[CREATE] Pitching a community-funded conference

[Yuval Levy]

Dave Neary wrote:
> "we just don't get why this one is important to our business".

desktop-FOSS drives innovation.

=> if your business is content creation (downstream industries):

it opens up new creative possibilities for content producers (look at 
the enfuse story), or at least puts their suppliers under pressure and 
expands the toolbox of creators

=> if your business is enabling content creation (upstream industries - 
hardware)

it drives professional and consumer demand for newer, higher margin 
hardware - digital cameras with more bracketing / dynamic range options; 
GPUs, CPUs (any useful non-FOSS 64bit desktops out there?)

<thought provoking>

=> if your business is enabling content creation (upstream industries - 
software)

it drives innovation, build a pool of human resources to tap into for 
the continuation of the business model, enable you to focus on your real 
unique selling proposition while commoditizing non-strategic areas. it 
is not a zero-sum game, together we can make the cake bigger and 
everybody has its share. Sometimes the FOSS model is superior, sometimes 
the proprietary one is. Together they are both better off.

</thought provoking>


> Graphics applications rank among the most desired applications on Linux

take that "Linux" away. compromise. Graphic apps are the most desired 
apps, full stop.


> And yet there's no corporate money being spent improving the free
> software apps out there. The investment from Google and others is going
> into making commercial apps on Windows work better on Linux.

accept it. embrace it. use a strategic argument: competition is good. 
collaborative competition is better. LGM is about collaborative 
competition (or isn't it?).

When the likes of Google invest in FOSS they make it primarily out of a 
strategic stance. They inject competition into a supplier's market to 
reduce dependency and/or get better performance/features.

Sometimes the outcome is the adoption of the alternative supplier (i.e. 
true love of FOSS). More often it is "only" an incremental improvement 
at the supplier. Good enough for the pragmatic sponsor. Next cycle.

As a user, I want Photoshop's functionalities at my fingertips ASAP. 
Many ways lead to Rome. I'll try the shortcut first (buy Windows and 
Photoshop). But it's in my interest to have alternatives. Getting rid of 
the Windows dependency is a significant step forward. Next cycle.

I suspect Google's objective for the next cycle is to push Adobe to 
release Linux native software. Adoption of a FOSS alternative is a few 
cycles away, and may even never come. It will take a FOSS copycat of 
Photoshop, like OpenOffice for M$ Office. Interoperability and 
compatibility.

<thought provoking>
have you thought of inviting the Adobe's of this world to LGM? or even 
to sponsor LGM?
</thought provoking>

Only after the copycat stage comes the innovation stage, where FOSS can 
take the lead without being too far out for the mainstream to adopt.

And the commercials take note (and advantage). This is currently the 
case with enfuse, a revolutionary exposure blending tool I've been 
involved in. Commercial implementations are popping up.

If the users behave like lemmings and run into the arms of the 
commercials, so what?

I'm an advocate of 6$/litre 20$/gallon gasoline, with the excess revenue 
redistributed equally among all citizens. The bottom line won't change 
for a citizen with average consumption, but there will be a net transfer 
from those going shopping in Urban aSsault Vehicles to those more 
conscientious of the environment - a flow of money to the smart.

But I'm diverging here.

@Louis: thank you for the link to the wiki - your work on LGM 2007 was 
spectacular.

I am missing travel sponsorship for the current event, but I understand 
the difficulties. Also: even with travel sponsorship, I won't make it. 
Higher priority: <http://blog.yuvallevy.com/2008/02/14/first-picture/>. 
After that we move to Oxford UK in November. I will need a job there.


> What we need to do is publicise the Create project, publicise the
> concrete results we've achieved out of the last 2 LGMs (XCF2, improved
> drag & drop between graphics apps, shared swatches, other shared
> resources, SIOX integration into Blender, ...). The list is pretty long.
> Above all, we've achieved a cohesion across different projects which
> will benefit us all moving forward.

Sure - you want to talk about collaborative competition as opposed to 
obstructive one, and of its advantage for everybody - *including* the 
current monopolist.


> And then we say that we're short money for the conference, and we ask
> for donations.

everybody's always short of money. ask for donations because what you 
provide is valuable, not because you're short of money. if what you do 
is good, it is worth throwing money at. If you can do good with $10K, 
you can do better with $20K. Of course marginal utility diminishes (as 
in: the first glass of water is worth more than the second one to a 
thirsty person in the desert), but we're talking marketing here, not 
economics.

Don't tell them what would be enough to cover your needs. Tell them that 
the more the merrier, and what you have to offer will give them a huge 
return on investment.

E.g. when approaching a company like Pentax, the line of reasoning is: 
you will be selling thousands of K20D, with its extended bracketing 
capture. A tool like enfuse would drive larger sales number for your 
great hardware. You have spent millions in R&D to get it where it is. 
You could sell thousands more with a few thousands dollars in 
sponsorships to those that promote software that drive the adoption of 
your hardware. See the synergy?

hope this helps
Yuv