Thank you for the questions - I appreciate you asking.
We were not paying a speaker fee. The arrangement was a membership exchange in lieu of a keynote fee, along with sponsor table placement. There was no formal contract beyond email confirmations outlining keynote participation and sponsor listing. We did not have a signed scope document detailing specific deliverables such as a pre-conference webinar, daily kickoff segments, or a fixed session length.
From my perspective, we honored the core commitment - keynote placement, sponsor listing, and membership exchange. When the schedule shifted due to late Sage additions, I temporarily moved the keynote to Friday while working through several "Jenga" pieces in the agenda. Unfortunately, that version was published before I was able to have a direct conversation with them, which I believe contributed to the tension. This all occurred last week while I was out of the country and I was communicating with them the entire time.
Once they raised concerns, I restored the Thursday opening placement and offered a Friday workshop session. I also previously offered a pre-session webinar, but it was never scheduled. During the final call, the discussion centered more on reviewing past communications and differing interpretations of scope rather than aligning forward. It became clear that they viewed the engagement as materially different than originally discussed, while I believed the primary commitment had been restored. They never intended on coming in my opinion at that point.
At that point, they chose to withdraw.
To my knowledge, they had not booked travel or hotel, and since no fee was paid and no contract was in place, we do not appear to have financial exposure.
They were listed on the website as sponsor and keynote, but broader announcements had not yet gone out, so the external impact will be minimal. Operationally, we are in a strong position - we have Sage keynotes confirmed and the schedule flexibility is actually helpful.
In hindsight, this reinforces the need for more explicitly documented scope for keynote exchanges, especially when structured as non-monetary arrangements. That's something we can tighten up going forward.
I'm comfortable with where we landed, even though it was disappointing.
Happy to discuss further if helpful.
Anne
------------------------------
Anne Sawyer
90 Minds Inc.
Executive Director
anne.sawyer@90minds.comCA
https://90minds.com------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 02-24-2026 13:07
From: Madeline Stefanou
Subject: Keynote Update
@Anne Sawyer I wanted to clarify the circumstances around the keynote speaker's withdrawal, particularly regarding their expectations and our subsequent efforts. If I understand correctly, we were not paying them a Speaker Fee for Joe Rotella to speak at the MOTM's event this year.
In your conversations with them and in our agreement for them to come speak, did we agree to all of those requests? Do we have a contract in place or some documentation for the speaker engagement? Were we not able to deliver on what we promised in our agreement with Delphia Consulting?
Regarding the schedule change, moving them to Friday morning and back to Thursday, after they expressed their preference to be the first speaker; are there any potential obligations around reimbursing expenses they may have incurred, such as pre-paid travel, due to this cancellation?
Do we have a backup speaker as our Keynote? Do we need one?
------------------------------
Madeline Stefanou
RKL eSolutions, LLC
------------------------------