Hacker News Reader

Comment by ProfessorLayton | Hacker News Reader

One interesting tidbit here is that the mayor made the call to cancel the event, not SXSW themselves. I understand the organizers stand to lose _a lot_ from cancellations, but this still seems like bad optics.

Unrelated, but I have three big events I booked long ago that I'm either becoming weary of attending, or fear that they will be cancelled and I'll be on the hook for the hotel and other accommodations. One of them is at SF chase center (19K capacity) and SF recently announced infections. Not a good time to be a fan of live events.

EDIT: Here's an interesting twitter thread that gives an isight into what smaller event organizers are going through due to the coronavirus https://twitter.com/jessiechar/status/1235685514667126786

View on HN

Here was SXSW's statement on the cancelation.

> The City of Austin has cancelled the March dates for SXSW and SXSW EDU. SXSW will faithfully follow the City’s directions. We are devastated to share this news with you. “The show must go on” is in our DNA, and this is the first time in 34 years that the March event will not take place. We are now working through the ramifications of this unprecedented situation. As recently as Wednesday, Austin Public Health stated that “there’s no evidence that closing SXSW or any other gatherings will make the community safer.” However, this situation evolved rapidly, and we honor and respect the City of Austin’s decision. We are committed to do our part to help protect our staff, attendees, and fellow Austinites.

https://www.sxsw.com/2020-event-update/

I find their statement a bit irritating...they're basically saying "if it weren't for the city, we would have still done it, screw any consequences".

If the public health authority that they're within the jurisdiction of says closing wont help, then it seems weird to say it's a "screw the consequences" move. More of a "we've been told there wont be consequences" move.

I think when it comes to public crisis, decisions like this should be made by the public as a whole, and in a democracy that means the elected government.

Private individuals shouldn’t have to parse health statistics or educate themselves to the level of virologists. Instead the government should do this work, and issue a decree. If not this, then when will government be useful?

What I am hearing is SXSW cannot get the insurance payout if they unilaterally cancel the event. Thatswhy they have waited the city and Austin Public Health to make the decision for them. Same thing with SaaStr as well - They waited for the Santa Clara county to make the decision.

That's the rumor, but the statement they put out was absolutely ridiculous and in no way required for insurance. The organizers were willing to put people at risk for profit.

Well, there goes the theory of waiting to cancel to collect insurance [1]...

This makes the delays even more incomprehensible. Seems it wasn't greed after all; it was just sheer irresponsibility.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22509322

Just got this email from SXSW: https://www.airsend.io/images/sxsw_deferral.png

2020 registrants can opt to defer to 2021,2022 or 23

Could the city announcing the cancellation yield the organizers a more favorable insurance payout? I've heard of some event insurance policies treating pandemics as Acts of God, and will not pay on a pandemic forcing a cancellation or closure. Would be very interested in hearing the insurance industry's justification for that position.

They normally justify it by requiring you to take out an additional premium for such coverage rather than just skip out on it by force majeure. At least that's the way it's done in other countries.

To the contrary, this is a decision that impacts the entire city, involving many, many people. The mayor is the right person to make that holistic, wide-ranging call.

It's not bad optics at all. This is a public decision that is most responsibly taken by public officials.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com