Dan Hocking - Latest Comments in Adding Registration Fees to Reduce No-Shows: Does This Make Sense?

Re: Adding Registration Fees to Reduce No-Shows: Does This Make Sense?

Malcolm Bastien — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:55:28 -0000

You know, that's true. Especially since many of the presentations I see at a few of these are events are 10% informative, and 90% promotion for their business.

As soon as you give money to attend at event like that, it transforms, and you're basically paying to be sold to.

Re: Adding Registration Fees to Reduce No-Shows: Does This Make Sense?

Dan Hocking — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:52:27 -0000

Good points, Malcolm. Really, it's not just students this affects either; the proper way to run a start-up is to keep all costs at a minimal level, to give yourself time for success. That's not anything revelatory, but it does mean that our start-up community should be considering where its money goes. While there are certainly benefits to attending these events - for advice, or just plain old networking, for instance - more thought would be put into whether such an event is worth attending or not.

In a way, introducing a fee places a significant burden on the event organizers. As soon as anything more than a quarter leaves my pocket as a registration fee, my expectations are significantly raised. If you're going to charge even a nominal fee, I'm fully expecting that each event you throw is going to have a takeaway for me - otherwise, I'll gravitate towards the multitude of free events offered to our community.

Re: Adding Registration Fees to Reduce No-Shows: Does This Make Sense?

Brian Alkerton — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:43:42 -0000

There's a ton of competing factors that make this a real minefield of an issue. My first impulse is to suggest that rather than charge a fee, have no-shows not be allowed to register for future events, while making an allowance for those who register but then alert organizers if they can't make it. However, you don't build a community by banishing people from it. As for paying to sign up, when an event that's been free and has funding lined up starts charging, it can appear as a cash-grab and it can rub people the wrong way.

Justin, I think your idea works, but I'm not especially keen on refundability being mixed with charity. If a different charity was selected each month and a minimum $5 donation was required to register, I think that's the sweet spot. You would have to make it clear from the outset that it's a donation directly to a cause and not being paid to the event organizers, but that would be a way to do some good and reduce the no-shows by having people committed to showing up. A fee waiver option for current students in order to encourage them to get involved and participate (which far too few of us do) would need to be figured out in addition to this, but could work quite effectively.

Re: Adding Registration Fees to Reduce No-Shows: Does This Make Sense?

Malcolm Bastien — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:41:01 -0000

One thing I hope groups of any size and industry take into consideration is the doors that the events open up to students. I couldn't be where I was today if Third Tuesday, Refresh, and Web Analytics Wednesday were not free. I probably would still be unemployed, would have made a lot fewer connections and friends, and they would not have been able to help my education.

So for students I hope all events keep it free, at 3+ events a month, at $10 a pop potentially, then it just becomes unfeasible for students to participate.

Should those with the ability to pay contribute? If there's more meaning to the money maybe. The idea of the money being donated then not only helps with the issue of no-shows, but it itself becomes a cultural ceremony of that community.

(not pointing any fingers here) Are these sorts of fees a solution for a management problem? No. So as long as the fees are implemented as such (and not like a group effort for instance), then they'll get this sort of kickback.

Re: Adding Registration Fees to Reduce No-Shows: Does This Make Sense?

Dan Hocking — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:29:36 -0000

That's a really interesting approach - I'm not going to lie, I like it a lot. Are you concerned with the shock of introducing that cost to your community? On the flip-side, would having that cost enable you to use a larger venue and open your events up to a bigger, more diverse group? Which would be more beneficial?