RE: [802SEC] Notes from Wed Mar 20 meeting with SA staff and BoG
While I am a newcomer to the SEC, and only really familar
with this issue from the presentations and debate of the
March meetings, I am inclined to agree with Tony's comments.
1) great progress would be a continuation under equal
or better terms of the program
2) If last year's shortfall was smaller significantly smaller
than 802's contribution, it would seem that
a) the program may not be the reason for the shortfall
(perhaps the economic downturn was the major factor?)
b) absent the program and 802's contribution, the
shortfall would have been much larger
c) sweeping changes in the program and unilaterlly breaking
agreements don't seem to be justified by *projections*,
especially ones made so early in a year where some economic
recovery seems to be widely expected
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Jeffree [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 7:45 AM
> To: Roger B. Marks
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [802SEC] Notes from Wed Mar 20 meeting with SA staff and
> I agree that it is good to have the situation restored -
> i.e., for the BoG
> to honour their agreement with us, but I wouldn't consider
> that in itself
> to be great progress. Great progress would be for them to agree to
> continue the program on the current (or preferably, a better)
> basis for
> another 2 years.
> Under item 2), I hope our negotiators don't lose sight of the
> fact that
> last year's *actual* revenue shortfall was significantly
> smaller than 802'1
> contribution, and that at present, we are only talking about
> numbers for 2002 (802's contribution exceeded the loss of
> sales for books &
> PDF by 80% if I recall correctly). The actual numbers for
> this year may
> well be beneficially affected by future events - such as the
> number of
> people that will choose to update their copy of the 802.3
> doorstop (or
> should it be doorstops, plural, now?) in the coming months.
> At 18:15 21/03/2002 -0700, Roger B. Marks wrote:
> >Great note! Great progress!
> >Thanks, guys!
> >>Dear 802 Executive Committee,
> >>Last night Geoff Thompson, Howard Frazier and myself had a
> very productive
> >>meeting with members of the SA Staff (Judy Gorman, Jerry
> Walker, Karen Rupp
> >>and others) and representatives from the BoG (Dick Holleman
> and Jim Carlo)
> >>to discuss the 3 motions we made last week on the Get802
> program, Trademarks
> >>and Certification.
> >>As a result of the meeting the following items were agreed:
> >>1) SA staff has agreed and Dick Holleman has obtained
> agreement (pending
> >>confirmation from all BoG members via email by April 5th)
> from Ben Johnson,
> >>President of the BoG, restore the Get802 to it orignal
> agreed upon terms
> >>(pay period = 6 months after publication) until May 15, 2002.
> >>2) SA staff will actively work with 802 to develop
> alternatives to make up
> >>for the apparent reduction in print in PDF revenue that has
> resulted because
> >>of the Get802 program. Initially Jerry Walker, Geoff
> Thompson, Howard
> >>Frazier and Paul Nikolich will be the focal points for this
> work. It will
> >>begin via teleconference Tuesday March 26 at 2pm EST.
> >>3) Geoff Thompson will be the 802 Point of Contact to work
> with SA Staff
> >>(person TBD) to give 802 perspective/recommendations on
> Trademark Policy.
> >>4) Paul Nikolich will be the 802 Point of Contact to work
> with the SA Staff
> >>(person TBD) to give the 802 perspective/recommendations on
> >>5) SA staff and the BoG invited 802 to continue to work
> closely with them
> >>via an "advisory group" consisting of a 2-3 members from
> each organization.
> >>6) The BoG accepted 802's invitation to co-locate the BoG
> and 802 meetings
> >>at the July plenary. The BoG most likely will meet
> Th/Fri/Sat. Logistics
> >>to be worked out between BoG and 802 meeting planners.
> >>This meeting has set the stage for 802, SA staff and BoG to closely
> >>collaborate in order to reach our common goals of making
> high quality
> >>standards available to the public in a timely, cost
> effective manner. Now
> >>we have to execute on this objective--there is much work to be done.
> >>Thanks to all that participated.
> >>--Paul Nikolich
> >>Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Project
> >>email: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >>cell: 857.205.0050
> >>mail: 18 Bishops Lane, Lynnfield, MA 01940