Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: URGENT - We Need an Instantaneous Response. (That means DOIT NOW !!!)


Option #2 is fine with me.

However, I don't feel comfortable choosing between Option #2 and 
Option #1. If 802.3 wants to come to Orlando too, I am happy to 
share. If they prefer Sacramento, that's fine too. I wouldn't want to 
see Option #2 win your poll if 802.3 supports Option #1, or vice 


At 6:37 AM -0800 00/11/29, Rigsbee, Everett O wrote:
>Dear SEC:   OK here's the pitch for the May Interim.  Please response ASAP !!!
>After some rather intensive searching of the Orlando area for a 
>suitable venue (and checking other Eastern locations as well) we've 
>finally come up with something that looks workable, but we need to 
>make an immediate decision as to how we want to go. 
>We have found 2nd option availability at the Hyatt Orlando in 
>Kissimmee, FL (a resort property  ~1.5 miles from Walt Disney 
>World).  During our week of May 14-19, 2001, they can offer us up to 
>625 of their 922 rooms per night and there's a large Radisson right 
>nearby which could provide any necessary overflow rooms and/or 
>meeting space.  The Hyatt Orlando has a good selection of meeting 
>space, all centrally located, and almost all of it is currently 
>available (only a couple of the smaller rooms are currently booked). 
>We believe there is enough space to do all the meetings for an 
>Interim meeting for all of our Working Groups.  The group rate they 
>are offering is  $119/129 S/D.  Their pricings for Food & Beverage, 
>Audio Visual, and Miscellaneous services look to be very competitive 
>for the area.  You can check out all the details of the property at 
>their website at:
>OK, so what's this 2nd option business all about ???  This means 
>there is another group who has asked Hyatt Orlando to hold space for 
>their function during that same week, but they have not committed to 
>sign a contract yet.  How it works is as follows:  if we sign a 2nd 
>option contract for the dates we want, the other group is given 72 
>hours to either sign their contract or release the space (and we're 
>in).  The probabilities are good that if we act now we WILL get the 
>space.  The problem is that we have a nice gentleman from Intel, 
>(Dawson Kesling) who has offered to host an 802.3 Interim meeting at 
>the Hyatt Sacramento, who is holding space there and he is being 
>pressured to sign a contract or risk losing the space.  If he loses 
>the space and the other group signs the contract at Hyatt Orlando, 
>then we're back to square zero. 
>So I see 3 possible options for us to choose from:
>Option #1:  We say, "Go for it!"  We sign the contract for the full 
>meeting and we'll know in 72 hours whether we have a site or not. 
>We tell Dawson, "Thank you very much for your offer and we'll hope 
>to have you host a meeting in the future."  If we strikeout at Hyatt 
>Orlando, we go back and look at several other back-up properties to 
>get the deal we need (we currently have several, but only 1 is in 
>the Orlando area). 
>Option #2:  We divide the meeting.  We let 802.3 go ahead and do 
>their own thing at the Hyatt Sacramento and we do everybody else at 
>Hyatt Orlando (if we can get in).  We can reduce the room block to 
>500, we will certainly have plenty of meeting space, and we won't 
>need to worry about overflow space.  OK so it's not a fully 
>co-located 802-Hosted Interim meeting, but we said this was an 
>experiment to see how it works.  It probably best to start off with 
>a more manageable-sized group anyway. 
>Option #3:  We blow-off the 802-Hosted May Interim meeting 
>completely, every WG does their own thing with their own hosts, and 
>we think about maybe trying this again sometime in the future. 
>I'm going to go out on a limb here and recommend Option #2 for your 
>consideration, since it seems to get us a trial run and we take on 
>the least risk, but the choice really belongs to the WG chairs who 
>have to survive these meetings.  I also think we should weight the 
>voting on this by the size of the constituency (as recorded at 
>Tampa) since I'm a believer in 1-man, 1-vote, and we're trying to do 
>what's right for the greatest number of people here (note: this 
>implies the vote for an SEC member with no WG would count 1). 
>Whatever you decide (i.e. Option #1, 2, or 3), you must send me you 
>response TODAY because we risk losing all if we don't decide right 
>away.  In the unlikely event of a tie vote, I flip a coin to see who 
>wins.  Please decide now !!!  Later will be TOO LATE and you'll wind 
>up with Option #3 by default.  You may call or send email to Dawn or 
>myself if you have any burning questions but please don't bother 
>with suggesting other Options which we have overlooked/forgotten. 
>What you see is what you get.  Tempus Fugit !!!
>We await your response.   :-)  
>Thanx,  Buzz
>Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
>Boeing SSG
>PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
>Seattle, WA  98124-2207
>ph: (425) 865-2443, fx: (425) 865-6721
>Thanx,  Buzz
>Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
>Boeing SSG
>PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
>Seattle, WA  98124-2207
>ph: (425) 865-2443, fx: (425) 865-6721