"Latest statement about the Host and HMGS" Topic

A word of thanks to the organizers of HOTLEAD 2016. Great gaming, and a wonderful experience. Well done!

Since I did provide a nice summary of Otto's comments in my last blog post, I thought it would be fair to post the HMGS BOD official report on the status of the Lancaster Host, the state of HMGS's contracts with the Host, and what fallback plans are in effect should the Host not be able to or choose not to exercise their part of the contract.

I received this last night from Kevin directly, and here it is: link

(I admit, I'm editorializing in places, but only as observations.. my opinion is after the gray portion)

Thanks for your interest and thanks for reading thus far.

Walt

Thanks for this piece.

Out of curiosity, was the notion of a sizeable penalty for HMGS canceling the contract with the Host disclosed? Sometimes, canceling may still be worth it even if the penalty is painful.

Erik

Trust me, Erik, HMGS has looked at all its options regarding the Host, including walking away from its existing contracts. (I know the theory you are talking about. Law review articles were written about it years ago.) My understanding is that the potential penalties are prohibitive. There's no support on the current HMGS BOD for such a course of action.

As far as things go with the Host, the short answer is that HMGS is back to "wait and see" mode, just like it was when news of the auction first came out. If this were a game (and in many ways, it is), it's the Host's turn to move, with HMGS set on "opportunity fire." Cold Wars 2016 dodged a bullet (or, if you prefer, made its saving throw), so now it's Fall In 2016's turn to see what happens.

BTW, if you think it was a coincidence that the Host invited prospective buyers to do their inspection on the weekend of an HMGS convention, think again. The Host obviously wanted to show off a packed house to impress the buyers. We'll see whether that has an impact on the negotiations and on whether any future owners decide to keep the existing contracts for future shows, including those with HMGS, in place.

Thanks for posting the link to the official HMGS statement, Walt. Not everyone who attends an HMGS convention is on the HMGS mailing list. Now they can read it here and draw their own conclusions. FYI, I stayed at the Quilt Show hotel (Continental Inn). The place was packed. As you said, there is clearly demand for meeting space in Lancaster, both at the Host and elsewhere.

Walt,

Thanks for the info.

Jim

One thing that I find interesting is that the Continental and a lot of other hotels, had vacancies. That is with the quilt show and Cold Wars. I noticed on Saturday that even the small Classic Inn, right next to the Host had vacancies.

Even if a cancellation penalty is financially feasible in the short term, that may be held against HMGS by other facilities when negotiating future contracts.

I calculated the potential penalty and it is not financially feasible. Think bigger than the BCC. I am reluctant to quote a number in an open forum, as Scott was at the meeting. It could come back to bite us you know where.

Kevin Kelley former treasurer

Even worse would be to develop a reputation of acting in bad faith.

Hi Kevin -

Gotcha. That provides a magnitude of impact. Appreciate the info.

47Ronin – Great points and thanks again!

Erik

Thanks, Erik.

Kevin said it all--"bigger than the BCC" (another HMGS T-shirt slogan, perhaps?)--and that's from an official source.

As far as rooms being available at other hotels on Route 30 during Cold Wars, they probably had a 24-48 hour cancellation policy, unlike the Host.

Also, all staff members and many vendors and GMs prefer to stay at the Host, not off site, for a variety of reasons, including that it's easier to make it from the bar at 2am to your room when you are staying at the Host. Another reason for vacancies at other hotels.

One more thing to remind everyone about that I should have mentioned earlier. The contracts with the Host that we are talking about were negotiated and signed years ago by prior HMGS BODs. As far as I know, THE CURRENT BOD HAS YET TO APPROVE A CONTRACT FOR ANY CONVENTION LOCATION. There is some carryover with regard to individual long-serving board members, but as a group these guys are just getting started. Try to remember that the next time someone says "it's just like the bad old days."

It's not. Give them a break.

Actually the current BOD cancelled the Fall IN 2017 contract before the penalties kicked in and then renegotiated it for a 1 year penalty window so we have till 1 Nov 2016 to make a decision.

I think John covered this in one of his 'state of the host' missives.

Kevin Kelley

Kevin Kelley is correct. Cancellation is prohibitive in fees. Right now, I believe the penalty would be 50% even a year out, and that is not only rental for the hotel, but the fees from rooms as well.

If any of you are interested in these things you should go to the membership meetings.

Keep the slow and steady course things will work out for the best they always do. Panic only brings bad decision making.

Amen to that. Similar to Panicky signing of contracts when pressured. You don't want to take either course without a lot of consideration.

Was unable to make the membership meeting or the convention as I had just undergone an amputation. Maybe next membership meeting.

Erik

This BoD inherited these appalling contracts, and they have no choice but to deal with them. I hope when they make new arrangements, they take note of this, and demand better terms.

Thanks for the clarification, Kevin. I stand "corrected."

BTW, welcome back to TMP.

As Victor Laszlo said to Rick at the end of "Casablanca": "Welcome back to the fight. This time I know our side will win."

"Was unable to make the membership meeting or the convention as I had just undergone an amputation."

Whiner.

Erik,

Hope you're doing well with your rehab/recovery after the surgery.

Scott

These "appaling contracts" were made long ago when the conditions in the economy and the host were better and they were trying to save money by long term commitments. The details of the contracts were known, and applauded by all. It is not the fault of the Bod.

Thanks for this information everyone. I am optimistic that there will be a bright new shiny "Host" one day.

Otto,

I appreciate your comments, but I have to disagree.

The details of the contracts were not "known and applauded by all." HMGS has historically had a problem with sharing information, and even if the contracts were posted somewhere, suggesting that they were seen by many people (e.g. "applauded by all").

The lopsided cancellation policy suggests a poorly negotiated agreement. And I'm dumbfounded at the statement it is not the fault of the BoD. Who negotiated it? Who agreed to it? Who signed it?

Just curious: is this a threadjacking or did the 'bug' strike? (And it would be pretty ironic for the 'bug' to hit a Hot Lead comment thread!)

The current BOD is bound by old contracts that they did not negotiate. So the blame if you want to call it goes back to an entity that doesn't currently exist. We are in a new phase of leadership that is trying not to repeat any past mistakes, in my opinion, but is also bound by its by-laws and contracts. I wouldn't want the job myself. Also knowing all the whys and wherefores doesn't change much except in an election. If you think someone screwed up, vote them out, nominate a friend or run yourself. Frankly we argue too much about things we can't often control or change. We do better working together.

OK. I see it's the bug.

I can tell you from personal experience our contractual agreements with the Host have historically included a lot of leeway we could never assume going into a new venue. This is the result of two entities doing business with each other for over 20 years.

That being said, I agree they are far from perfect, especially with the economy being what it is right now, and the shape the Host is currently in.

Judging from what people here have said about Fall In 2015, the place appears to be a Health and Safety nightmare – maybe the BOD should look at that if they want to move from the Host ASAP.

Interesting reading. Keep posting. C