Co-Events attendance and cost discussion

[Phil Stanton]

Reasons for starting this discussion include observing what the levels of sign-ups seem to be at events this year so far (both ones we've had and ones to come), and being in the position, as host of an upcoming event, of really not knowing yet what my budget is going to be for trophies, prizes, etc. (due to current number of sign-ups), with only 7 weeks to go until the event. (Trophies and branded goodies take time to order, especially if you want to allow time to get them re-done if something goes wrong.)

This isn't intended as a sneaky ploy to get more people signing up to my event, but I'll take that as an added bonus if it has that effect

My sense at the moment is that sign-ups are a bit down on previous years, and/or people are leaving it till much nearer the event date to actually sign up.

The challenge for an event host, as ever, is one of money and timing.
You have to find a venue, pay for it in advance, and hope that you get enough sign-ups to cover the venue cost plus the cost of prizes, trophies, etc.
There often seems to be a spate of sign-ups quite close to the event date, and whilst that's not a criticism, it does pose a challenge to event hosts.

Do we, as event hosts, commit to whatever we can afford based on the numbers we have at, say, 4 weeks prior to the event, and then potentially end up with a surplus? (And then decide what to do with that surplus, as well as possibly being disappointed that we perhaps compromised on prizes/trophies needlessly?)
Or do we take a punt, and risk ending up making a loss?

One option which might help event hosts is to increase their entry fees, which is why this post includes a poll about that, but that risks more events generating a surplus and then deciding what to do with that. (Which might not be a bad thing ... it could go to FOCAL to continue improving event resources, implementing a centralised sign-up and payment system, etc.)

Some questions

• If you're thinking of attending an event, what makes you hesitate before committing, if you do?

• What factors influence whether you attend an event? The date is an obvious one, but what about others? Location? Travel/accommodation costs? Event cost? Event format? (Lincoln/Bristol, 9R/15R, etc.) Event host?

• Are there too many events? Or too few?

• Are you put off from an event if the names of the sign-ups aren't published, because you like to see who else is going? Or vice versa, does a published sign-up list put you off? (Some events don't even publish the number of sign-ups on an ongoing basis, which would at least show if an event is proving popular or not.)

• Do early sign-up (or other) incentives work for you? (Last year I gave a discount for people signing up early, this year all early sign-ups are going into a draw and one will win their entry fee back. Both of these cost money, obviously.)

I think that'll probably do for now, have at it!

[Fiona T]

I did suggest to George that Focal could pay for and own enough of Adam's nice sets of cards to ensure everyone at a Lincoln style event is enjoying the same quality play experience (this is assuming Adam has both the capacity and will to produce them - not sure what's involved!) I think it would be reasonable to temporarily increase the focal levy, or have other fundraising activities to cover the costs (event fee excess would go a long way)

Whether an event is £10, £12 or £15 doesn't really come into my decision to attend - travel and accommodation costs far outweigh the entry costs for most events. What I am not keen on is expensive prizes - the money people pay to attend the event should primarily be for the benefit of all attendees. £5-10 choc/wine/puzzle book seems much more in keeping with it being about the game, not the prizes! If there's an excess, crisps/snacks/fruit etc seems a good value add that most attendees will enjoy.

Most people appreciate that a decent venue in London or Edinburgh will be a lot more expensive than a venue in the middle of nowhere!

Last year I set my Reading entry fee at £12 - when it was clear I was going to have a very large surplus, I gave everyone £2 back (think I still owe one attendee!) rather than finding stuff to spend it on. This year's (TBC) is likely to be raising money for charity in exchange for a free venue but I will be very clear about that if/when we confirm the event and open signups.

What I'd really like to see is transparency round event finance- I think I suggested a while back that hosts could produce a high level breakdown as part of their event wind up -

e.g.

Entry fees - £360
Venue hire - £230
Focal Levy - £30
Trophies/prizes - £50
Tea/coffee/biscuits/stationery - £24

Excess (carry over to next event/give to Focal/whatever) - £26

[Matt Rutherford]

After events in Blackpool, I know we stopped announcing who's going, and I think that has impacted publicity. Previously that was something to regularly post about on the Facebook page and it generated discussion about who is going. I'll be bringing it back for Brum (with exceptions if people don't wish to appear)

I speak as someone who tries to do most, if not all-that is very much my choice). But the increase in events this year is having an effect (IMO)

There is a glut, with a couple that are two weeks apart. Cost and dancing around other commitments is challenging with that, for me and I'm sure for others. Not for admission, but for travel and hotel costs. Given previous instances (i.e Valentine's Day, the Durham Miners' Gala, and various festivals) sending hotel prices through the roof, checking local planned events might be useful.

Beachy and I chit-chatted at Liverpool about some guidelines to use when putting the calendar together...

-Maximum of fifteen 'event weekends' in a season (these can include double or triple headers...Just a weekend where a FOCAL event happens. This would not include the finals)
-Minimum three-week gap between event weekends.
-An event cannot be in the same 'region' or within 75 miles as the one immediately before or after.

I know I currently hold two slots-would be more than happy to give one up. And these would just be guidelines

[George Armstrong]

I did suggest to George that Focal could pay for and own enough of Adam's nice sets of cards to ensure everyone at a Lincoln style event is enjoying the same quality play experience (this is assuming Adam has both the capacity and will to produce them - not sure what's involved!) I think it would be reasonable to temporarily increase the focal levy, or have other fundraising activities to cover the costs (event fee excess would go a long way)

I did make the point to you that I'd offered to reimburse Beachy and he rejected it, although the offer was still on the table. Would be better having these proper sets rather than the "Big Bloody Twat" ones - I'd hope we've all matured in recent years!

I

What I'd really like to see is transparency round event finance- I think I suggested a while back that hosts could produce a high level breakdown as part of their event wind up -

e.g.

Entry fees - £360
Venue hire - £230
Focal Levy - £30
Trophies/prizes - £50
Tea/coffee/biscuits/stationery - £24

Excess (carry over to next event/give to Focal/whatever) - £26

Back before I hosted my first tournament, Callum showed me how to work Atropine etc. At that time, he showed me finance spreadsheets and the like. Up to that point, afaik, there was only 1 tournament that had a sizeable discrepancy in terms of incoming funds not matching expenditure. Most of the time you can tell that organisers have roughly broken even when seeing the upgrade in quality of venue (some tournaments like London are naturally going to have more expensive venues too), or extra/ more expensive prizes/stationary. If people felt like any current organisers are being a bit fiddly with their sums this might need revisiting?

I think the thing to look at is... Scrabble. As the closest thing to what we have in terms of these tourneys, it's worth looking at what they do and how, and where their money goes. Luckily, as someone who's CO'ed (computer operated) Scrabble tournaments I have a bit of insight.

Their one day tournaments currently are priced at around £20 for 7 games played, so fairly similar to ours if a bit higher. The big difference is after venue costs, their money goes into prize money and ORGANISER FEES. Yes I put that bit in caps deliberately. If you direct or computer operate a Scrabble tourney, you'll be paid for it. Not incredible sums, but enough for something you're doing in your free time. How much money back goes out depends on the amount coming in. Conversely, FOCAL organisers are doing it for nothing. Our incoming fees go out into the £1pp levy, material prizes as opposed to cash, pens/paper/etc (for any Scrabble tourneys I've played you've brought your own but scoresheet books are sometimes available for purchase). Basically our tourneys have always had less money going in, but less going out. Part of this I believe helps with accessibility. The cheaper you can do things, the more likely people are to pay for them. Like Fiona also mentioned, the big cost for a lot of people is in making a weekend of it. I for one stayed over for Lincoln, and now aren't staying over for one until probably Brum in August. Personally that's down to cost of living etc and not wanting to spend as much on hotels rather than an increase in the number of tourneys, but I accept that for the few who want to do as many tourneys as possible that's gonna become a financial problem.

tl/dr I wouldn't say no to upping fees a little bit if organisers are really struggling.

[George Armstrong]

There is a glut, with a couple that are two weeks apart. Cost and dancing around other commitments is challenging with that, for me and I'm sure for others. Not for admission, but for travel and hotel costs. Given previous instances (i.e Valentine's Day, the Durham Miners' Gala, and various festivals) sending hotel prices through the roof, checking local planned events might be useful.

Beachy and I chit-chatted at Liverpool about some guidelines to use when putting the calendar together...

-Maximum of fifteen 'event weekends' in a season (these can include double or triple headers...Just a weekend where a FOCAL event happens. This would not include the finals)
-Minimum three-week gap between event weekends.
-An event cannot be in the same 'region' or within 75 miles as the one immediately before or after.

I know I currently hold two slots-would be more than happy to give one up. And these would just be guidelines

To add my two pence into this (confirmed tourneys in the same month):

Oxford and Rugby - I felt these were gonna be too close together when the calendar was started on last year, but wasn't my decision then.

London and Monasteraden - very little potential crossover so was happy to sign off on this.

Sheffield and Tunbridge Wells - little but some potential crossover but only with the die hard players. I personally could list a lot of players who would attend a Yorkshire tournament but would never attend a Kent one, and someone more southerly based could easily list the opposite so was happy to sign off on this.

After events in Blackpool, I know we stopped announcing who's going, and I think that has impacted publicity. Previously that was something to regularly post about on the Facebook page and it generated discussion about who is going. I'll be bringing it back for Brum (with exceptions if people don't wish to appear)

The content of what is posted on social media isn't the issue - it's the fact of publishing posts on social media. Ben u-turned on announcing his sign ups, but still regularly posted on social media with photos and memories of years gone by, trophies, prizes, all that good stuff. He ended up with incredibly similar numbers to his 2024 tournaments. So not announcing sign ups isn't the reason, or at least the sole reason, why other tournaments aren't getting the numbers in. Since taking over the website, I can see how many people visit it. Let's just say this, Facebook event pages currently will get far much more traction that the website, or apterous, on this forum do. It's the most important and efficient way of getting through to the highest number of potentially interested people, from inviting all your FB Countdowny friends, to promoting in groups like Countdowners. Small but frequent posts will pop up on people's timelines and act as a little reminder of "oh yeah that's a thing I was gonna go to".

Even making the upcoming event speeches at tournaments, some people will have their own conversations (please if someone, whoever it is, is addressing the group, be quiet for 5 minutes and listen, it's incredibly rude to talk over them. Even if it's the start of the day and you've heard all this before, not everyone has!), some will have mentally switched off or will be on their phones, some might've even left to catch trains.

I know I currently hold two slots-would be more than happy to give one up. And these would just be guidelines

I'd suggested this to you previously. Next year I might put forward the suggestion of one organiser per slot where possible (up until the last few slots if no one else can fill them), as I know of a few people who want to get onto the calendar. On a similar note, there are a large number of people who want a slot "but only in the summer", including current hosts in non summer slots, and people wanting to host their first event. Those summer slots will get to stay with those who currently have them so should they wish. Slot assignment has always been: current events in same slot (give or take a couple of weeks obvs), current events in different but available slot, new events.

But if people would let me know if they're happy to move, both in order to allow other people in, and to balance out the geography so we don't have too many tournaments in similar places at the same time that'd be great. But that's a conversation to be had in the summer, not now.

[Fiona T]

To be absolutely clear, I wasn't suggesting any suspected shenanigans in tournament finances and apologise if my post gave that impression.

I'm just always pro-transparency - make it clear what the money is spent on, not because I believe anyone is being dishonest, but just because transparency is good, and it's useful for attendees to see why the organiser charges what they do, and useful for potential organisers to know likely costs etc!

But if no-one's bothered, then it's not a biggie.

[George Armstrong]

To be absolutely clear, I wasn't suggesting any suspected shenanigans in tournament finances and apologise if my post gave that impression.

I'm just always pro-transparency - make it clear what the money is spent on, not because I believe anyone is being dishonest, but just because transparency is good, and it's useful for attendees to see why the organiser charges what they do, and useful for potential organisers to know likely costs etc!

But if no-one's bothered, then it's not a biggie.

I wasn't presuming that you were suggesting anything, just wanted to be transparent about both my own knowledge of event finances and that IF anyone felt there was some fiddling going on (which I don't suspect there is) they could be open in bringing the issue forward.

[Thomas Carey]

Lol, fiddling

To get the obvious pedantic point out of the way - George should be talking about which events have the closest gaps, as the same calendar month can be 3 or 4 weeks apart which is (I assume) fine. So there's Liverpool and Oxford with the two week gap right now - both of these I would say are in roughly the middle for popularity, average ease of getting there and attendance numbers, but they're far enough away that it's probably OK. I was (until last minute plans in Germany forced me to pay out the arse to go back for a week) planning to do both in the same UK trip as they were nice and close together, but I'm aware that I'm literally the only person for whom this is a benefit.

Back in my day (when I started going in 2011) we had about an event every three months. When FOCAL started in 2016 it was one a month. Now we've slowly added more and obviously it keeps shrinking the gap. In theory new events is a good thing - adding new events doesn't stop people attending the older events/just the ones they want, but obviously the more events that appear the less likely anyone is to attend any given event so generally the numbers go down. This is all pretty obvious. I guess the question is how much does it matter? It's great that the community is getting more engaged and more people want to host stuff. But personally I don't think it's a huge deal - it feels kind of unfair to say 'you weren't attending this event miles away, so we got rid of the event on your doorstep to incentivise you going to the one miles away'. Think it's more effective to just publicise the crap out of your events, Phil has some good suggestions for this upthread. Glasgow last year I think is a memorable recent example of a vastly underattended event - but as far as I'm aware there was little to no publicity for it and a lot of the people who regularly attended Edinburgh and Glasgow in the past barely knew it was happening.

Transparency good. Money wise I basically agree with Fiona - an extra fiver or so is hardly gonna make the difference between someone attending or not when they're paying obscene money for accom/travel, and even for locals it's still pretty cheap. As long as we don't do a scrabble and put the money into event prizes and stuff (it's been discussed at length why this is a bad idea). As George said I was also pretty shocked when learning that scrabble pays its hosts (including accom and flights where necessary!) - and, like, it just feels a bit shit when I pay literally hundreds to attend a scrabble thing knowing I'm not gonna challenge the top players and am essentially paying them to beat me.

Don't really have a conclusion to this just waffling as always. I like co events. Actually in fairness I'm thinking about doing a smallish break after London which could well bw due to the fact that there's so fkn many right now, but might be more to do with the fact that flying in and out everytime is a ballache lol

[Adam Beach]

I was discussing this topic with Daz the other week, as he had concerns about his Oxford event (next Saturday) having half the number of sign-ups than last year's (at the time), meaning he'd barely be able to break even. The two points I made with regards to what's impacting event numbers were the costs involved, and the time of year in which they're being held, though the latter is probably irrelevant given the congregations we have in Lincoln every January. Other factors will include the region and whether it conflicts with another major festival.

It's a sign of the times, sadly. It's no wonder that sign-ups are down when hotel and transport costs have catapulted once again this year; from experience, you're now incredibly lucky to get a 2-night stay for less than £200 in an event held in a major city — Liverpool was a prime example of this, and that being held on the weekend of Valentine's Day certainly didn't help. Entrants this year were down to 27 from last year's 39, and it's a no-brainer that it was sabotaged by the costs involved for everyone.

For hosts, another thing to mention is that venues are also charging more to cover their finances in line with this cost-of-greed crisis we're in the midst of, which adds further pressure to those who are already struggling to get the numbers as it is.

To be blunt, there are too many events this year. Some of the people who enjoy them, and want to attend as many as they can, simply can't — be it because of the financial burden, having other commitments, or something else. A two-week gap between some is really pushing the boat out, and that boat is evidently struggling to stay afloat. Having events this close together was something I didn't agree with in the first place, but I admittedly kept my mouth zipped to avoid potential conflict with committee members, who I consider friends above anything else. Granted, the two-week gap is only applicable between two UK event weekends up to now: Liverpool and Oxford, then Sheffield and Tunbridge Wells. With the entrants lists, I don't believe having them hidden has impacted anything in the slightest, but who am I to say anything?

I did make the point to you that I'd offered to reimburse Beachy and he rejected it, although the offer was still on the table. Would be better having these proper sets rather than the "Big Bloody Twat" ones - I'd hope we've all matured in recent years!

My card sets are slowwwwwwwwwly being rolled out. Sets 1 and 2 were done for Oxford last year, after which I randomly stopped making more. Those two are now "officially" FOCAL property as of Liverpool, but will no doubt be revisiting Beachy's workshop in due time. Sets 3 and 4 are in the works, but it can take weeks for a set to be completed — each card is being done by hand, and some days there's no motivation to even look at them. I had a fleeting thought of getting them produced professionally (like the big cards that go with my board), but it would cost a fortune for the full 20 sets, so that was instantly parked. Besides, with these handmade cards being a mahoosive project, they give me something to do, which I'm very grateful for. I don't expect FOCAL to fund these, but would be appreciative of any contribution for the literal litres of printer ink they're consuming. No pressure though.

Hopefully entrants will pick up for future events. It would be shit if we had to give some of them up because of financial constraints. Anyway, off to sleep.

[Fiona T]

That does sound like a painstaking process! Thank you! And yes, you should definitely be reimbursed for ink and any other materials - if focal don't have the funds, then that's where any excess or fundraisers or even voluntary donations could come into play

[Fiona T]

I don't think more choice of events is ever a bad thing. I agree with trying to keep a sensible gap between geographically close events. To echo what others have said, the real barrier is hotel prices - travelodge and premier inn used to be reliable at around £40 per night - now they're frequently over £100, with nicer hotels charging £100s per night, and crappy public transport. Hotel prices was the primary reason I didn't attend Liverpool this year. Attendance lists do play a part - you're more likely to get FOMO if you know there's a lot of people you like hanging out with going!

[JackHurst]

Echo the thoughts about event prices. Compared to the cost of travel, hotels and giving up a weekend, the £12 or whatever it costs is nothing at all. I'd still go to as many events even if it were £20 an event.

I also feel the same as others about the calendar congestion and event fatigue. It's great that we have so many events, however the amount now feels overwhelming, and you can't make it to all of them these days. I have Countdown burnout from the past few Focal cycles and am trying to force myself to take a break.

George makes some really good points about overlapping really far apart event. For example, there's a section of the year where events are just in Dublin, Blackpool and Glasgow/Edinburgh all of which are too far for me. If there were a southern event on an adjacent weekend that would be cool.

Are the finances of events being managed independently by hosts, rather than in a centralised way by FOCAL? If so, there's a pretty obvious optimization.

- Event Profit goes into a central account
- Events running at a loss can recoup the loss from the central account.
- Set up some rules and guielines to make sure event hosts don't take the piss - They still need to try to at least break even, and consecutive big losses on the same event might lose its slot.

TBH when I got my £2 refund from Fiona I was quite confused, I had assumed that the money would do back into Focal to help running of future events.

You'd need some rules and regulations around it, because there are lots of follow up questions, but I am sure that can be worked out

[JackHurst]

I don't think more choice of events is ever a bad thing.

I'd disagree here, I think there is a point where the calendar gets saturated and events become no fun because they are so sparsely attended. What that point of saturation is remains a matter of opinion that varies between people.

To echo what others have said, the real barrier is hotel prices

For some people the barrier is time before money becomes an issue. Family, relationships, holidays, hobbies and work are all competing for our time!

[Matthew Brockwell]

I tend to sign up to events when I can book the transport (usually trains) and accommodation (if staying overnight) at the same time. Advance train tickets go on sale 2 months before event, so I'm not going to book before then unless it's a high demand event with limited space that is running out (Lincoln really only fits that bill). If hosts want earlier sign-ups then offering incentives does help (I signed up to London earlier for a chance of the free entry).

If I'm on the fence about going to an event or not the most important factor is cost of accommodation/transport, followed by who is attending. Events I can do in one day I am highly likely to do; if I need accommodation then I usually look for something else (quality socialising, multiple events) to justify the cost. It may get to a point when there are too many events near me but that hasn't happened yet. I am not really bothered about event formats.

[Adam S Latchford]

Quite simply it feels like there's just so many events right now. I am really busy which doesn't help things but three events in five weeks (liv,ox,rug) is quite excessive. I signed up to liverpool last year but probably wouldn't have gone if I'd known of the whole calender before hand i'd have prioritised the more local events to me. As it is, I can't even commit right now to either (admittedly i might still go to both but they're gonna end up late decisions rather than planned ones)

I do think advertising of events is often quite poor in many ways. I want this to be taken constructively and not like i'm trying to dig stuff out because I do know the work it takes, but the chat at the end of events, the slow announcements if there are indeed announcements of sign ups with often users chasing people, the @everyone in the facebook group. I just think that there's better ways to advertise. Push the USP of the event; on personal pages and on community pages without tagging everyone who doesn't care would be really useful! (look its goatdown! It's 8 games! We have this prize! We have this entertainment afterwards!)

I'd be much more likely to sign up for a far away event if the key aspect is pushed more.

As for event cost - it's immaterial for me. I think i'd start turning my nose up once it goes over £20 but even then its mostly fine

[Adam S Latchford]

Although there is one additional point RE cost.

Please event hosts ALWAYS check hotel costs before you okay the exact event date. Durham last year with the gala, liverpool this year, glasgow last year. Sometimes shit is going on and hotels spike. Checking this should always be done and if they spike a few days/ weeks after its just bad luck!

[Phil Stanton]

Too many points for me to quote all of them, but some observations in no particular order ...

• Checking significant local events should always happen. The obvious ones, like Valentine's Day or Bank Holiday Weekends, but also the less obvious ones, e.g. some of the big Prides, music festivals, etc.

• George said (and others alluded to) "I wouldn't say no to upping fees a little bit if organisers are really struggling."
  The problem is that we set fees in advance, and don't know that we're struggling until close to the event. My venue costs haven't changed this year (don't know about anybody else's), but I wouldn't be able to go back and ask people for more money if my numbers looked drastically down with only a few days until event day, for example.
  This seems to be an upvote for centralising funds and costs ... event hosts could charge more from the outset, knowing that surpluses would sit with FOCAL and go towards improvements.

• Some good points made about marketing. I post outside of the Countdowners group to my own FB/Insta, I post WhatsApp statuses, I post on LinkedIn, I have adverts in the venue, and it's on my email signature. However, let's be honest ... we're rarely going to get anyone other than Countdowners attending, so the reward from some of that "external" marketing is likely to be pretty small. Nonetheless, I think everyone should be following/liking/sharing/boosting the official FOCAL social media stuff.
  Is FOCAL on TikTok? It's apparently where all the cool kids go.

• There seems to be some agreement that we have too many events at the moment. It's all very well wanting to grow FOCAL and have lots of events, but we don't have an unlimited resource of attendees ... the size of our market is small, mostly it's the same people who go to events, so having more events just stretches those people more thinly, and means that attendance takes a hit.

• Re people requesting summer or other "prime" slots, we could rotate some of these? e.g. a host can have their requested summer slot in 2026 but not in 2027.
  Similarly, as it seems we have new hosts and locations popping up, who says they have to be annual? Picking 2 events at random as an example, Stockport and Tunbridge Wells could each share the same slot, but on alternating years.
  (This doesn't work for all events, depending on the venue ... might just be me, but my venue is ONLY available in school holidays, and even then isn't available on every Saturday of the hols.)

• Brocky said that advance train fares come out 2 months before the event; it's actually 12 weeks before, and signing up those few weeks earlier makes a big difference to a host.
  It's definitely a good idea for hosts to put out a post saying "Advance train tickets now available" as soon as they go on sale, just like I did last year (nicked the idea from Beachy) and forgot to do this year!
  A FOCAL list of guidelines and tips for event hosts would be great in this regard.

[Gavin Chipper]

To answer the questions:

Some questions

• If you're thinking of attending an event, what makes you hesitate before committing, if you do?

• What factors influence whether you attend an event? The date is an obvious one, but what about others? Location? Travel/accommodation costs? Event cost? Event format? (Lincoln/Bristol, 9R/15R, etc.) Event host?

It can depend on various factors, like other things I might possibly be doing that day, debating whether it's worth the travel and accommodation for the specific event (location makes a big difference for me), and sometimes just getting round to actually signing up. The cost and format don't have much influence for me. The cost of the event has been discussed by others - it generally pales into insignificance against travel/accommodation cost. Lincoln/Bristol or 9R/15R are unlikely to make much difference. I might prefer some formats to others, but not to the extent that it will make a difference whether I go. Though if it was a Goat tournament (so not Countdown, therefore essentially Scrabble, chess, football or maybe boxing) that could easily tip me into not going.

• Are there too many events? Or too few?

In a way it shouldn't matter if there are "too many" events, because you just go to the ones you want to. It shouldn't matter if other events also exist. However, I think it can make a difference in people's minds. I tend not to go that that many events these days and with there being so many, I do feel less "part of the scene", and if other people may also feel that way it could contribute to people on the edge disappearing entirely. Having fewer events could mean more people going to each one, but I can't prove it.

• Are you put off from an event if the names of the sign-ups aren't published, because you like to see who else is going? Or vice versa, does a published sign-up list put you off? (Some events don't even publish the number of sign-ups on an ongoing basis, which would at least show if an event is proving popular or not.)

I think I prefer sign-ups to be published though it probably doesn't make much difference for me. You may have noticed that I have questioned events doing this recently - but that was only because I thought it was generally agreed it wasn't going to happen after the post-Blackpool discussions. I think having an opt-out system is probably the best solution.

• Do early sign-up (or other) incentives work for you? (Last year I gave a discount for people signing up early, this year all early sign-ups are going into a draw and one will win their entry fee back. Both of these cost money, obviously.)

Potentially, yes. But if I'm putting off signing up for reasons other than apathy then obviously I still might delay signing up.

Reading the other comments has made me think I have a couple of others things to say, but I think they'd make more sense in the general suggestions thread.