Minutes of third Committee meeting 7th Dec

nzLARPS
#1

Third NZLARPS Committee Meeting

7th December, 7.25-9.35pm

Agenda:

  1. Review minutes of previous meeting
  2. Standard forms; project and affiliate.
  3. Constitution: Review draft document.
  4. What is provided by the society, what the project is obligated to give back
  5. Nationalisation issues
  6. Bank Account and Finances status
  7. Membership roll, joining process, review of forms, payments status.
  8. Deputies for the major Committee Roles
  9. New project plan procedures and documents – starting projects or events within projects
  10. How a project or associate can leave the society
  11. Lessons from the Grey Lynn festival
  12. Steve’s Og game discussion as a Project
  13. Web site update
  14. Next Newsletter
  15. Other business

Members present: Adam, Rhiannon, Mike, Craig, A.J., Steve
Apologies: Hansi, Nikki, Lucy

  1. Minutes from last meeting reviewed and approved.

  2. Two standard forms are available, one for application for a Project, and a second Affiliate Agreement. A Project proposal must include a financial forecast. These forms are to be sent to existing projects and affiliates, and uploaded to the website for the perusal of members. A gear acquisition form is to be created.

  3. The constitution was reviewed.
    Decided to make some changes:
    Section 3, Scope of Powers, changed to financial commitment over NZ$3000 must be approved by General Meeting (whether AGM or SGM)
    Section 18, Structure of Committee, changed to 9 members including 3 general Committee members. This will reduce the likelihood of voting ties.
    Section 19c, Appointment/Removal of Committee, changed to President after holding office for two consecutive terms may not hold that position again for the following term.
    Section 20, Nominations for Committee. Changed to: a) Every candidate for the Committee shall be proposed and seconded by two (2) members. Whether or not to allow nominations from the floor at AGMs was not fully agreed – a vote was 3 for, 1 against, and 2 abstentions. To be discussed on the forum. Section b was unanimously voted to be left as is (2 months membership prior to nomination needed).
    Section 30a, Control and Use of Funds, discussed and voted to leave as is (flexibility vs. protection)
    The rest of the constitution was accepted.

  4. a) Provided by NZLARPS:
    To Non-member Organisations…
    -Organisation forum
    -Advice, possible assistance
    To Affiliates…
    -Organisation forum
    -Gear
    -Promotion
    -Assistance
    To Project…
    All of the above including funding
    b) What the game is obligated to give back:
    Profits
    Discounts
    Props (whether made for game or borrowed)

  5. Nationalisation
    Decided not to worry too much about nationalisation until fully incorporated.

  6. Bank account and Finances are healthy at the moment. NZLARPS funds at $400 currently. Mordavia has paid a $500 deposit for the upcoming weekend game. Is expected to return the same post-game. However $140 owed by two people from the last Mordavia game. Will be chased up on a no money, no game policy.

  7. Create a pending members category: until Treasurer in possession of full money in account, and Secretary is in possession of all details in database. Possibly create new email addresses for easy contact, e.g. joining@nzlarps.org

  8. Deputies – all major Roles in the Committee need to have specific persons ready to take over roles if necessary.
    Deputies decided:
    President – Rhiannon
    Treasurer – Adam
    Gear – Craig
    Project – A.J.
    Community – Rhiannon
    Secretary – Nikki? (pending)

  9. Mordavia project proposal approved unanimously. Sample documents as well as proposal forms to be placed on new NZLARPS Website as soon as up.
    Decided to invite pending Project Leaders to the next Committee meeting after Project Proposal received, to discuss Project.

  10. How to leave affiliate agreement: end agreement as mentioned in contract. If Project wants to leave: in general, physical assets, such as props and finances, remain with NZLARPS – intellectual assets such as game ideas, IP remain with Project. Any exceptions will be discussed within paperwork of Project Proposal.

  11. Lessons from the Grey Lynn Festival…
    Main problem was the Festival itself closing without adequate warning. The people who have to come from farther have less chance of finding out such things before leaving.
    Perhaps need to have ‘rain dates’ or alternative activities planned in advance, and a quick and easy way to notify people of cancellation.

  12. Steve’s proposed Caveman Og game. Would need to create a large amount of gear and costume (caveman outfits and clubs) It is proposed that these props could be used again, if not for the same game, for other LARPs such as Mordavian primitive Orcs.
    Because props must be made from scratch, Project will make a loss. Voted to set maximum total loss at $150; motion passed with 1 abstention.
    Game proposed to be last weekend January - $15 non/m, $10 members, $5 minibus transport to beach near Piha, $5 to hire club (or make own at workshop)
    Og game confirmed as Project on terms that all props made pass to NZLARPS.

  13. Website: nzlarps.org is cheaper than larps.org.nz. The former will be created and linked to the Diatribe forum, and email addresses will be created for the Committee members (eg. gear@nzlarps.org…)

  14. Next Newsletter will be done by Craig

  15. Other Business - Next meeting is to be held 4th January, at 26 Malvern Rd Morningside, due to President being away. Rhiannon will stand in as chair.
    Decided to create Membership Cards without logo on as one has not yet been decided on.

Points of action:
Rhiannon to fwd updated Membership Forms to Mike.
Mike to convert Membership Forms to PDF and fwd to Craig for website.
Rhiannon to create Mark 1 membership cards and send to Members.
Mike to get gear from Carl and Derek, also to contact these two about gear workshops & dates of such.
Steve to email Project and Affiliation forms to Craig.
Craig to create nzlarps.org website, holding page, and email addresses, add forms.
Adam to check out North Head Devonport as a possible game venue.
Mike to create Gear Acquisition Forms.
Adam to post a discussion for date of first AGM on forum.
Adam to send both Project and Affiliate forms to Raoul for Nightmare Circle.
A.J. to get materials for Og props from Marley.
Rhiannon and Craig to finish and print flyers for NZLARPS advertising.
Steve to email finished Constitution to Craig.
Craig to post Constitution, Project and Affiliate forms to Diatribe for members’ perusal.

#2

Are there any more details on why Og running at a loss was considered a good idea?

If the Og costumes are anything like what I imagine (i.e. comical caveman outfits), I don’t think we’ll want to use them at Mordavia. How about the players make their own costumes and pay for them? I’m intending to play or crew at Og, and I’m happy to make my own gear at a workshop or on my own.

The club and rock weapons will get used for other games. But then the Mordavia crew gear will get used for other games too, but the cost of that gear is totally covered by participant fees.

I would have thought that standard practice would be to charge however much it takes to get your costs back (and some more so you’ve got a margin). Otherwise the floating funds are just going to be eaten away by unprofitable games.

Intentionally running games at a loss seems like an unwise precedent.

#3

We figured there’d be an initial outlay to make the gear in the first place, but, for example, the second game would immediately turn a profit on the original outlay, and the third game would be all profit. nzLARPS would make and lend gear to players and crew.

#4

That’s clearer, thanks.

Sounds like a calculated risk, dependant on whether there will be a series of Og events and enough players at each event.

Starting out running at a loss and making it back later can be sound business practice, but I’d be hesitant to apply it to organising larp events regularly. Both the organisers and the players can be quite fickle. It seems wiser to make each event pay for itself, there’s much less financial risk involved.

Also, running at a loss will have adverse effects on the LARPS cashflow. Until we make that money back, there will be less money available to invest in other projects.

Sorry if I seem to be sniping from the sidelines after the fact. Will attempt to come to some meetings so I can provide more timely advice.

#5

You could maybe do a deal where people using Larps gear have to pay an extra $5 (or something) for gear hire. It might encourage people to bring their own stuff which will cut down on the game costs.

Stephanie

#6

I think a much better way to put it is that the budget for setting up the game is $250, and that each game generates $100 of revenue. Og may at no time (including organising the first game) exceed a balance of -$150.

Obviously it would be unfair to charge $25 for the first game and $2/game each thereafter, which would more accurately reflect running costs. If there are four games a year, our initial $150 overdraft pays off nicely!

We discussed at the meeting that this did “set a precedent” that will likely be followed by other games, and we agreed that for a game that expects to play more than once, if they can show they will be earning money by the second instance then it’s probably ok. We thought $150 was fair for a low budget serial game. But I expect to be asking for a budget of $1000 (I would describe this as very high) for Nibelungen next year!

#7

It doesn’t matter how you put it, the same risk exists. If the series doesn’t run its full course for whatever reason, the money is lost. And even if it does run its full course, you’re generating negative cashflow which will have an adverse impact on funding other projects.

In most cases it would be better to run at a lower cost or charge more, IMO. If this becomes a standard approach, LARPS will sooner or later lose a bag full of money.

$1000 is not a particularly large budget. Mordavia runs up over $2500 per event. But it makes that amount back after every event, because it charges participants an amount that covers the costs. Nibelungen could do the same. Rather than build EVERYTHING the games needs before the first event, gradually accumulate it over the campaign.

A common error of small businesses is to charge less for their products than it costs to take them to market. One way or another, they don’t make that error for long…

You figure out what your product will cost (incuding production and marketing and infrastructure and distribution and everything else). Then you figure out what the market will pay for it. If you can’t sell it for enough to cover your costs (and make a profit), you don’t make that product.

#8

ahh, a good healty discussion that sounds exactly like what we had last night, thus why it came to a vote.
One of only about 3 things that we had to vote on becuase not everyone agrees on the same thing, but thats the idea behind the committee, it makes a group decision.

#9

Part of the reason for LARPS is that it helps small games get off the ground. There will always be the problem that you need a lot of gear to run a game. Mordavia already has it, so the gear-making costs per game are low. Og has no gear, and almost none of the existing LARPS equipment is appropriate, so its necessary to make an initial financial outlay. Charging all of this upfront would result in no players (would you pay $25+ for a couple of hours game?) but the project was approved - with cost boundaries - because (a) we get the gear back in any case, and the costumes are not going to be comical style, and (b) future games will have a very low or zero running cost, meaning we get return on investment after a couple of games.

If the game fails, or just stops after one event, we make a financial loss, but gain in re-useable gear and also fulfill the society objective of promoting LARP games.

#10

Mordavia was capable of running within budget from the start. We just scaled back our costs to match the income we thought we could achieve.

I still think people could make their own caveman costumes. It’s the same as Mordavia players acquiring their own gear. Why this communistic approach where everything in the game is common gear?

EDIT: I don’t object to the communistic approach, just the fact that it will cause a game to run over budget.

#11

I certainly want people to make their own costumes - we have neither the time nor the funds to provide all players with gear. I just need a few items for NPCs and for people who (for one reason or another) cannot make their own to hire.

Hopefully, the LARPS system will allow games to start off more quickly since they can borrow equipment/funds/etc to get off of the ground initially. LARPS will benefit by gaining new equipment which can then be used in other games. Games should always be able to run within budget excluding any generic gear which is added to the inventory - and over several games, this cost should be recovered.

Of course, any game can be run (like Mordavia) with investment from day one, but this makes for a slower start and is a disincentive for the risk of starting a new game. With LARPS allowing central coordination of assets between projects this should result in more games… note that, if we didn’t have this support from LARPS, then I wouldn’t have considered running an Og game as it wouldn’t expect as many players and I’d have no NPC gear at all.

#12

[quote=“Stephanie”]You could maybe do a deal where people using Larps gear have to pay an extra $5 (or something) for gear hire. It might encourage people to bring their own stuff which will cut down on the game costs.

Stephanie[/quote]

Exactly what we thought of. If I’m correct it says exactly that in the minutes.

#13

Docs can be found at docs/core/

Steve, do you want to make a thread explaining them and linking to each individually?

#14

I have bought nzlarps.org for two years.

#15

Cool. Let me know when you want to start looking at building an initial website.

Draft constitution?

#16

I have a couple of changes still to be made to the constitution document, then we will post it out to the membership for discussion (probably 1 month). After making any final changes, we should be able to schedule a Special General Meeting for February (?) to ratify it, then we can gain incorporation before I leave for holiday in March (which means I can sort out the bank account stuff before going away and it is then easy to hand over to a deputy)

So, there should be a thread appearing in here shortly with a link to the constitution for discussion by everyone.