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

RE: [802SEC] +++ SEC EMAIL BALLOT +++ Get IEEE 802(tm) program re commendation

What I am more than a little concerned about here is, as always, a lack of 
information - in this case, regarding what it actually costs the IEEE to 
support & publish our (i.e., just 802's) standards activity. The 
information I have seen so far (and that has been pretty sparse - just the 
spreadsheet that was presented to the Tuesday meeting in March) was all 
focused on revenue levels & how to maintain them, rather than on the cost 
of our program to the IEEE and how to meet it.  In other words, I have yet 
to hear a straight answer to the question of whether, with the $75/head 
tax, the GET 802 programme would cover its costs.

To put it another way, to exactly what extent (in $$) is the revenue from 
802 standards (and related revenue, such as the not inconsiderable income 
from registration of OUIs) being regarded as a means of supporting other, 
less profitable, IEEE activities? If this is really what is going on, then 
maybe these other activities should be re-structured to bear their own 
costs, rather than us having to find creative ways of continuing to support 


At 15:48 27/04/2002 -0700, Bob O'Hara wrote:

>I vote DISAPPROVE on this motion.
>I agree with Buzz, that going in with a position like this will get us to a
>spot we don't want to be.  I think it is time for the IEEE and 802 to be
>creative on this program.
>If for all intents and purposes, revenue from sale of 802 standards has
>dropped below a level that is sustainable, we need to find a way to increase
>those revenues.  Adopting a hold-off period of 12 months is not the answer,
>in my opinion.  I believe that this will only result in the revenues
>remaining too low and the standards remaining unavailable.
>I believe that it is possible to sell the downloaded standard for a nominal
>fee.  Granted, there will be "information wants to be free" rebels that will
>purchase a copy and then post it for free somewhere else.  However, that is
>one sale more than would have resulted from either today's 6-month or the
>proposed 12-month hold-off period.
>What is a realistic value to place on the downloaded standard?  That, I
>don't have an answer for.  I think it is somewhere between $5 and $20.  Even
>a student can afford that.
>  -Bob
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Nikolich []
>Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 5:13 AM
>To: 'IEEE802'
>Subject: [802SEC] +++ SEC EMAIL BALLOT +++ Get IEEE 802(tm) program
>Dear SEC,
>This is an SEC email ballot on a recommendation to be made by the IEEE 802
>SEC to the IEEE-SA regarding the Get IEEE 802(tm) program as moved by Geoff
>Thompson, seconded by Bill Quackenbush.
>The email ballot opens on Friday April 26 9AM EDT and closes Friday May 3rd
>As a result of the extensive discussions between representatives of the SEC
>(Nikolich, Thompson, Frazier) and IEEE-SA staff (mostly Jerry Walker) and
>with some participation by Jim Carlo (who is on the BoG) I propose the
>following motion:
>802 SEC Motion
>Moved by:       Geoff Thompson, 1st Vice Chair
>Second by:      Bill Quackenbush
>That the following choice be offered to the IEEE-SA regarding the "Get IEEE
>802 (tm)" program:
>1) Extend the program as per the original agreement until the next annual
>review date (May 15, 2003). The following adjustment to the original terms
>would not negate this choice: Change of the new standard hold-back period
>from 6 months to 12 months.
>802 approves continuation of ongoing support for the program on a year by
>calendar year basis at the original rate of $75 per person per 802
>2) Terminate the program as of the annual review date (May 15, 2002). 802
>would cease payment of support funds.
>Paul Nikolich
>Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Project
>cell:    857.205.0050
>mail:   18 Bishops Lane, Lynnfield, MA 01940