Auckland Region Gear Policy

I have attached the new Auckland gear policy. This was ratified at last week’s Committee meeting. It includes costs for hiring the gear on a game-size and event-length basis. In practice, the costs will be included in the budget for any Auckland project, and affiliates will be charged a fee.

We have moved the gear into a paid storage solution in Onehunga, and the costs of hirage are designed to cover the costs of storage - currently $3000 per annum. We have approximately 2 furniture trailer’s full of larp gear, and it is now stored in a secure lockup with a custom-built shelving system for maximum accessibility. No matter the size of a larp, we can provide gear that will help bring it to life, and the gear policy is aimed at ensuring the gear is available, in good condition, and the Auckland Region receives enough income to pay for the storage and maintenance of our gear library.

I have attempted to contact all known active larp campaigns in the Auckland region to alert them to our new policy.

I am happy to answer any questions :slight_smile:

UPDATE:

We have changed the policy to tweak the pricing bands. The 1-19 band is now 1-20 etc… The new policy is Gear Policy 2016.

Gear Policy 2016.pdf (493.9 KB)

Why does the cost per member go up for larger games?

Generally speaking, larger games use more gear than smaller games (you can end up taking more stuff because it fits in the trailer in a “just in case” approach), and the costs reflect this.

We made a decision to use a stepped fixed-cost model as it was felt that this was easier for game organisers to deal with (as compared with a variable cost model).

The table below shows the per-participant cost for the gear at different sizes for the different event types. The closer an event is to the beginning of a cost band, the higher the per-participant cost, but getting more participants will make the cost per participant come down. I do not expect we will be very strict on the boundaries either - this model is about paying for the gear storage, not profiteering.

Participant, Project Day, Project W/E, Affiliate Day, Affiliate W/E

[code]5 6.00 9.00 8.00 12.00
10 3.00 4.50 4.00 6.00
19 1.58 2.37 2.11 3.16

25 3.20 4.80 4.00 6.00
40 2.00 3.00 2.50 3.75
49 1.63 2.45 2.04 3.06

60 3.33 5.00 4.17 6.25
80 2.50 3.75 3.13 4.69
99 2.02 3.03 2.53 3.79

120 4.17 6.25 5.00 7.50
160 3.13 4.69 3.75 5.63
200 2.50 3.75 3.00 4.50
250 2.00 3.00 2.40 3.60[/code]

So by that table, something like an affiliate game like the Crucible weekend game with the numbers they’ve had so far might be just under $6 per person, whereas a project that is small like Moonbright, which will just be a day game, would be about $2-3 per person.

It’s late, I’m sleepy, and math does my head in. But why is a 120 person affiliate game charged so much more per person than anything else?

Because its the first example above the breakpoint. Remember, the charges are not imposed per person, but as a flat fee based on game size.

There were two options, one was percentage based one, and one was fixed numbers based, and we decided the latter was easier for game organisers to build into a budget. Both were opened up to community to discuss, and our figures are based on thoroughly looking at past game numbers.

Ah - derp, just like Mike explained. Clearly when I’m sleepy not only are my math skills lacking, but reading comprehension too. I get how it works now. Thanks!

Very cool. Nice and clear.

We have updated the pricing schedule to include more bands. The top band pricing stays the same.

When the initial pricing bands were set up, it reflected the sizes of games in Auckland at the time, but this has since changed (and we are also supporting Hamilton larps) so we have changed the bands to make it easier for medium/large games to borrow gear.

The bands are now: 1-19, 20-39, 40-59, 60-99, 100-150, 151+

The table below shows the per-participant cost for the gear at different sizes for the different event types. The closer an event is to the beginning of a cost band, the higher the per-participant cost, but getting more participants will make the cost per participant come down. I do not expect we will be very strict on the boundaries either - this model is about paying for the gear storage, not profiteering.

Participant, Project Day, Project W/E, Affiliate Day, Affiliate W/E

5 6.00 9.00 8.00 12.00 10 3.00 4.50 4.00 6.00 19 1.58 2.37 2.11 3.16 30 2.00 3.00 2.67 4.00 40 3.00 4.50 4.00 6.00 50 2.40 3.60 3.20 4.80 60 3.00 4.50 4.00 6.00 80 2.25 3.38 3.00 4.50 99 1.82 2.73 2.42 3.64 120 2.50 3.75 3.33 5.00 160 3.13 4.69 3.75 5.63 200 2.50 3.75 3.00 4.50 250 2.00 3.00 2.40 3.60

Can we get the document uploaded again, please? It looks like it was lost in the migration.

1 Like

Sure, I have uploaded the updated policy - we changed the bands to 1-20, 21-40 etc.

Gear Policy 2016.pdf (493.9 KB)