the right thing to do, even though on the surface it appears somewhat absurd with a supported magazine and a slowly diminishing membership base. Perhaps life in a part of the country where collective rights can be stronger than individual rights conditions me to think that the IJA is (and should be) more than a collection of auto-financed parts. |
Bob Neuman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No - I thought I made it clear. I was undecided > about the Youth pricing and e-mailed the Board > about that. BECAUSE I felt that just raising the > Youth prices was not enough - all prices should > have been raised. I know this isn't in line with > the "why" you'd like to read - but it is my > reason. What I said was this: "That brings up the interesting question, why was Bob pretending to be undecided on raising festival prices when he is known to support that?" Please explain what it was I got wrong? It looks like I nailed it. Can we see the e-mail you claim to have sent to the board? I bet our members would learn a lot from seeing it. > Why, then did I vote for it? Because politics is > compromise and partailly raising the fee was > better then not raising it at all - IMO. Again, > not the most popular reason or the one many might > expect. I also believe that the raise was not an > impediment to youth attending. First off, Bob voted against the motion, not for it as he claims. I assume he just got confused, and there was no hidden reason for saying otherwise. More importantly, Bob's posts are irrational. If Bob only objection to the current pricing is that the prices were not raised enough, then it is illogical that he would ever consider a motion to [b]lower[/b] the price. Therefore, Bob is either irrational or he is being less than totally honest about this. For my part, I don't understand why anyone would be in favor of raising festival prices unless it was needed. I do understand how one might argue it is a necessary evil, but to want to raise festival prices without some distinct purpose in mind sounds like Orwell's 1984. Is the board tormenting the membership just because it can? It has been months now, no one on the board has yet to give a plausible reason on why festival prices were raised. This is, to my mind, unacceptable. * * * The rest of Bob's post is just Bob whining about his responses not being adequately appreciated. I've left it attached below for those who want to read it. For the record, I again object to his characterizations of me. In general, I think Bob is wrong to say I don't like his "answers" because, as Andrew pointed out, Bob hasn't been giving "answers". For Bob to make statements claiming to know how I will like his answers is inappropriate. I don't mind him making conjectures, but why doesn't he try actually answering some questions, and then everyone can judge for themselves about both his positions, and mine. Directors owe it to the members to let us know what they are planning on doing and why they did what they did. > I realize, Dave, that you do not care for my > replies. I am not going to change that just for > you. There does not seem to be a large membership > outcry to back you wanting me to change how I > answer questions. So, I will continue to answer > when and how I want to. I am reluctant to answer > more often or more quickly because they are not > the answers you seek or are satisfied with. So, > why should I bother? > > I know, I know - if I'd just do it your way, to > please you, the IJA would be a better place, you > think. > Bob Neuman |
Our March numbers should give us another look at where membership trends are heading. |
Okay, the three directors who post (Bob, Kim, and Don) have now all posted to Andrew's question. None of them answered it. Forget polling the membership, we can't get results from polling the board. So what should the membership think in the absence of a clear answer from any director? My guess, based on their posts, is that Bob, Kim, Don and the silent board members all would have no problem with the magazine financing the festival just as they have no problem with the festival financing the magazine. Unfortunately that is very bad business, even for a non-profit. This lack of business sense is a problem. The current IJA leadership, in my opinion, does not have a good understanding of business. It shows in the way they did the failed insurance program, the prohibitively expensive magazine contract, and the still "confidential" festival budget. * * * The directors have sent us a few new red herrings to gut. Red Herring #1 - Poll the members: A poll is not a solution. I have no problem with a poll being conducted. But who picks the questions? What are we trying to learn? What options are we willing to look at? Until/unless these questions have been adequately addressed, a poll is just a distraction. Note: I said this same thing a year ago. Red Herring #2 - Auto-financing: Several directors have pointed out that 100% perfect auto-financing is not reasonable. I agree, but what of it? The issue here is not about Plato's philosophical ideal, but a practical matter of degree. If one or two dollars of every festival registration went to the magazine, then I wouldn't care. But as much as 40% of the festival price is forced magazine support. If you don't want the magazine, then $50 or $60 tacked on to every festival registration [b]is[/b] a big deal. Red Herring #3 - Status quo?: Kim said: Until I hear otherwise from a majority of our IJA members, I want to stick with what has worked for the IJA in years. This implies that we are sticking "with what has worked for the IJA in years." That is not true. Reducing from 6 issues to 4 issues a year is a significant change from what we've been doing for years. All previous magazine contracts were expected to be roughly break even. The new magazine contract is expected to lose $16,500 more than is collected in membership dues (and growing). This is a significant change from what has "worked". This is a dangerous new road the board is leading us down. Don't be fooled into thinking we are sticking "with what has worked for the IJA". |
Dave: So what should the membership think in the absence of a clear answer from any director? My guess, based on their posts, is that Bob, Kim, Don and the silent board members all would have no problem with the magazine financing the festival just as they have no problem with the festival financing the magazine. Don: Actually, yes. If the magazine was the breadwinner, I would still say the festival is important. And I would say the video is important even if it was not doing better than breaking even. One of the reasons that we allocate video production costs outside the festival costs is because we think it is important to the IJA as a whole. So? The magazine is important too. |
Dave W, as you'll find at: http://www.juggle.org/business/magsmailed.php membership was at 1776+19=1795 on 2/21/07, when we generated the mailing labels for the upcoming Spring JUGGLE magazine. Martin |
I feel the last sentence of my post did answer how I personally felt about the topic. I don't see a problem with aspects of any organization (including the IJA) supporting certain projects or other aspects. The rest of my post was discussion. I was thinking out loud. I freely admitted that I did not answer Andrew's question but instead raised many questions on the topic. Forums are for discussion and not just asking what certain members what their beliefs are. Besides, my personal beliefs on a topic don't necessarily matter. As a board member I'm supposed to work toward what I believe is in the best interest of a majority of our members (since it is extrememly rare to please everyone at any given time). Kim |
The 2007 Operating Budget for the IJA is now available for viewing and discussion on the IJA website. You can access the 2007 IJA Operating Budget at http://www.juggle.org/business/IJA_Operating_Budget_FY2007_Draft_2.pdf Thank you again, Holly, for all of your work on this and helping us to get the IJA finances in order! Kim |
I thought I was being clear. I have no problem with the fest subsidizing the magazine or some other projects. I view the magazine as a service to the members. I think the large majority of the members want a print magazine. The different levels of membership is an option I would like to see discussed more. In any organization there are parts of it - or offerings that all the members may not want. As to the magazine subsidizing the fest? Not sure what that's about - but anything that makes a profit probably should partially help to subsidize other projects. Yes, you can buy a gym pass. But the cost of the fest package may be higher because some of the events do not pay for themselves. I have no problem with that - but I would imagine it to be true. Bob Neuman |
> membership was at 1776+19=1795 on 2/21/07, when we > generated the mailing labels for the upcoming > Spring JUGGLE magazine. First off, this is good news. This is up quite a bit since the beginning of the month. It is still down about a hundred from last year. This was the time of year we had the highest membership in 2006, so it shouldn't be to surprising that membership is a little higher. So I don't think the IJA can celebrate, but it sure is better news than otherwise. But I do have a few questions. I thought we were told, and our contract required that the mailing list be generated at the beginning of the month. Why was a new list created on the 21st? Will this become a norm? We also appear to have resumed our practice of sending magazines to expired members, why? I had posted on this and our actions don't match what I was led to believe we would do. Unfortunately, this new information proves my complaint that the board presented a fictitious (or at least trumped up) argument when they said it was too late to lower youth festival prices. The magazine couldn't have gone out yet, as we are now told the mailing list wasn't generated yet. All of these magazine circulation details (while not bad in themselves) are disturbing because it shows a widening of the gap between what the IJA leadership does and what we are told about. Nonetheless, it is good that membership is up from a month ago. |
Well, now my answers are irrational and whiney.... Just reinforces my conviction that I am certainly not giving the answers that you want. So, I will continue to answer in my own way, when and where I chosse too. Bob Neuman |
The 2007 Budget is out and can be seen at: http://www.juggle.org/business/IJA_Operating_Budget_FY2007_Draft_2.pdf It is unfortunate that we didn't see this budget prior to last weeks board meeting as this budget shows that a number of the statements being made by directors did not match the facts. Specifically we were told that festival prices were being raised because of cost increases "across the board". This budget shows that costs have actually gone down for the festival (as I had argued). The details still are a bit obscure and I haven't looked too closely at it yet, but it looks like the festival will make $30,000 to $40,000 based on whatever attendance estimates they made. That is a huge profit. Had the board been so inclined festival prices could be lowered by about a third and we would still make money. Again, can anyone explain why we raised prices, especially the youth prices? This budget also has some odd lines regarding the festival. Travel expenses are way up by 400%; why? Food expense is $20,000; is that the awards banquet? If we got travel back in line and didn't have a banquet (or made it optional) then our festival prices are probably twice what they need to be. Why? |