Star Trek Convention Cancelled DURING Event

[JerichoNut]

Several cons aren't listed on their past event archives.

Ans assuming for a moment I buy into your explanation/story, then it still a stupid move on the part of the con organizers not to push the thing back into a more advantageous slot. Of course, that still ignoring the fact that they planned the con for father's day weekend, which in and off itself begs the question: Did these guys even look at a calendar?

You don't have to buy into anything I say. I was there and I know what was told to me , like I said, all you have to do is place a call and ask for yourself if you really want to know. Doesn't matter to me.

As for it being held on FD weekend, I don't think that would hurt it much. I've seen many events held on Holidays and gone to several of them myself.

If they were held in a contract by the Hotel, it may not have been possible to change the dates. From what I was told by a woman named Ann at the hotel, Fedcon had theirs booked first then Creation booked their convention months later for the weekend just before the Fedcon one.

 

[SeerSGB]

Place a call and likely get a different story; been there, done that in the past when chasing down the "facts" in a story for the paper, every person you talk to will have a variation on events and seldom will they line up. And, like what you say and most of this thread and the various excuses offered up, all be hear-say. We don't know, and likely never will, know what really went down with the con and walk alignment of bad planning, poor marketing, and out and out ass hattery, caused this think to tank so hard.

 

[Tom]

Regarding Creation, We noticed there con put on there website in April which seemed rather odd given it only allowed them a month and a half to promote it. We heard from some contacts related to Creation that part of the reason for that con was to throw fedconusa off. I't seemed real odd that they would do that over this (fedconusa) single convention vs. going after Jumpcon's multi-city convention launch this summer (IMO more of the threat to them, given there owner does have allot of money to do it) . Did creation affect sales? Perhaps by 10 to 20 percent at most. Still the hotel allowed this, I think they figured that if fedconusa did not fill there room nights they could get the penalty fee. I am not blaming the hotel, I am just bring up facts that i was aware of. Tim made some bad decisions, he took way way to much on and did not communicate properly with alot of people, which is absolutley essential. I just want some people to know some facts that were not previously mentioned.

@jerichonut, Fedconusa was booked in September and Creation was booked towards the end of March. That can be confirmed with Anne or Don at the Hyatt. I met Anne (nice lady) when i was there but I never met Don (not that I needed to) whi did the contracts and allowed Creation to book a week before.

 

[PowderedToastMan]

Also, TrekMovie is a great site, but they aggregate news just as much as anyone else. They post original columns just as much as everyone else. But there's nothing wrong with that in my eyes, or thousands of other people's eyes -- but it does show the contradiction in your statement. An TrekMovie has been wrong, too ... they reported on a lot of the rumors that ended up not being true. Of course, TrekMovie also worked to corroborate and debunk -- something we and everyone else have done. That is what we do ... that is what we ALL do. We try to report what we can ... and if it can't be confirmed, we try to corroborate it, or debunk it. But every time, all of us let's everyone know that is IS a rumor and it should be treated as such.

some one emailed me this link and I feel I have to reply

I and TrekMovie.com pride ourselves on accuracy. Yes we do 'aggregate' some stories, but try and put as much original context to them, however that is not why we are the number one trek news site and one of the highest trafficked scifi sites in general...it is for having the best sources in the world of Trek. We work both officially and unoficially with Paramount, Bad Robot, CBS and all the licensees. I would like to see examples of all of these rumors we have reported that have been wrong. And when something is 'rumor' and not confirmed we report it as a rumor. But generally we require two sources on most stories or sources so trustworthy they are unimpeachable. In fact we have be the site out there debunking all of the false rumors being put up by other sites. When we report on a rumor from another site we always try to confirm it, debunk it or note if it is 'unconfirmed' to add as much context as possible.

This thread itself speaks to TrekMovie's rep. The OP links to our site where we had a person reporting from the scene and within a couple of hours of the show being closed down (while trek celebs were still hanging out in the Autograph room) we had our first report, and an interview with Brazeals son up as an update shortly thereafter.

I am not going to say that we have never ever been wrong about something or will never be. But compared to other sci-fi sites, we try not to report every rumor we hear.

you all may go back to your kicking the dead Fedcon carcass while it is still down.

 

[Tom]

Also, TrekMovie is a great site, but they aggregate news just as much as anyone else. They post original columns just as much as everyone else. But there's nothing wrong with that in my eyes, or thousands of other people's eyes -- but it does show the contradiction in your statement. An TrekMovie has been wrong, too ... they reported on a lot of the rumors that ended up not being true. Of course, TrekMovie also worked to corroborate and debunk -- something we and everyone else have done. That is what we do ... that is what we ALL do. We try to report what we can ... and if it can't be confirmed, we try to corroborate it, or debunk it. But every time, all of us let's everyone know that is IS a rumor and it should be treated as such.

some one emailed me this link and I feel I have to reply

I and TrekMovie.com pride ourselves on accuracy. Yes we do 'aggregate' some stories, but try and put as much original context to them, however that is not why we are the number one trek news site and one of the highest trafficked scifi sites in general...it is for having the best sources in the world of Trek. We work both officially and unoficially with Paramount, Bad Robot, CBS and all the licensees. I would like to see examples of all of these rumors we have reported that have been wrong. And when something is 'rumor' and not confirmed we report it as a rumor. But generally we require two sources on most stories or sources so trustworthy they are unimpeachable. In fact we have be the site out there debunking all of the false rumors being put up by other sites. When we report on a rumor from another site we always try to confirm it, debunk it or note if it is 'unconfirmed' to add as much context as possible.

This thread itself speaks to TrekMovie's rep. The OP links to our site where we had a person reporting from the scene and within a couple of hours of the show being closed down (while trek celebs were still hanging out in the Autograph room) we had our first report, and an interview with Brazeals son up as an update shortly thereafter.

I am not going to say that we have never ever been wrong about something or will never be. But compared to other sci-fi sites, we try not to report every rumor we hear.

you all may go back to your kicking the dead Fedcon carcass while it is still down.

I agree with you Anthony as you may have saw a couple pages back, you a very professional journalist that knows how to seperate his reporting from his feelings.

 

[JerichoNut]

Also, TrekMovie is a great site, but they aggregate news just as much as anyone else. They post original columns just as much as everyone else. But there's nothing wrong with that in my eyes, or thousands of other people's eyes -- but it does show the contradiction in your statement. An TrekMovie has been wrong, too ... they reported on a lot of the rumors that ended up not being true. Of course, TrekMovie also worked to corroborate and debunk -- something we and everyone else have done. That is what we do ... that is what we ALL do. We try to report what we can ... and if it can't be confirmed, we try to corroborate it, or debunk it. But every time, all of us let's everyone know that is IS a rumor and it should be treated as such.

some one emailed me this link and I feel I have to reply

I and TrekMovie.com pride ourselves on accuracy. Yes we do 'aggregate' some stories, but try and put as much original context to them, however that is not why we are the number one trek news site and one of the highest trafficked scifi sites in general...it is for having the best sources in the world of Trek. We work both officially and unoficially with Paramount, Bad Robot, CBS and all the licensees. I would like to see examples of all of these rumors we have reported that have been wrong. And when something is 'rumor' and not confirmed we report it as a rumor. But generally we require two sources on most stories or sources so trustworthy they are unimpeachable. In fact we have be the site out there debunking all of the false rumors being put up by other sites. When we report on a rumor from another site we always try to confirm it, debunk it or note if it is 'unconfirmed' to add as much context as possible.

This thread itself speaks to TrekMovie's rep. The OP links to our site where we had a person reporting from the scene and within a couple of hours of the show being closed down (while trek celebs were still hanging out in the Autograph room) we had our first report, and an interview with Brazeals son up as an update shortly thereafter.

I am not going to say that we have never ever been wrong about something or will never be. But compared to other sci-fi sites, we try not to report every rumor we hear.

you all may go back to your kicking the dead Fedcon carcass while it is still down.

Thanks TrekMovie . I have been to your site many times and love it ! I like the fact that it's more about good stories about actors, movies and what's going on in the various series. Somehow I don't see visions of ambulance chasing lawyers when I think of TrekMovie.com. lol

lol@kicking the dead carcass while it's down. There does seem to be a ton of that going around.

 

[Tom]

lol@kicking the dead carcass while it's down. There does seem to be a ton of that going around.

I've been on this site for over 5 years, kicking carcasses is nothing new, its when they cook them, thats the issue.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

That's for sure. It was dead when this thread started. But there are a lot of people who are understandably frustrated, so it's good to vent.

PTM, I don't think anyone's really attacking trekmovie.com. It's a great site (one of the best around, imo). I wonder if I can say that, since I should be promoting this site instead (Go Trek Today, best news coverage ever ).

Has anyone seen the Video from the closure of the con? The hero has to be John Billingsly. He was the fan advocate. Whenever the Fedcon reps started the "OH Tom, who isn't here right now, will deal with the refunds", John basically told the Fedcon people that they needed to get Tom THERE to answer questions.

I'd like to see that (is there a link somewhere?). John Billingsley is a classy guy.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

...when something is 'rumor' and not confirmed we report it as a rumor. But generally we require two sources on most stories or sources so trustworthy they are unimpeachable. In fact we have be the site out there debunking all of the false rumors being put up by other sites. When we report on a rumor from another site we always try to confirm it, debunk it or note if it is 'unconfirmed' to add as much context as possible..

Bolding for emphasis above is mine.

In other words, Anthony and Trekmovie practice responsible journalism in a professional manner - doing all of the things which were demonstrably not being done by sites like SyFyWorld during the whole 2001 "Series V casting sheet" imbroglio which I've used as an example of shoddy reporting.

I wonder if I can say that, since I should be promoting this site instead (Go Trek Today, best news coverage ever ).

And of course, it was Christian's "scoop" concerning the Series V casting sheet that did so much to grow Trek Today and TrekBBS back in 2001 - a bit of serendipity combined with good news judgment which produced some outrageous reactions of envy at other sites (there was a fellow working for TrekWeb at the time who seemingly made it his personal mission to demonstrate that the sheet had to be a fake). That, and the fact that Trek Today was quick to debunk silly rumors - like the "Daljit Dhaliwal" thing - made this site a destination for people looking for reliable information about the new Trek series, rather like Trekmovie is now with regard to the new movie.

 

[Amaris]

^ I would just like to re-affirm the awesome Trek glory that is Trekmovie.com.
Oh, and to add that John Billingsley is the primary reason I liked Enterprise.

As for this whole thing, I guess it would just be wise to know the organizers for these conventions before attending, and I badly want to attend one.

J.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

As for this whole thing, I guess it would just be wise to know the organizers for these conventions before attending, and I badly want to attend one.

J.

Just stick to the ones that have been around for a while, and ask the opinions of fans who've been to them.

 

[Michael Hinman]

Trekmovie.com has to be one of the best Star Trek (and some scifi) news sites I have seen. I find Anthony Pascale to be a remarkable person capable of deliving current and unbiased news in a highly professional manner. Some other news sites while having great connections tend to sometimes get biased over particualar topics to point of clearly showcasing a 'I told you so', 'Im always right' mentality. While news at such sites may be faily accurate in some cases the tone of how such news is delivered is also important.

By the way, I corrected my post just before Tom's here ... I wasn't sure why he was saying that above when I read it earlier today, but I got a note that showed I screwed up something I was writing.

In my rather long post about sites and such, I had gone back and rewrote a large portion of it at the beginning, but I believe that an old part of my post didn't get deleted, and I -- in my haste to paste it together -- ended up having part of an old paragraph with part of a new paragraph that didn't go together.

My post was SUPPOSED to say that AICN has print a lot of bad rumors, NOT TrekMovie. Has TrekMovie posted a bad rumor or two in its lifetime? Who hasn't, but I can't recall any from them. And obviously, that is very incorrect, and would not be anything I meant to say.

Sorry about that Anthony ... really, my sincerest apologies.

I corrected the post, and for the record, TrekMovie, as far as I'm concerned, has been right all the time (or at least as far as I can remember).

======

FleetLord is right - Creation did come in the week before with a Supernatural Convention and if I remember right, some of the Actors they were going to have there were also Actors from some of the SciFi series.

Funny thing, now there is no mention of the Supernatural Convention they had there anywhere on their site that I can find. But it was on there before.

I saw a page for this particular convention. They were completely and exclusively "Supernatural." As far as I know, there's never been a single "Supernatural" guest scheduled for FedConUSA.

From the person I talked to at the Hotel, who happened to be one of the managers, I was told that Creation didn't book their Convention until long after the Fedcon USA convention had been booked.

Hmmm ... interesting. But then again, I still can't imagine that Creation would be THAT interested in FedCon. If they did book after FedCon, I would think it was more coincidental than anything else.

But who knows ...

I think she told me that the Supernatural convention was booked since Feb or Mar of 08. I asked her because there were a small group of us talking about it there at the convention. I'm sure a call to the Hotel could clear that up though. I disagree that a similar convention being held a week before would not hurt the ticket sales. I think it probably did hurt it some, people can only afford to go to so many things, especially in one month. How much it hurt ticket sales for the Fedcon Convention would be the question. And why did Creation go in and book a similar event there for the week before ?

But if Creation really wanted to hurt FedConUSA, why not do a full-fledged convention? Why do something so specific, unless they were simply doing a more boutique-style convention?

I don't know how much it could hurt ticket sales, especially since there could be some crossover of audience. But it's not like people HAD to go to the Supernatural convention just because it was first. I mean, if you're a general science-fiction fan, one would think you would likely choose the convention with a more general theme.

But I don't know.

Creation does have past event listings on their site but that Supernatural convention is not listed among them.

The Creation past conventions list doesn't have anything post 2007. I did a Google search of "Creation" "Supernatural" "Dallas" and came up with this site:

http://www.creationent.com/cal/supernatural_tx.htm

Of course, that still ignoring the fact that they planned the con for father's day weekend, which in and off itself begs the question: Did these guys even look at a calendar?

Well, I don't know if Father's Day really is that much of a killer. I mean, conventions are planned for Memorial Day Weekend, Halloween, Labor Day Weekend, Fourth of July ... I bet there's a Christmas one somewhere.

I don't know if it has THAT much of an effect, but I don't organize conventions, so I don't know.

Regarding Creation, We noticed there con put on there website in April which seemed rather odd given it only allowed them a month and a half to promote it.

Why is that odd? This would be considered a boutique convention for Creation ... with a very targeted audience. It would need very little promotion.

Did creation affect sales? Perhaps by 10 to 20 percent at most

What are you basing that on?

In other words, Anthony and Trekmovie practice responsible journalism in a professional manner - doing all of the things which were demonstrably not being done by sites like SyFyWorld during the whole 2001 "Series V casting sheet" imbroglio which I've used as an example of shoddy reporting.

This is like a song that just repeats the same chorus over and over again.

And of course, it was Christian's "scoop" concerning the Series V casting sheet that did so much to grow Trek Today and TrekBBS back in 2001

You might want to check your history. TrekToday was already a pretty big site pre-2001. TrekBBS also was pretty big then as well. Did they get a bit larger with the casting sheet? Yeah. But to say that TrekToday was pretty much not on the radar previous to that would be inaccurate.

 

[pookha]

alidar..

http://www.vadercast.com/
that is the link for the thing with john b.
though i cant get it to play

i dont see how the hotel can be blamed for booking the creation con in before fedcon.
hotels book similar type conventions in all the time.
and frankly to the hotel they may have seemed to be different enough since the creation con was supernatural and well fedcon was sci fi.
if they had booked a creation sci fi or trek con in before you all that would have been something to grip about.

and frankly tom did you actually see the hotel contract or just reporting what you were told.

i dont believe the 70,000 figure for cancelation a month out.

just like i dont believe the thing about tim was blindsided by the extra fees since it was looking like you wouldnt meet the room commitment.

and i sent a pm to the fedcon gemany people to see what they have to say about they were the ones responsible for the contract/

 

[Michael Hinman]

i dont see how the hotel can be blamed for booking the creation con in before fedcon.
hotels book similar type conventions in all the time.
and frankly to the hotel they may have seemed to be different enough since the creation con was supernatural and well fedcon was sci fi.
if they had booked a creation sci fi or trek con in before you all that would have been something to grip about.

and frankly tom did you actually see the hotel contract or just reporting what you were told.

i dont believe the 70,000 figure for cancelation a month out.

just like i dont believe the thing about tim was blindsided by the extra fees since it was looking like you wouldnt meet the room commitment.

and i sent a pm to the fedcon gemany people to see what they have to say about they were the ones responsible for the contract/

It's pretty hard to argue against any of that ... I think those bring up some real good points, Tom.

Just let me ask (to Tom, that is) ... do you know all of that stuff for a fact, or is it simply what you were told by various people? I guess I have to echo Pookha's question here: Did you see the contract? Did it state that the hotel could charge an upfront fee at its own discretion? Did it include a $70,000 cancellation fee?

That is all questionable because many times, booking a specific number of rooms usually wipes out a large percentage of convention fees. A very large percentage. I'm wondering if the contract actually stated that if you didn't meet the threshold of booked rooms, you would be charged full price (or whatever price) for the convention space. So you get to the day of the convention, the hotel realizes the threshold hasn't been met, and they say, "Well, we warned you ... here is the fee we charge."

That sounds far more plausible. If Tim Brazeal or even you had come on here and said THAT, I think many of us would shrug and say, "Damn, that sucks."

 

[Tom]

We had weekly meetings about fedconusa, this is some of the info that was touched upon, I did not see the contract but beyond Tim there were others who did see this and mentioned it also . I think is was more or less the hotel saying , " hey if you want re-book at a later date we require all the money that you would have paid us plus a certain (re-sheduling) fee (coming to about 70k) that we would give you back (the fee) after the con completes successfully at that later date". Again I can't give specifics as it was not my area. My point being, based on this, that there was not that much capital present there to re-schedule even if we wanted to. However, (and again i'm not the expert) perhaps, we could have just cancelled from Hyatt and moved the con to the Marriot at that later date (October perhaps) under an all new contract, but the worry was how many of the actors would have been able to come if the date was moved and the guests that already booked to come in June.

Regarding Creation, the hotel said they booked the Creation con because they did not think it would compete with Fedconusa, they said they would not have allowed creation to hold a full scifi con. We felt that even a supernatual only con would still effect sales. Interestingly enough if you play devils advocate and you ran Creation would you not be also worried that Fedconusa would take away from you 'Supernatural' con sales since Fedconusa was a broader scifi/fantasy and most people would rather go to that vs either going to just the supernatural only con or coming two weekends in a row to see 2 cons.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I would imagine that a convention hotel requires some insulation against the losses they'd take if they're unable to book an event because some group already has that time period and then that group simply cancels at the last minute.

 

[pookha]

oh i suspect there would be some type of cancellation penalty. especially after 9/11.
9/11 changed a lot of how a hotel deals with bookings.


i just question a 70,000 one with a month out.

and i am siding with the hotel in that they probably believed the conventions would be disimilar enough for it not be too much of a problem.

and if there was a 70,000 penalty a month out when the hotel could still try and rebook the space i wonder what type of penalty they are facing now if the check for the con space wasnt good and the hotel had to cancel the event themselves.

a long time ago i used to do a fannish science fiction newsletter.
even before this i have been considering bringing it back.
but i am tempted to write to the hyatts sales manager and ask if they would tell their side of the story.

because they are getting a black eye with some of these assertions.
and frankly the fans were lucky they were as nice as they were.
they could have not recognized the con rate for the hotel saturday night but they did and evidently at the behest of a fan not connected with the con it was their decision to allow the autograph area to stay open until they had a shift change.

 

[T'Bonz]

I wonder if I can say that, since I should be promoting this site instead (Go Trek Today, best news coverage ever ).

Off to the mines of Remus for you!

Traitor!

Oh wait....Alidar Jarok....

 

[pookha]

I wonder if I can say that, since I should be promoting this site instead (Go Trek Today, best news coverage ever ).

Off to the mines of Remus for you!

Traitor!

Oh wait....Alidar Jarok....

oh yeah i think we already know what happened with him.
now we know the true behind the scenes story.


True Romulan Story:
The real fate of Alidar Jarok

 

[Michael Hinman]

We had weekly meetings about fedconusa, this is some of the info that was touched upon, I did not see the contract but beyond Tim there were others who did see this and mentioned it also . I think is was more or less the hotel saying , " hey if you want re-book at a later date we require all the money that you would have paid us plus a certain (re-sheduling) fee (coming to about 70k) that we would give you back (the fee) after the con completes successfully at that later date". Again I can't give specifics as it was not my area. My point being, based on this, that there was not that much capital present there to re-schedule even if we wanted to. However, (and again i'm not the expert) perhaps, we could have just cancelled from Hyatt and moved the con to the Marriot at that later date (October perhaps) under an all new contract, but the worry was how many of the actors would have been able to come if the date was moved and the guests that already booked to come in June.

But Tom, actors get bumped from conventions all the time. In fact, I think they would rather be told as early as possible that the convention isn't going to happen, then spend an entire week waiting for a plane ticket, with their bags all packed, that will never arrive.

Yes, this is hindsight, so I'm not going to go too deep into that ... but it's hard not to see this as excuses.

Regarding Creation, the hotel said they booked the Creation con because they did not think it would compete with Fedconusa, they said they would not have allowed creation to hold a full scifi con. We felt that even a supernatual only con would still effect sales. Interestingly enough if you play devils advocate and you ran Creation would you not be also worried that Fedconusa would take away from you 'Supernatural' con sales since Fedconusa was a broader scifi/fantasy and most people would rather go to that vs either going to just the supernatural only con or coming two weekends in a row to see 2 cons.

That's my thinking, too, Tom. I'm not much of a "Supernatural" fan, so if I were to choose between the two, the choice would be easy. I would go to the general sci-fi con rather than the boutique con. So really, I can't see Creation feeling like they were playing spoiler when FedCon could've spoiled them just as much. I think it was shitty of the hotel to schedule a con like that a week before FedCon, and if FedCon was scheduled first, they should've at least made the effort to make sure there wasn't anything competing with it so close. But at the same time, I doubt they siphoned that much away from FedCon ... no more than you guys siphoned from them.

By the way ... is it Cinco de Mayo in TrekBBsdom? =P