Babscon=epic fail?

[PiquoPie 28]

That's like reviewing a movie or video game based on other peoples' reviews.

 

You mean its exactly like the news, or a talk show, or talk radio, or conversations with your friends about other friends, or conversations about history with your familty, or learning about health information from someone other than the researcher, or anything ever said by a politition.

 

There is also a reason that I disclosed that I didn't attend. Because I respect the people here enough to let them know that there are weaknesses in what I say.

[Simon 4,557]

 

 

It was my opinion that the con grew too big too fast and though you said they didn’t you also provided an opinion that supports that statement. You said it yourself; they didn’t have all that much time. Time to do something determines how fast they need to do it. I actually disagree on this point. They did have time, but they had to adjust for the size. I think that if they started with a larger expectation they could have done better. That said you don’t start big, it’s a bad idea. You start at the safe numbers and if the numbers get bigger you adapt. They did that, quite well in fact. Also getting big fast isn’t a problem or a bad thing about the con. If anything it shows that they were doing a good job. It’s also a reason why next years will be better. They did well with growing quickly, and it will even out for next year making their job easier.

 

I think this is where I take issue... sure they had some minor issues, but what does any of it have to do with the size of the convention?  You're complaints are about things like isolated staff incidents, issues with Everfree, and issues with the setup of the pricing structure.  None of those things would have changed had the convention been smaller.  You're disagreeing with the way they chose to ran things, and then accusing them of having these problems because they were too large, but that simply wasn't the case.  

 

They didn't decide to give Final Draft another chance because they had too many other things to do and couldn't be bothered, it was because we're in a fandom which has forgiveness as a core tenant of its beliefs so you have to give people a second chance sometimes.  Once it became clear he had no intention of following the rules, they revoked his badge.  Remember, all the stuff he did happened in a relatively short amount of time and he was kicked out about a day into the convention if I remember correctly.

 

Someone could have accidentally grabbed an item and auctioned it off regardless of the con size.  And you mentioned that they should have had a system in place... well they did.  The system is telling people that the convention isn't responsible for lost or stolen items.  Sure they have a convention break room, but you still have to watch your belongings... that person should have never left something that valuable anywhere but locked inside their hotel room.  The big deal here is that the convention, despite its size, realized the importance of that item to that individual and despite the fact that they don't have to take responsibility for lost items, stepped in to remedy the situation.

 

The pricing structure would have been the same regardless of the number of attendees.  And while you may personally disagree with this, it's just a difference of opinion.  My point in reminding you that it's something that's done every day is to remind you that you're the minority on that belief... so while you can disagree with them for pricing convention tickets in that way, you can hardly condemn the entire convention for doing something that's completely socially acceptable.  And it's also worth mentioning that you really have no idea what percentage of tickets used coupons, you're just assuming most people did.  The truth is that they had a huge variety of different discounts and promotions throughout the sales.  For example, I paid full price, but I bought my ticket at a time where all the money from my ticket was donated to Michael Morones.  By using that promotion code system, they could do things like that.

 

The point is, you say it was too big, but you didn't really identify any problems having to do with the size of the convention.  The only one that was at all related to the size was the complaint about the number of guests, but you're just wrong all around on this one.  As I explained before, they actually had a number of panels with only one or two of the guests there in addition to the big panels.  There were a number of guests that asked for a panel to talk about some other topic and they were provided with that time, because the convention wanted nothing but to accommodate them and allow them to do exactly what you're saying.  I don't know if you've ever watched one of the bigger VA panels though, but nobody involved wants those to be smaller... not the guests, not the people watching it, nobody.  The reason is because these people are absolute geniuses with bouncing off of what eachother says and it makes for an absolutely hilarious panel and a much better time.  You're also not considering the length of the panel... sure they had a lot of VA's, but they had two full two hour long panels for the VA's, a bunch of smaller panels for some individual VA's, several hours of autograph signing where people could ask individual VA's questions, and a VIP meet and greet for higher up badge holders.  There was tons and tons of time to ask all the VA's any question you could possibly imagine, so there really wasn't any harm of them having as many guests as they did.

 

And you keep trying to say they did it to take a cut of the signature money, but you really don't even have any evidence that Babscon did take a cut of the signature money.  For Tara Strong, you paid for her signature in cash directly to her, so I know nobody was getting a cut of that money.  The reason behind the use of vouchers for the other guests wasn't so the convention could take a cut of their signature money, it was so that the guests didn't have to spend the convention playing cashier and giving out change and handling money for signatures.  And let's be honest here, it's a pretty good system... there's something less personal about getting that picture of you hugging Andrea when she has to break a hundred dollar bill to give you change before she'll hug you.  I'm not saying that I have absolute proof that they didn't take a cut, but I've never heard of Brony conventions taking a cut of that money, and if your only reason for speculating that they did is the vouchers, then you're wrong, because as I stated before that's not the reason they used the voucher system.  Given the fact that Tara shares an agent with several other VA's and all the VA's agents interact with one another about these conventions, I'm guessing that since Tara didn't have to pay a cut of her signatures to the convention, none of them did.

 

You also have to remember that this is not a for-profit convention, so even if they do make money off of some things, it's only to have funds to run the convention the next year and provide a service to the brony community.  I could understand all your concerns about them making money if at the end of the day someone from the convention was profiting off of this thing, but they're not.  The convention is run under Harmonious Elements which is a non-profit with pending 501c3 status, and was also supported by Anthropomorphic Arts and Education which is a 501c3 non-profit organization.  

 

Also, your entire post is filled with speculation and much of it is wrong.  You assume that the media was being paid for advertising Babscon... they weren't.  As part of the media badge contracts with Babscon, they would provide media badges only to organizations which agreed to a number of terms including providing promotion for Babscon prior to the convention.  So they weren't being paid, they were just being permitted to do media coverage of the actual event by providing promotion upfront.  You also assumed that they were profiting off vouchers which I discussed.  The problem with you trying to provide an in-depth opinion about a convention you didn't go to, is that when you have to fill in the holes with guesses about what happened, you're going to lead people into believing the wrong information.

 

You might have said that the convention was a success, but it was buried in paragraphs and paragraphs of incorrect statements about failures the convention didn't make.  Sure, news often report on things they weren't actually there to witness based on interviews with other people, but you're basing your opinion off of speculations, and no credible news source does that.  If you want to provide an opinion that's fine, but you should probably limit you're discussions to parts of the convention you're actually familiar with instead of making speculations based on what other conventions have done.

[SveciaDash 364]

Gotta say that the media cover of the convention on youtube was VERY bad and the sound was shite.

[PiquoPie 28]

I think this is where I take issue... sure they had some minor issues, but what does any of it have to do with the size of the convention? 

 

The larger and faster a con grows the higher a chance for issues to develop. If you grow more over time the issues get spread out and more eyes will review things. Plus issues at other cons can cause a con to look at their own system and identify issues.

 

It's one of the reason the Everfree issue bugs me. It was a known issue at some other events...

 

 

 

because they had too many other things to do and couldn't be bothered

 

 

Any time your con rules are threatened you need to take cost benefit analysis. If there were other major issues at the con then this would be more acceptable because he didn't appear dangerous and MLP show guests are rather tolerant compared to many other celebrities. They ran a good con, so they should have had the staff and resources to deal with the situation at the first incident at the con. They also showed that they had a lot of time before the con so they should, and probably did, address the issue before the con. Remember, he has had issues in the fandom before. This could be his 5th, 6th, or 7th chance to make a good impression at a new con and abide by the rules. They did stand up eventually after he intentionally breached security but before that he was, by legal definition, harassing show guests on more than one occasion after trying to scam the con into extra free passes. Obviously BABScon didn't want to press charges and agree with that decision for many reasons, but they needed to not let such behavior escalate because if it had been a different person with ill intent they they could be considered at fault for not providing proper security. It would be a long shot in court, but there would be legal grounds given that they knew he had willfully gone around con regulations to approach a celebrity.

 

 

 The system is telling people that the convention isn't responsible for lost or stolen items.

 

That is not a system, that is a liability reducing statment. A system is having items documented, and having the signed document of the donator when they present the item for auction. No documentation, no auction. If they said "we cannot be held liable" and then took someone stuff it's still stealing, even if it was an accident, so long as they made no attempt to return the item. They didn't steal, it was an accident, and they did take action to remedy their mistake. But better implementation of a solid system would still benefit them. Which is the point of this, it's an area they can, and should, improve on.

 

 

The staffer also supposedly did take responsibility for their item as there was suppose to be a note on the item and it was off to the side. Given that they were working in that exact room immediately after getting a signature it's reasonable to assume they were allowed to leave the item there and could expect that the con would no walk off with it as she did supposedly, have a note.

 

 

My point in reminding you that it's something that's done every day is to remind you that you're the minority on that belief... so while you can disagree with them for pricing convention tickets in that way, you can hardly condemn the entire convention for doing something that's completely socially acceptable

Agreed, it's a difference of opinion where I am in the minority and I don't fault you for holding with the majority belief. It's a very secure and reasonable position to take. I still like to push for greater ethics however and I am grateful that you are respecting that. So in the middle of all this I would like to say that I do think highly or your arguments. That said I do not condemn the whole con. I merely take issue with that policy. But when you have multiple policies to take issue with, or single major issues that did not happen at all, then it counts as taking issue with the con. I don't take issue with the con as a whole. I only wish a few areas to improve and am wary until I see this happen because I am a pessimistic grump old man at heart and think that this con can do better than slide by without addressing minor issues. 

 

 

sure they had a lot of VA's, but they had two full two hour long panels for the VA's, a bunch of smaller panels for some individual VA's, several hours of autograph signing where people could ask individual VA's questions, and a VIP meet and greet for higher up badge holders.  There was tons and tons of time to ask all the VA

 

This is how I break it down because I am a numbers guy. Though you do make a good point that they accommodated people most celebrities guests don't historically do that kind of thing in my limited exposure to that side of cons (by cons I mean more than just pony cons. Pony cons are particularity cool about this and I include BABScon with that statment.

 

6 show guests / 2 hours = 20 minutes per guest minus the time it takes to ask questions. So at best they are on stage for 2 hours contributing 20 minutes on average per panel. They did have smaller panels for VA's but if every gust from official material wanted panels they would be overlapping and withering time and space for other types of events. While this works in bigger varied cons that cover wider topics My opinion is that it hurts more specific cons. Va's also are the biggest ticket celebrities and having the most experience with cons to know to ask for time and space at a brrny convention. As for AKR and her Ukelele it's a really cool thing that other cons have done as well. It's expected that she play at any con by this point thought, the time dedicated varies.

 

Mostly this is a personal gripe and a different preference of respect that I admit I have compared to the majority.

 

 

You also have to remember that this is not a for-profit convention

 

 

Non for-profit doesn't quite mean what it use to. Sadly I am a bit of a pessimist especially on the issue of how people treat money. I see non for-profits pay way to much and make way to much with very little benefits to society. The NFL, for instance, is a non-for profit that makes around 14 billion a year on a good year and the higher ups get paid a lot and the charity donations they make are almost all exclusively football related such as museums for football that aren't non for-profit. Additionally they pay all the teams which are for profit and everyone walks away rich. Heck, the top paid state employee in virtually all states are college coaches but that's a debate for another time.

 

I know it's sad and I wish I didn't feel this way but I see a lot of charities as businesses that don't pay taxes. I will keep in mind that they are a non for-profit as I did forget this and I thank you for reminding me.

 

 

And you keep trying to say they did it to take a cut of the signature money, but you really don't even have any evidence that Babscon did take a cut of the signature money.

 

I was saying I don't know. Just like you don't know if they kept part of the money. I've also defended them on a previous post saying that it's normal and pointing out that a lot of celebrities charge a lot more and don't take nearly the time mlp guest take with fans. It does make it easier to walk around though but the entire reason Tara prefers cash is that she has been screwed in the past. I am sure that this didn't happen in anyway.

 

 

You assume that the media was being paid for advertising Babscon... they weren't.

 

Several podcasts and websites listed BABScon as sponsors. They opened their podact thanking their sponsors, they had BABscon officials on their shows and introduced them as sponsors. That implies some transaction worth some value. It could be a comped ticket or a hotel room or cash or a portion of the proceeds generated by fans using codes. And that is all fine and I approve. But to be a sponsor you are comping for ad time. As media badges would be presented to recognized media outlets anyway (within reason) this wouldn't technically count as a sponsorship because your offering something that would automatically be given anyway unless they were idiots and threatened to snub the media which I know didn't happen.

 

 

actually familiar with

 

Security procedures; check, I worked in event security for years across many types of events and still work in the security field. Systems for running an auction, I won't check this but saying, " we cannot be held liable" then taking other peoples stuff, even on accident, is a nono. Yes I am being stubborn on this because it should not have happened and you keep dismissing it as an accident when part of running a con is taking action to prevent accidents. I think we can agree on that. Business ethics, raised by independent business owners who won awards for service in addition to college courses covering multiple types of ethics. I will also point out that even by my standards it's only misleading attendees in the worst possible scenario, and as you said, such things are common and expected by the majority of businesses and people.

 

I wrote up detailed points because I wanted to present a more complete picture than 'I heard x happened' Some things had nothing to do with them and they had some things they could improve on. That's normal and expected and I don't think less of them for it, but I will if they don't try to improve for next year. Part of improving is knowing where issues are and finding out what different people think. I'm sure there was something that you thought could have been improved on, for instance and I am curious to hear what that could be. It wouldn't change the fact that you had a great time, it won't diminish the fact that for such a large first con they did a good job. But not presenting a criticism that you saw just means that it's that much harder for them to be the best that they can be. And dismissing criticisms because they can't expected to be perfect, they said it's not our problem, or because people it's a standard by which most business would fail/it's accepted by the majority doesn't push the con to be the best. It can even, in some instances, cause them to become complacent. Though I don't expect that from them. It's obvious that they really want to be the best. Maybe they decide to see some merit in my opinion, maybe they don't.

 

Either way I did my part to encourage them to become better.

[Diva Pony 345]

Either way I did my part to encourage them to become better.

 

How did you encourage them to become better from your posts?  From what I can see this is what you want them to do:

 

1.  Forget all the principals of FIM and never give anyone (who is not actually hurting someone) a second chance

2.  Stop advertising because you find it offensive

3.  Never discount tickets for any reason because you find it offensive

4.  Have fewer guests because you think they are not given enough time?

5.  Don't overlap smaller events and make the con a month long so everyone can see every seminar

6.  Book themselves into prison because they made a single mistake by grabbing one non-auction item for the auction by accident

 

I really do understand that you actually are saying good things about the con.  But you are doing it in such an authoritative way amidst several criticisms based on snippets you have read in the news and/or blogs that I guess you are ruffling a few feathers including mine.

 

I think you made a reference to being a grumpy old man and so you know, I am a grumpy old woman!  And in a grumpy old motherly type of way, I find it offensive that probably the best event I have attended in years (and I go to a lot- doll conventions, Disney conventions, bear conventions) is being ostracized over assumptions by someone who was not there!

 

Finally, I would like to invite you to actually attend next year.  Pre-Registration is open right now with discounted prices- feel free to write to them and tell them you would rather pay full price on principal- and then when you give your review on the con next year, it will truly be from experience.  And I will try not to be grumpy in return. 

@

Diva Pony

 

Though I won't go myself, as they are below my personal standards, I also recognize that I am a grumpy old man at heart and tend to be a bit of a stick in the mud. Always have been, always will be.

 

 

since you had the @sign and my name on 2 different lines, I did not catch that you answered me until I wrote the above.  So I am throwing this into a 2nd post. 

 

Below your personal standards again is an amazing negative statement against something you are supposing exists vs what does- something you have stated that a lot went really well in your absent opinion. 

 

And the stick in the mud and always will be is only if that's what you want to be.  If you want to be ornery and stuck it is certainly your right.  But you might want to find out what it's like to experience FIM first hand.  I hope that you have not sentenced yourself to a life of alienation.  It's a lot more fun to feel companionship.  It doesn't mean you don't get to have opinions.  It means you get to experience things yourself instead of living vicariously through others.

 

You really are limiting yourself.

Edited June 3, 2014 by Diva Pony

[PiquoPie 28]

How did you encourage them to become better from your posts?  From what I can see this is what you want them to do:

 

1.  Forget all the principals of FIM and never give anyone (who is not actually hurting someone) a second chance

2.  Stop advertising because you find it offensive

3.  Never discount tickets for any reason because you find it offensive

4.  Have fewer guests because you think they are not given enough time?

5.  Don't overlap smaller events and make the con a month long so everyone can see every seminar

6.  Book themselves into prison because they made a single mistake by grabbing one non-auction item for the auction by accident

 

1) Having been assaulted at cons and other events multiple times by people given second , third, and even fourth chances. Having seen celebrities get heckled by people not properly adressed, and seeing the same potential happen here where the person was not removed until after accessing a VIP area in front of VIP guests this has nothing to do with the principles of FiM. More accuratly it has to do with protecting the con staff, attendees, and VIP guests. I didn't say give no second chances. I said with two chances given before the con, given a third chance at the con is to much. If this wasn't a member of the press, and it was some random person with ill intent, they would be in a heap of trouble and partially responsible. I hope they review their polocy to protect themselves and others but I encourage them to give second chances because it's also normal for people to try. But you need to be clear, once is fine, but if they purposly try multiple times to access parts of the con, and VIP guests and circumvent the rules of the con, that is not acceptable.

 

2) My point was that over advertising can turn people off of the con. Though in the grand scheme of things this was a minor point that I mentioned off hand. While sometimes annoying there is nothing innatly wrong with it. 

 

3) Being honest and forthright with your pricing is appreciated, using the tactic of saying 'discount' or 'sale' for what ends up being your majority pricing point is shady and not okay with everyone.

 

4) Growing to fast can be a problem that happens. It's not exactly their fault and if more people wanted to come than I can't fault them for doing it. Its more of a condition than a fault and I wouldn't discourag them from doing it in the future. But understanding what is happening can help compensatw. So they should make sure to learn from mistakes made and come back next year better.

 

5) Now your just being silly. I assume your talking about my issue with show guests. In which case my point is to go for quality events over quantity of guests. A few less guests and they could have focused a bit more in each event. Then again I value depth when it comes to things like interviews. For party style events go to town. I think I forgot to make that distinction.

 

6) Assume things will go wrong and have a system in place to catch mistakes. It won't be perfect but it will be benifitial and as a business I feel companies should take extra effort to prevent such issues.

 

Sorry I miswrote the @.

 

As to being a stick in the mud I choose to be by most peoples standards because I believe in constantly trying to learn and better the understanding of oneself and the world. I accept that issues happen but I also want to see people learn from mistakes and grow. I also don't like seeing people blow off issues because they can come up with an excuse. As I am in the minority in this feeling it makes me a stick in the mud. I am ornery. But only because other people tend to be more care free and take issue with others expecting high standards and being willing tpo point out flaws. I have many friends and family who are like minded to me and we have great times. Conversly if you take a bunch of people who value being the best then add a more carefree person they won't fit in as well and will stand out as being overly care free and undisciplined.

 

 

 

Finally, I would like to invite you to actually attend next year.  Pre-Registration is open right now with discounted prices- feel free to write to them and tell them you would rather pay full price on principal- and then when you give your review on the con next year, it will truly be from experience.  And I will try not to be grumpy in return. 

 

If I have the money I may attend depending on if/how they try and improve as it is one of the more reasonable cons for me to travel too. I generally don't attend more than 1 con a year. And yes I have some minor issues with that con as well but they are a bit older and as such I know how they try and usually do improve.

 

And I don't see you as grumpy. I can be rather vexing, and for that I apologise, but I won't fault you for my personality being rather provocative in some ways. I actually admire everyone here who has taken the time to respond and have a converstation because it shows a general interest that is encouraging and does paint the con in a rather possitive light, though now I have higher expectations

 

And I know the con probably won't adress everything. For all I know they may have specific and completly valid reasons for doing things a certain way. But the hope is that they do take the time and effort to improve and that the interest from the community only serves to motivate them further.

 

And, as always, I will say it again. It was a good con. Keep it up guys.

[11th Doctor Whooves 794]

You have a few valid points, but honestly, 90% of your posts seems like you're just going out of your way to find fault with a convention you never went to, and have no intention of ever attending.

 

You say you might attend next year, but only if they improve.  Quick question.....how will you know whether or not they've improved if you don't go?  You can't judge a convention by information put out ahead of time.  If that were the case, then Las Pegasus was a really successful and well thought out con.

 

In your last line, you say its a good con.  You use 3 words at the end of your post to compliment it, compared to all the rest, in which you complain about the advertising (which didn't seem over the top to me), you complain about the amount of guests, you complain about the pricing and offering discounts, you complain because they gave Final Draft too many chances, and you complain because a mistake was made and quickly corrected.  If you're so concerned with them learning from and correcting mistakes, why is that last one even on the list?  It was learned from and corrected almost immediately.

 

And just a quick thought on the prices and discounts.  You seem utterly focused on only the 60 dollar package, which true, is what most of the con goers had.  However, I'd like to think that those discounts were created to entice people to buy the larger packages, because you'd save a lot more money that way.

[PiquoPie 28]

@,

 

Sorry that it took a while for me to respond. Your comment wasn't linked so I wasn't notified.

 

 

In your last line, you say its a good con.  You use 3 words at the end of your post to compliment it, compared to all the rest

 

Fair enough, though the topic is about 'failing' so the focus of the entire thing would tend to lean toward the negative. But you raise a fair point so here are a list of the positives that I remember.

 

I heard good praise for their vendor hall. It sounded like they embraced vendors quite nicely and found an innovative way to include more.

 

They did have 5 writing track panels for the con which I appreciate given how much the fanfiction scene is overlooked. They did have a good variety of show guests. It wasn't all VA's with one or two others thrown in. They honestly seemed to respect all aspects of the show as well as other forms of media.

 

They didn't have any scandals. I know it should go without saying that a con shouldn't have scandals but for a first year con being so big it is worth noting because usually someone tries to take advantage. So either not having people do so, or keeping it from becoming public (including preventing it from happening at all) is a note deserving of recognition.

 

They did interact with a wide variety of media before hand and were willing to address issues and discuss their plans with peers to make sure their budget was in order and they had the vast majority of ducks in a row. I was impressed with this because peer review isn't usually done this extent in the con scene.

 

They did their fair share of charity work. It's always nice to see a community event include things like that and even though it is standard practice that shouldn't undermine the fact that it is still a huge plus.

 

You will also note that I sided with BABScon in my original post on a few topics like the guy who was accused of stalking. BABScon did it's due diligence for a lot of things but sometimes unfortunate events arise.

 

You complain because they gave Final Draft too many chances, and you complain because a mistake was made and quickly corrected.

 

If they had corrected it quickly it would have been addressed before the con either after he broke the rules and tried to sneak extra free passes or when he contacted show guests on his own. Giving him and his group one chance to correct their behavior is standard, two is moderately generous. At the con he harassed the show guests and again the issue wasn't properly addressed. Thus giving him a third chance which is extremely generous and giving his known past behavior this should have been a cut off point. That's not quickly. Even with a three strikes rule he would have been out. Saying, "Oh he did this thing and was kicked out so it was a fast response" is not correct at all.

 

 

You can't judge a convention by information put out ahead of time.

 

I most certainly can compare their actions before the con in both instances as well as listen to them addressing new items and improved items at the con.Quote

 

 

However, I'd like to think that those discounts were created to entice people to buy the larger packages, because you'd save a lot more money that way.

 

But your not saving money. That's the problem I have with the pricing things higher, then giving a discount and saying your saving money. If you always give the discount and set the price higher you are projecting the image of saving when the customer is not saving money.Quote

You seem utterly focused on only the 60 dollar package, which true, is what most of the con goers had.  However, I'd like to think that those discounts were created to entice people to buy the larger packages, because you'd save a lot more money that way.

 

There is an example used to address this in retail. A woman looks at a $150 purse and thinks, "Nah, it's a nice purse but it's not worth it." But if the same woman looks at the same purse with a $300 price tag but at a %50 discount she think "Wow, what a great deal, that's totally worth it."

 

This works, it increases sales, and I do take issue with it because it is a specific strategy based off of lying to the customer with the intent of making them feel like they are getting a good deal and increasing sales when they aren't.

 

Sometimes companies will arrange the cost to be higher than normal after the sales price. You see this often on Black Friday. A company will mark products up by, for this example lets say 50 percent. So a $100 product will look like it's $150 normally. Then they put it on sale for %25 off, or $37.5 in this example. But people will be in the store on black Friday and think they are getting a good deal so they will sell tons of them at a higher than normal price.

 

With the way BABScon was marketed, that's what it looks like to me. Marking up the price then making people think they are getting a discount when the price they wanted the tickets to be sold at was the final amount after the discount.

 

By you saying you like to think of it as a nice discount for the bigger packages you are displaying that they not only lied to you successfully, but that you bought into the lie to the point that you think better for them lying to you. And when someone is pointing out that you have been lied to you defend the lie. It pisses me off that they have mislead their customers in this fashion and that is why I don't intend on going unless they change how they do things.

 

It's also why I consider it a fail. They failed at ethical business practices by choosing to mislead their customers in order to increase sales.

Edited June 21, 2014 by PiquoPie

[11th Doctor Whooves 794]

How do you know these packages are being marked up?  It's the exact same prices when the convention first started.  It's not like after the con WAS A SUCCESS the first year they jacked all the prices up.

 

Yes, marking a purse as 300 dollars and then selling it for 150, when it was really worth 150 all along is dishonest.  However, making a package deal and making it worth the 250, 400, 900 or however much, and then offering a discount that you can, but don't have to use isn't dishonest or unethical.    I doubt those deals are going to be around the whole time the tickets to Babscon are going to be on sale.  Are you saying that they're ripping people off who don't use a code? 

 

That's honestly a bold statement for someone who didn't go to this years con, and probably isn't going to next years con.

 

I don't think you understood what I was saying when I told you you couldn't judge a con by the information put out ahead of time.  As previously stated, which you failed to quote, if you were to judge a convention by the information put out ahead of time, then Las Pegaus was a huge success.  What I mean is, yes, you can judge a convention by second hand information, you can judge it by the information you get from people who attended.  But should you?  Personally, I don't think so.  You want to be judge of a convention?  Go to it.  Don't sit at home, reading people talking about how wonderful it was, and then read about a couple of things you don't like and call it a failure.  It's not a fair way to judge a convention, and you're apparently all about fairness and honesty, correct?

Edited June 22, 2014 by 11thDoctorWhooves

[Simon 4,557]

@@PiquoPie,

 

I think you're not understanding how those codes were distributed.  Not every discount code and sale in this world is some attempt to deceive people.

Let me give you an example... a pizza place I go to offers 15 percent discounts to anybody who orders online.  Now seemingly, that's exactly what you're talking about... they could just mark down all their prices 15 percent and get the same amount, but instead they make people feel like they're getting a deal.  So at first glance, this pizza place would be a huge offender in this deceptive marketing you're talking about.  But you'd miss the point of that ongoing promotion... placing the order online.  They aren't offering the discount because they don't want that money... it's because getting phone calls with orders is expensive, ties up staff, ties up phone lines, and creates more errors than computers have which means food gets sent back and remade which is more cost.  The 15 percent discount is to encourage you to order in a way that's more cost effective for the business while still allowing people to order on the phone if they have no access to the internet.

 

Babscon is similar... you're quick to say that they had no reason to give out promo codes, but in fact they did.  The codes were given out on things like interviews with the Babscon staff on various podcast channels, and in advertisements on various brony websites.  Let's take the example of a podcast... what incentive would the podcast have to interview Babscon?  Seemingly, there's more interesting things they can do for their viewers than have an hour long commercial, so Babscon most likely wouldn't have gotten many interviews.  However, if you offer a promo code, it changes the dynamic entirely.  Now by putting Babscon on your podcast show, you're going to bring in viewers who are watching your podcast so they can get the code, which means you have a chance at getting new viewers.  Plus it makes your normal viewers happy because you're giving them something they can save money with.  Babscon benefits by going on these podcasts by getting more people to come to the convention which in turn pays for offering the discount.

 

You also have to remember that convention ticket pricing is much more complex than something like merchandise.  When you're selling merchandise, you know the price you're paying to create or buy the individual item you're selling, so you know exactly what you need from each customer to make a profit.   That's not at all the case with a convention.  The per-person costs are very low... for a basic ticket, all they're really paying for each person who signs up is the convention book, the cost of printing their badge, and a lanyard.  That only adds up to a few dollars... Now of course they have to cover the costs of all the guests, the costs of the convention center, the costs of any hired staff members like the people that escort the VIP's, the costs of equipment, and all the other money that goes into making a convention possible.  Now, you see, it's a much more complicated equation, because they have no idea how many people will coming, so they don't know how much money they actually need from each person.

 

Because of this, the way conventions work is elevated pricing schedules.  People who sign up early are rewarded with lower prices because the early registrations give the convention an idea of how many people are coming and gives them much needed funds up front to cover early expenses.  Then after the early bird registration, the prices go up a little.  Again, they need to get as many people to the convention as possible so they do a ton of advertising at this stage since its when most people will register.  Promotion codes are offered, because as I described before, they make it so that the convention has advertising and interview possibilities they might not otherwise have.  Then as you get closer to the convention, the promo codes start to disappear or become smaller, and eventually pre-registration closes.  Finally, at door registrations are the highest cost and have no promotion codes.

 

To you it might seem that they're offering these discounts to deceive people into thinking they're getting a discount when they're not, but it's simply not the case.  It's about marketing... not marketing in the sense that it manipulates people into thinking they're getting a discount, but marketing in the sense that offering promo codes gives them more sources to advertise through and gets the con more publicity.

 

However, even if you could show that Babscon's entire plan from the beginning was to deceive people into thinking they were getting a discount when they really weren't, you have to remember that unlike buying things at a store, every convention attendee benefits by having more people there.  The more people they are able to convince to come to the convention, the less everybody including those people has to pay in order to cover the costs of the convention, and the more guests and VIP's the convention can have.  If someone registers that wouldn't otherwise have registered if it weren't for the promo code, that person along with everybody else will benefit.

 

The bottom line is you seem to have it out for Babscon, and you're determined to try and make them look like an evil corporation... but at the end of the day they're a non-profit filled with mainly volunteer staff just trying to work their butts off to get as many people to come as possible so that everybody can have a fun and successful convention.  They aren't trying to be evil and deceive people... these aren't people who are trying to find ways to manipulate people at a psychological level... they're just people trying to get the community to come out to their con and have a good time.  Even if you were to show that their marking was somehow horribly deceptive and evil by using promo codes, I'm not going to hold it against Babscon because I wouldn't expect anybody to analyze every marketing strategy to the ridiculous degree that you are doing.

 

If you want to change the way marketing happens because you think these traditional methods are horribly deceptive and evil, be my guest... but this isn't the level to do it.  Go talk to a corporation... some place that actually has people who think these things through and analyze them at the level you are trying to.  But attacking a non-profit convention for using traditional methods of marketing that have been used for years isn't achieving anything...