gaspode | View from the bar ...

Current Mood: thoughtful
Current Music: Dark Side of the Moon

View from the bar ...

I have found myself musing the nature of the relationship between media and Lit fandom over the last few days spent at eastercon.

It was an enjoyable weekend - but I felt it had to work hard to be one. There’s no Bid for 2007 yet - Some people are saying it’s the end of Eastercon.

On reflection I don’t agree - I think that between now and Glasgow next year (if not sooner) someone will step up. I am almost tempted myself as some of you know, but I have several reservations, although the feelings I have expressed to you still stand - but I don’t think now is the time. EC needs to evolve but I think it needs to work out which way for itself, I have some fairly drastic ideas, but I'm not convinced EC is ready for them (In fact I know its not). Who am I to judge? No one special but I am regular attendee (not every year - but certainly most since Confabulation in the docklands in 95 (or 94 - I can’t remember) and 4 or 5 before that over the previous 10 years.

The problem is always going to be how to change for the better without losing your core attendees - and that’s something that is going to be very hard for EC. But if it doesn't it is going to continue to shrink - it may take a few years or it could be as soon as 2007. EC doesn’t market itself - it takes the 'If we run it they will come' attitude. It needs new blood (like so many other conventions - it is by no means the only con guilty of this - certain established Media Cons take the same stance and have the same problem). New Blood - New Attendees - found from new sources. EC can be difficult for an 'Outsider' to crack. It has all the right ingredients - a good selection of relevant guests, several streams and lots of panels and the games and 'fun items'. But it can be difficult to get accepted into the established 'cliques' - This con has been running a long time after all and many of the attendee’s have been coming for 30 years plus. While most are not rude (though some are) many are very disinterested in embracing new people – or even engaging in conversation with them.

The main thing that needs to be addressed I think is the negativity some have towards the inclusion of a media strand (something that is still minimal). Should EC become a media con? Certainly not. That said having a panel called 'Have Media fans fecked Fandom' may not be the way to go (incidentally the conclusion was 'No'). The inclusion of more media related panels - (but still small scale ones) can help bring more fans in to the true SF fold - god only knows nowadays people need to be encouraged to read - Have items that will help bring these people in and make the con more accessible to newbie’s - more smaller interactive items - two of the most enjoyable panels for me over the weekend were the ;Have I got books for you' and 'SF Charades panels' - oddly enough an awful lot of redemption faces were at these panels. Also the Galactica and HHTGH panels were literally overflowing from their room – the interest is there - so give the media strand more depth.

Sorry – Its probably not my place to go on like this but I class myself as a Sci-Fi/fantasy fan. I don’t make a distinction between Lit and Media and why should I ?

No, EC shouldn’t become a media con – We have Redemption which does that well (and embraces the lit side too). But it needs to realise it needs to sell it’s self and make people outside the established con circuit aware of its existence. Bring people in and give them a good time they will come back – and bring their friends. The Exec of Eastercon always do a sterling job - and I take my hat off to anyone who takes a con on and succeeds (i'm wayyy too lazy). As i said this is just my opinion and I have no answers.

....

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I agree with you generally. Many of the same points were made in the future of Eastercon panel at the con.

I wholeheartedly endorse what you say about marketing, but it's not a particularly easy thing to do, nor a particularly cheap thing to do, due to the spread-out nature of the potential fan base.

I've thought a lot about this today and I think that we're not helping ourselves when it comes to "branding". Every Eastercon has 3 names: "Eastercon 200X", "The British National Science Fiction Convention 200X" and whatever the committee decides to call it (e.g. "Paragon 2"). I understand the reason for all three, but it's confusing for outsiders. We need to standardise on one and use that one primarily in all advertising. That one should be "Eastercon 200X". It's short and snappy and it tells you when it is. In short it's a name for the society we live in, like it or not. We do need to use the BNSF Convention in the advertising because it's the USP, but not in the name. Likewise, committees like to use their own name because it feels more like their own con and it helps the cognoscenti to know who's running the con. However, we should not be aiming at the cognoscenti; they'll find out who the committee is soon enough.

Of course, Worldcon will bring in new fans, but I think that the main problem is persuading fans to try Eastercon. Time and cost are two big factors and these aren't helped by hiding away in the Leicestershire countryside, no matter how ideal a hotel it is (and it does have drawbacks - the primary one being the shortage of easily accessible program rooms).

We need to run cons in the cities and we must run a con in the London area if we want to bring in the fans. Fans are more likely to go for a day if it's near by and they're only risking a day. They won't get the full experience (the 'bar' experience!), most likely, but hopefully enough of them will like what they do find.

Apologies for the length of this reply; perhaps I should have posted it on the Eastercon LJ, but I saw the link to yours and in my post-con, post Queen concert haze, thought "What the hell!"

Marketing is a term i used after much hesitation - but it is not just traditional forms I mean. Word of mouth is free - its how to generate that that is needed.

Yes - The Branding issue is Key - Eastercon should be EasterCon. If for no other reason it makes it easier to find the web page - If you know theres an Eastercon but this year you didnt know it was paragon 2, finding the web page was not straight forward. Branding is marketing and a cheap form.

I really dont want to complain - I did enjoy myself - but I brought some Eastercon first timers with me and saw somethings I normally wouldnt notice.

There was an undercurrent this year that I haven't put my finger on yet - I think I picked up on it by being with the first timers.

I should add these were first time eastercon'ers not first time conventioners by any stretch. I include Reet in that too ...

The branding thing is slightly contentious. There are those who say that it needs to be EasterCon™ Ltd, but the problem that you get with that is determining who owns that. It's easier for the WorldCons, becuase they have WSFS behind them, but getting together the momentum to do that in the UK is difficult.

Then, on the other hand, you have people who would argue strongly that there shouldn't be an Eastercon brand, becuase it implies that the cons are all run by the same people.

Actually, that leads me to another thought that really belongs further up the thread...

I dont think a con name need imply that the same people run it - no reason why the exec cant change each year much as it does now ...

To be honest I dont have a problem with the different Con names anyway - as long as there is a central way of finding the Con online - much like Worldcon.org. I know at the moment there is a problem with pulling together all the eastercon URL's but if that can be sorted it would help a lot.

I dont think a con name need imply that the same people run it - no reason why the exec cant change each year much as it does now

No, but it's a perception thing, and whether that's right or wrong....

Re: Eastercon (R)?

gaspodex.livejournal.com - 2005-03-29 11:57 (UTC) - Expand

We're doing something about that.
I've bought all the eastercon domain names (com/org/net/co.uk/org.uk) and in the next couple of weeks I intend to point them all at the web site that

alexmc and others have been putting together.

I've just updated the site at http://www.eastercon.co.uk (which all the others, except www.eastercon.org.uk point to), so it now is up to date with the current situation won eastercons.

Now the convention is over, and once my aunt's funeral is past, I expect I'll be spending more time updating websites (including www.smof.com!)

It's easier for the WorldCons, because they have WSFS behind them...

I don't know if you meant to do this, but to me this implies that there is some formally incorporated body ("WSFS Inc.") who manages the Worldcon and sanctions the individual committees, the way the International Olympic Committee licenses the Olympics to individual host committees.

There is no WSFS Inc. There is no "headquarters" or "home office," and WSFS isn't an incorporated organization. There is no central organization that goes out and promotes Worldcons, or "stands behind" Worldcon committees in any meaningful legal way. Its only definition (an unincorporated literary society) is the WSFS Constitution, and the membership of WSFS is everyone who is a member of the current Worldcon. (It's not possibly to join WSFS any other way.) The "government" of WSFS consists of an annual business meeting, open to every member. (Of course, in practice only about 100 of the thousands of eligible members actually participate, but all of them are eligible to attend, make proposals, debate, and vote if they want to do so.)

The only way in which WSFS is just slightly more centralized than Eastercon is that there is a WSFS Mark Protection Committee whose members are elected at the Business Meeting (Worldcon committees also appoint members), and whose job it is to look after the service marks on "Worldcon," "Hugo Award," etc. (As each Worldcon is a standalone entity, no one committee could actually own the service marks.) The MPC has no independent funding. Individual Worldcon committees donate money to pay for the ongoing cost of registration (Interaction recently paid the cost of renewing one of the WSFS marks in the UK, for instance).

At the couple of Eastercons I've attended, discussions about the future of Eastercon seem to assume a heck of a lot more coherence and permanent structure to WSFS than actually exists. As Chairman of the Mark Protection Committee, I suppose I ought to be flattered, but the real situation for Worldcons isn't a whole lot more different than Eastercon's.

I suppose that you're right in saying that we assume WSFS is more than it is really -- you'd know.

Certainly the perception is that it's far more organised and... well, organised than anything in UK fandom.

But it *is* a permanent, ongoing organisation, which is far more than there is for Eastercons.

I'm going to stop, now. I have no intention of trying to argue any WSFS points with Mark, as I know that he knows infinately more about it than I do!

Re: Eastercon (R)?

kevin-standlee.livejournal.com - 2005-03-29 14:29 (UTC) - Expand

BTW - where did you see the link to this ?

:)

The Eastercon bounce.

That was me - I pimped it there to open up the discussion. It seems to have worked.

The trouble with running a con in the London area is the cost: there aren't many hotels in London with the right number of rooms and the right mix of function space to make an Eastercon work, and those that there are are too expensive.

Hence you end up on a motorway junction in the middle of nowhere....

Actually, there is *one* annual SF con in London: Picocon. But it's traditionally got a slightly poor programme and, in recent years, there's been very little movement of people from ICSF to mainstream fandom, something that I regularly nag them about.

I agree on the London matter - While in theory a nice central location is good (OK - So London's not central for every one - but it is easy to get to, and to some degree this applies to most big cities anyway) space and expence are the problems - Its even hard to find a room to use in a pub in London on a regular basis as 'Ton regulars will attest.

Even the modest media sf pub meet I help host has space issues and we seldom go over 20 people.

I don't think a move to a london venue is the answer - In fact I'm a big fan of Hinckley - while there are complaints about the food (although the quality does vary - same menu 'ish at Red but generally the food was better prepared) i've had a lot worse at other hotels for a lot more money.I like the venue generally - what with 3 eastercons, 2 diskworlds and 1 redemption (and I think a few others) its becoming something of a regular venue.

Oh and welcome to my LJ, Pleased to meet you.
Run for your life

I actually like Hinckley, as a con venue, but the food is a big problem. They're better than they used to be (I remember when they tried to set up a till at one end of the food serving thing, which was Just Horrible).

I shall run away, now!

I've always remebered the Friday Buffet in 01 ....

Just meat meat and more meat ....

Now as a carnivore I wasnt worried - but most of the group I was with was :)

I think it was in 01 I was given the title 'The Anti Veggie'

Re: Eastercon (R)?

gaspodex.livejournal.com - 2005-03-29 12:00 (UTC) - Expand

I know - that's been the argument against for years; that and the fact that the London hotels don't need our business, so we can't bargain them down and when we have gone, the service has been awful (although I don't remember it being that bad in Docklands in '95).

However, I'm starting to think that the cost is a little bit of a red herring. Media cons charge much more for membership than we do, and the hotel room rates are the biggest expense and for many the cost of transport is almost as large. A few years back, a possible London bid was abandoned in favour of somewhere else (I don't remember where) because that's what the people at the bid session wanted. They had their own short term interests at heart, and I can't blame them.

If we want Eastercons to thrive, we have to bite the bullet and hold a con somewhere near London. It doesn't have to be central London, I'm sure the costs would be prohibitive, but it does need to be somewhere in the South East near London where people can get to on a day's outing. Croydon anyone?

I liked the Brittania too - but that was a long time ago and the Docklands have become far more accessable now than back then which will have changed the situation.

It's an interesting issue - is the percentage of people likely to attend that much higher for people that live in london ? I'm not sure it is ... Any thoughts anyone?

Media cons charge much more for membership than we do

Yes, but they're *media cons*... [g]

True, but if people (well, media fans anyway) are prepared to pay that, we shouldn't shy away from charging a bit more for memberships if we have to. The more established fans do tend to be better off (unless they have kids or become unemployed).

To get around that, we can always give reduced memberships to students and unemployed (and families?!); as affluent members of society many conrunners forget how poor students and those newly "enmortgaged" can be.

Redemption also allows the refunding of memberships if you can't go, up until a couple of months out. This would be an excellent way of encouraging people to sign up earlier, albeit it makes the budgeting harder.

Re: Eastercon (R)?

gaspodex.livejournal.com - 2005-03-30 00:01 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Eastercon (R)?

despotliz.livejournal.com - 2005-03-30 04:17 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Eastercon (R)?

gaspodex.livejournal.com - 2005-03-30 04:38 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Eastercon (R)?

kilbswhitecrow.livejournal.com - 2005-03-30 14:19 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Eastercon (R)?

dev-iant.livejournal.com - 2005-04-01 07:58 (UTC) - Expand

I know there's a "[g]" there, but...

It struck me today that there's a great similarity between fans who say, "It's media, so it's not *real* sf," and critics who say, "It's sci-fi, so it's not a *real* novel."

If you want sout east venue, there is always the Radisson at Heathrow that held Eastercon in 1996 (I think) and has had various media cons since. I know that hotel has its problems, but there have been some good conventions there.

When I was first considering bidding for an Eastercon I did a lot of footwork and spent a lot of time on line.

We are an awkward size: if we were below 500 there are a number of city hotels we could use. But we are between 500 and 800 and that, for most cities, means more than one hotel. If you think back to Manchester, people were *very* unhappy. Glagow will (hopefully) work because it is a campus.

From Blindpew

It was mentioned in the Future of Eastercon meeting at Hinckly, that Blackpool had quite a lot of walk ins, if this can happen in Blackpool a Greater London Eastercon I believe will bring in possible new recruits. However we do have the question of cost raising it ugly head as London prices can be very expensive.

I agree on the name confusion and thoughts on the subject should be debated, but Eastercon is an anarchistic grouping with unlike Redemption no centre to it.

Regards

Blindpew and Faldo the Guide dog who is quite happy to be home so he can get some sack time in.

You're quite right about the anarchistic grouping at Eastercon. I've heard it said that Eastercon isn't _a_ convention, but several different conventions all under one banner. The filkers, the academic-lit crowd, the awards, cyberdrome, video stream, costumers, bar-dwellers, dealers-room scourers, etc.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only