3.7 Congresses
Mr. Grafendorfer referred to the Congress 98 report and highlighted the following:
A. Registrations:
No. of Registrations 1.232 Cancellations 84 No Shows 132 (without cancellation) Present 1.016 (incl. 130 free registrations like Inv. Speakers, Chairpersons, Keynotes, Sponsors)
Paying Participants:
Full payment of fees (> 6000 ATS) 711 With an IFIP grant 31 Students 103 Youth summit participants 31 Other, not full paying 83 (Part time, reduced fee, etc)
The 40 K CHF minimum guarantee of Congress 98 proceeds to IFIP were paid immediately after the Congress.
B. Participants with grants:
| IFIP grants | EU grants | ||
| Argentina | 1 | Belarus | 3 |
| Australia (TT-Speaker) | 1 | Bulgaria | 2 |
| Austria | 1 | Croatia | 2 |
| Brazil | 1 | Czech Republic | 7 |
| China | 3 | Egypt | 1 |
| Egypt | 3 | Estonia | 2 |
| Greece | 1 | Hungary | 5 |
| India | 3 | Lithuania | 2 |
| Japan (Chinese) | 1 | Moldavia | 1 |
| Kenya | 3 | Poland | 6 |
| Lebanon | 1 | Romania | 2 |
| Mexico | 2 | Russia | 9 |
| Mongolia | 1 | Slovakia | 4 |
| Nepal | 1 | Slovenia | 1 |
| Nigeria | 2 | Ukraine | 11 |
| Palestine | 1 | Uzbekistan | 2 |
| Rep. of Georgia | 1 | Yugoslavia | 2 |
| Singapore | 1 | ||
| Thailand | 1 | ||
| United States | 2 | ||
| TOTAL: | 31 | TOTAL: | 62 |
Total sum awarded from IFIP for IFIP grants to support developing country participants: 24,000 CHF (incl. 4,000 from AMB/TC3 for TeleTeaching); Total sum granted from the EU: 30,000 EUR (approx. 50 K CHF at current conversion rates)
C. Conference statistics:
Share of participation in the conferences under the umbrella of Congress 98:
| SEC | FUND | TCOOP | ICCHP | IT&Knows | TTEACH | KnowRight | undeclared |
| 16,6% | 3,6% | 10,5% | 10,2% | 10,1% | 28,0% | 6,5% | 14,5% |
Mr. Grafendorfer said some accounts are still not finalized but it is expected that the total Congress 98 associated expenditures would be about 1,072 K CHF. Subsidies from various institutions and organizations amount to 495 K CHF. Other revenues include participation fees of 630 K CHF, income from social events of 69 K CHF, proceedings (3,5 K CHF), Exhibition (5,5 K CHF) and other bringing the total Income to 1,203 K CHF, thereby forming a positive Congress 98 balance of about 131 K CHF.
Since the staff costs of the two Partner Societies were not budgeted in the Expense side of the Congress the positive balance in part would compensate these expenses.
Mr. Samways observed that bank charges were 4% of the expenditures and considered this to be rather high. From his experience, expenditures on credit card payments should be about 2%. Mr. Grafendorfer clarified that the sum includes all associated bank charges and not only credit card charges.
Mr. Miura wished to know why Japan figures in the column of IFIP grants for participants supported by IFIP and Mr. Grafendorfer explained that the grant was awarded to a Chinese living in Japan.
Mr. Rosenfeld pointed out that if all IFIP associated expenses are accounted the income to IFIP of about CHF 16 K is rather low and congresses are becoming a minor income factor to IFIP. He wished to know whether any other proceeds would come to IFIP. Mr. Grafendorfer responded that some royalties would be paid but these would be small sums. Mr. Khakhar pointed out that the IFIP support to DC participants should not be considered as a Congress expense only.
Mr. Granado observed the reported number of "No Shows" and thought their names should be published. Mr. Bollerslev felt that there could be good reasons for some of them so it might be inconsiderate to put all "No Shows" in the same category.
Mr. Boynton believed that besides the financial income to IFIP there is a great marketing value in Congresses and Mr. Reis added that the technical contributions of an IFIP Congress are the most important product. Mr. Delman recalled that, if properly contracted, IFIP could receive significant royalties from the sales of Congress proceedings.
The President was grateful to the Congress 98 IPC and OC for their efforts on behalf of IFIP and thanked Mr. Grafendorfer and Mrs. Toth for their hard work.
Council APPLAUDED.
3.7.2 WCC 2000 Organizing and Program Committee
Mr. Li referred to his PowerPoint presentation and said that he would present the combined reports of the IPC and OC. He informed that an action list of 48 items was agreed to serve as guidance to the various Congress 2000 committees. The Congress logo is now ready and its design is based on symbols including the Great Wall, a dragon, the earliest form of distance message (information) transfer, a road towards the future and a friendship link between IT professionals around the World.
A WCC 2000 website is up since December 98 at http://www.wcc2000.org/. A preliminary version of the Call for Papers is available at this site. The information is structured around the seven federated conferences, allowing browsers to get into individual conferences quickly. Welcome messages from the IFIP President, the IPC Chair and the OC Chair will be displayed. A "News/Schedule" item will show important dates in the preparation and other Congress related information. Information on registrations, fees and forms will be posted. A list of conference Chairs and responsible officers is developed with contact information for inquiries. All conference CfPs have a similar format with the full conference name, "In cooperation" status, Conference Theme, Topics of Interest, Program Committee, Submission Guidelines and Contacts.
Mr. Li referred to the registration fee structure (in US Dollars):
Before 1 May, 2000
Non-student $580 Student $200
After 1 May, 2000
Non-student $650 Student $300
Group registrations (for 15 persons or more, N/A for students)
Before 1 May, 2000 $480 After 1 May, 2000 $550
Registration fees include a welcome reception and banquet, access to all conferences, tutorials and exhibition, coffee breaks, conference package (including a CD-ROM with all conference proceedings, hard copy proceedings of one conference, Congress program, map of Beijing, invitations to events and other.
The OC currently is detailing the budget based on the following estimates:
Attendance:
Overseas Domestic
A. Minimum 800 1,200 B. On Target 1,000 1,500 C. Optimistic 1,200 1,800
Income:
From registrations, assuming 30% are students and 60% are group rates
A-2000 B-2500 C-3000
all early $848,000 $1,060,000 $1,272,000 70% early $895,400 $1,111,735 $1,343,100 50% early $927,000 $1,158,750 $1,390,500 30% early $958,600 $1,190,315 $1,437,900
Profit from Exhibition: $80,000
Expenditure (for 2000 attendees):
IPC $232,500 OC $238,000 Congress $346,060 IFIP’s share $80,000/$90,000/$100,000 Contingency (10%) $89,000 Total: $985,560
* IFIP’s share as considered for A, B and C respectively
Balance:
Income Expenditure Surplus
A $1,007,000 $ 985,560 $21,440 B $1,238,750 $1,192,672 $46,078 C $1,470,500 $1,380,072 $90,428
* figures in income column assume 50% early birds
Mr. Grafendorfer commented that the Organizers should budget sufficient funds for mailing. He also wondered if travel expenses were included in the OC budget. Mr. Li responded that travel expenses from 1995 onwards for reporting to Council and GA and all other associated Congress travels were included. Mr. Glasson thought it would be helpful if the FC Chair and the Treasurer could carry out a comparison of expenses for, say, the last 3 Congresses. Mr. Johnson said that a brief summary of the reported budget would be useful to have in the Council Minutes and wondered under which item the Congress proceedings are budgeted. Mr. Li said that the costs for proceedings are incorporated in the IPC budget. Mr. Brunnstein cautioned that the values of different budget items vary from one country to another so comparisons with previous congresses are not necessarily indicative.
Mr. Rosenfeld pointed out how important it is to quickly put together a list of speakers. Mr. Li responded that the IPC Chair, Mr. Wah is working on this.
Mr. Johnson stressed the importance of mailing lists to promote Congress and said that CEPIS would be happy to provide access to European members.
The President reminded of his intention to visit China later on in March to meet with representatives of the IPC and OC. One important issue would be to very quickly integrate the IFIP SEC2000 conference within the Congress format.
Mr. Reis wondered whether discounts would be provided to IFIP Members. Mr. Brunnstein opined that such discounts could be handled via the Group discounts scheme. Mr. Grafendorfer recalled that Congress 98 had a special rate for IFIP Members.
Mr. Bollerslev was very happy with the arrangement for Congress 2000 in Montreal.
The Congress 2002 OC Chair, Mr. Boynton, said he would like to have the same format as in Vienna and Budapest and invited TC chairs to take an active part in putting together a fine program. Mr. Boynton noted that the contract for Congress 2002 was signed.
3.7.4 Congress Frequency and Guidelines
Mr. Bollerslev advised that the frequency of IFIP Congresses had been considered by a number of recent IFIP General Assemblies. Prior to Council 99 EB revisited the issue and holds the opinion that the 2-year cycle works well and IFIP should continue with it. The President informed Council that Mr. Goldsworthy had submitted a paper on new Congress Guidelines. EB considered this very useful and EB members were requested to provide comments to Mr. Grafendorfer who will prepare a detailed proposal, based on Mr. Goldsworthy’s paper, and submit it to GA 99.
Mr. Rosenfeld drew Council’s attention to an article in the March 99 issue of the Newsletter where he presents his views on IFIP Congresses and their frequency.
Mr. Brunnstein suggested that IFIP Member societies should be consulted on the issue of Congress frequency and how they regard Congress in terms of benefits. He opined that congresses are valuable in many ways but the 2-year cycle requires too much effort on the part of IFIP's TCs. Mr. Berleur agreed and said that the procedure for preparing the Congress program is not clear and TCs cannot jump in at short notice. He thinks that the 2-year cycle is too short for planning and decision making at the TC level. Mr. Bollerslev reported that from Congress 2000 onwards proceeds will be shared with TCs and a conference under the Congress umbrella should be considered as part of the regular TC activity.
Mr. Reis felt that Congresses contribute to the IFIP visibility and to spreading its mission around the world. In his mind, if IFIP considers changing cycles then why not go the other way and think of having a Congress every year. Mr. Boynton thought that IFIP operates in a fast growing field and it needs events that draw continuous participation from industry.