Re: [AGA-sc] SFBAAPS bid for the AGA 2006 A/V requirements... (fwd)

["S. Hieber" <shieber@yahoo.com>]

I'm beginning to doubt that these folks talk to each other
much or that they have anyone with any planning or, worse,
organizational ability. 

I suspect that SFBAAPS is more like most rather than an
exception. We must adapt to the prospects because the
prospects have a devile of atime adapting to AGA.

Michael suggests that we send out a formal RFP. Well, we
pretty much did; if we could spec out the whole convention
beforehand, we wouldn't need the local club, we could
literally just bid out the local work to some laborers. And
anyway, ff we did put even more "specs" in the the
document, I think we would just cause even more folks to
not read it. I suspect that the comprehensiveness of the
current "Guidelines and Requirements" doc is simply too
daunting in appearance and therefore, not really read. It's
like showing them a contract full of fine print; who's
gonna read that stuff? Yet, obviously somehow we have to
make our document plainer, easier to read, and more
inviting, by which I mean, mapping out steps.

Next year I think we *definitely have to have* a
fill-in-the-blanks form of requirements document -- a
seriously revised version of the current "Guidelines and
Rquirements" doc. I can work on this over the holidays, or
shortly thereafter and  before I get to work on the 2005
IRS filing. But even with a "fill-in" document, unless we
want to leave prospective proposers no latitude at all for
creativity, there will have to be large portions where
"essay" answers are required.

I'm only suggesting something that might help, not solve
the problem. I fear there will always be those wastes of
perfectly good oxygen that can't understand what it means
to fax a photo release with signature or to plan and
propose an event, no matter what help you give them.

sh



--- Erik Olson <erik@thekrib.com> wrote:

> I thought I would share another impression from an
> SFBAAPS organizer on 
> how the bidding process is going.
> 
> My thoughts in next e-mail...
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 21:49:44 +0000
> From: Michael Laflamme <spicolte@hotmail.com>
> To: erik@thekrib.com
> Subject: SFBAAPS bid for the AGA 2006 A/V requirements...
> 
> [the e-mail begins asking for any changes in A/V
> requirements as part of 
> firming up his budget -- snip]
> 
> Lastly, I have been on the conheads list reading the
> banter concerning our 
> convention.   I will preface my comments below with the
> statement that I was 
> only added to the list a few months ago by Jim, so I may
> have missed some 
> earlier conversations.  If so, and my comments have
> already been dealt with, 
> then I apologize.
> 
> Concerning your e-mail detailing your frustration with
> our bid.  I understand 
> your frustrations and let me say that the SFBAAPS would
> be happy to place a 
> bid. However, before we can accomplish this, what we need
> from the AGA is a 
> Request for Bid outline. This would include all of your
> "must haves" and your 
> budget. If the AGA could provide us with a standard and
> customary Request for 
> Bid we could reply to it with our information and show
> your organization how 
> the SF bay area would be a wonderful place for this
> conference. We are happy to 
> do the work and outline how the project would proceed
> before you accept our 
> proposal but we cannot do so without knowing what you
> have for requirements. So 
> far, we seem to have only had bits and pieces of what is
> required, via the 
> e-mail correspondence to our questions.
> 
> By stating that we should look at other cities bids, are
> you implying that 
> these cities have provided for all of your requests? It
> seems to me that you 
> should cull from past meeting and conferences those must
> haves and budgets and 
> place them into a short Request for Bid and then allow us
> to respond. This is 
> the most efficient way to get what you want without
> spending countless time on 
> emails asking questions in order to project manage this
> task.
> 
> You mention spending time on the phone back and forth
> ironing out the details 
> of the last bid. If this was to clear up the fine details
> of the bid, I would 
> find that acceptable. But, if this was the process from
> the initial contact all 
> the way up until the bid was accepted, then time was
> wasted on both sides.
> 
> During my time in the Air Force, annual inspections were
> customary.  However, 
> if a section failed an inspection, the blame was
> essentially their own. The 
> reason why was simple; The Air Force had detailed
> instructions and inspection 
> reports that allowed each section of each unit, each
> base, etc. to prepare and 
> pass an inspection because all the info needed was
> presented beforehand. What 
> would be inspected, what was acceptable/unacceptable, all
> guidelines and what 
> was needed to accomplish the goal.  Essentially, the
> instructions to prepare 
> for and pass the inspection were handed to you months,
> even a year, before the 
> inspection.
> 
> These type of guidelines apply here as well. If we, or
> any other bid contender, 
> could receive a detailed list of what is needed to meet
> the needs of your 
> annual show, then we only need to fill in the blanks and
> present you with our 
> bid. This would also benefit the AGA, as it would make it
> much easier for other 
> local groups to put a bid package together, and then the
> AGA would have several 
> locations to choose from; all the while feeling confident
> that all the areas 
> where covered. Local groups wouldn't need to continually
> bother the AGA folks 
> over all the details, except the fine details after the
> bid was submitted and 
> accepted.  Perhaps many local clubs are intimidated, and
> don't wish to make a 
> bid because they have no idea what is needed, what it
> entails, etc.  If you had 
> a standard Request for Bid that you issued every year to
> all local clubs, you 
> would only have to sit back and what for the bids to come
> in.  Less work, and 
> e-mail chatter for everyone involved.  Plus...more clubs
> making a bid.  A 
> win/win all around.
> 
> Last year during our last bid attempt, I contacted you
> concerning our 
> audio/visual needs, as I am again.. What you sent me
> (below) was a concise, 
> detailed list of everything that was needed. This is
> making my task much 
> simpler, since I know what you need, and what I need to
> obtain. This is exactly 
> what I am asking for the AGA to provide to us now.
> 
> Thanks for your time and help Erik.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Michael Laflamme
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AGA-sc mailing list
> AGA-sc@thekrib.com
> http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-sc
> 

_______________________________________________
AGA-sc mailing list
AGA-sc@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-sc