[ProgSoc] Corporate sponsorship

Justin Steward althalus87 at gmail.com
Tue Aug 2 12:34:35 EST 2011

Brevity =/= lukewarm, merely pushed for time. I personally think the
extra money could be put to great use for the club, as long as we make
sure we have an exit strategy (just in case), and probably should have
said as much in my first response. I'm not current exec though.


On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:30 PM, John Elliot <jj5 at jj5.net> wrote:
> On 2/08/2011 10:35 AM, Chris Deigan wrote:
>> So, at a minimum to be a 'club member' we have to charge $5
>> to comply with the UTS Union. I think sponsorship or not,
>> Union affiliation is vital for us to remain a club at UTS
>> and justify occupying its space and use of its network/power
>> resources.
> Yep, wouldn't want to do anything that jeopardises the relationship with the
> student union.
>> That said, I think sponsorship is a good thing - it'd allow us to
>> do more subsidised events in fancier locations, and have fancier
>> computers. As long as ProgSoc has:
>>  * the fall-back to function as it currently does should sponsorship be
>> pulled
>>  * is not held to misrepresent what relationship exists between ProgSoc
>> and the sponsoring company (i.e. we can say "hey, these people sponsor
>> progsoc. here's some things they do you may be interested in" but not
>> "company x is awesome, progsoc says so! they can do no evil").
> I can't imagine any of that being a problem.
> Anyway, responses so far have been lukewarm, so in the best ProgSoc
> tradition: I think I'll do nothing.
> _______________________________________________
> Progsoc mailing list
> Progsoc at progsoc.org
> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc

More information about the Progsoc mailing list