How to organise a robotics competition with paid team entries

You've got robotics clubs asking about a competition, a hall that looks big enough and a supplier willing to lend you some equipment. Now you need to decide how many team entries to sell. Start with the time it takes to run a complete attempt, including everything that happens after the robot stops. That will tell you much more than the number of tables you can fit into the room.

To organise a robotics competition with paid team entries, define the technical rules and entry promise first, then test inspection, field turnaround and staffing before you set capacity. Keep team payment, participant registration, robot approval and spectator admission separate so everyone knows what their purchase allows them to do.

This guide is for an operator producing a commercially viable event. We'll use a fictional small competition to work through the timetable, budget and practical decisions. Every price, duration, capacity and result in that example is invented for explanation. They aren't industry benchmarks or evidence that a particular robot, venue or competition format is safe.

The aim is a competition teams can prepare for properly, with enough useful participation to justify the fee and enough time to deliver what you've sold.

Choose a competition you can actually produce

The first thing you want to do is decide whether you're hosting an event within an established robotics programme or creating an independent competition. That decision affects the game, equipment, eligibility, officials, registration and what you can promise about qualification for other events.

If you want an official programme event, speak to its regional organiser before announcing it. Confirm the current season's requirements and which parts of delivery are prescribed. You may need to use its approved registration and tournament systems. A general ticket checkout isn't a substitute for that process, and an independent event cannot award official advancement simply because teams recognise the game.

The Robotics Education & Competition Foundation's event planning checklist illustrates the preparation its events require, including regional support, equipment, key volunteers and rehearsal. Use the governing programme's current instructions for an affiliated event. Don't borrow its name, logos or qualification claims to make your independent competition sound established.

For a first independent edition, I would choose a narrow challenge with equipment you can test thoroughly. Adding several robot classes and age divisions multiplies the inspections and schedules you need to support. It also makes it harder for a buyer to understand whether their team belongs there.

Our fictional Harbour Robotics Open is an independent, non-combat tabletop object-sorting challenge. Teams bring a small autonomous robot that attempts the course alone. There is no robot-to-robot contact, no public handling of moving robots and no promise of qualification elsewhere. The organiser has a competent technical lead develop and approve the complete rules, equipment limits and operating procedures before sales begin.

The proposed maximum is 24 teams, with two to four competitors per team. Competitors are aged 16 or over, and every team includes one separately registered adult supervisor within its admission allowance. Competitors and supervisors have different roles, even when all competitors are adults. The example makes the allowances explicit; it doesn't recommend a universal age limit or supervision ratio.

This is a much narrower production than a combat event or a full-size industrial robot demonstration. Those require specialist engineering, containment and operational assessment beyond this guide. Choose the format your technical team and venue can support, then price that event. Don't start with a dramatic promotional video and try to build the safeguards around it later.

Explain exactly what the team entry buys

A team captain should be able to tell the rest of their group what they are paying for without asking you to interpret the event page. Name the competition class, eligibility, team size, robot requirements, included admissions, preparation deadlines and participation offer before the payment button.

Harbour's fictional entry includes one robot, one assigned worktable, admission for up to four competitors and one adult supervisor, an inspection appointment and three scheduled qualification attempts after approval. The top eight teams qualify for a separate final attempt. All other teams receive their checked qualification results and can watch the final.

An inspection appointment doesn't guarantee a pass. Say that plainly, and publish the rules early enough for teams to build an eligible robot. Also explain whether you provide any equipment or materials. A team that assumes a controller, charger or construction kit is included can arrive unable to compete even though it paid the full fee.

For each included service, define the boundary. A worktable isn't a fully equipped machine shop. Technical assistance might help a team understand a failed inspection, but it needn't include redesigning or repairing its robot. If there is a supervised practice area, explain when it opens, how turns work and whether competition robots must pass inspection before entering it.

Keep an adult supervisor's included admission separate from additional spectators. Harbour doesn't sell unused competitor places as guest tickets. A team arriving with two competitors still has one team entry, while extra friends use the public allocation. This prevents a small team from turning its spare roster allowance into unrestricted access to the work area.

Before launch, have the cancellation, withdrawal and failed-inspection terms reviewed for your location. Distinguish a team arriving with an ineligible robot from the organiser cancelling the event or failing to provide the advertised competition. An entry condition cannot settle every consumer obligation simply by saying the payment is nonrefundable.

Give teams one current information page with the preparation requirements and a contact for genuine uncertainties. If the answer changes the rules for everybody, publish it for everybody. Private replies shouldn't quietly give one team more time, a different equipment allowance or an advantage other buyers never had the chance to use.

Register people as well as collecting payment

The person paying may be a teacher, club treasurer or parent who never attends. Payment therefore needs a connection to the team record, but it cannot tell you who will be standing at a worktable on the day.

Use one team reference throughout the process. Connect that reference to the purchaser, named team contact, competition class, robot identity, roster, supervisor and any approved changes. For an independent competition, decide how your entry system and competition records will stay consistent. For a programme event, follow the required system rather than creating a parallel version of official eligibility.

A practical team record can contain these fields:

• Team reference, team name, class and entry payment status.

• Main contact, event-day contact and agreed communication route.

• Competitor roster and the eligibility information the competition actually needs.

• Named adult supervisor and the checks your safeguarding arrangements require.

• Robot reference, declared equipment and requests for technical clarification.

• Inspection appointment, outcome, outstanding corrections and any later approval.

• Included passes issued, approved replacements and arrival status.

Collect sensitive information through an appropriate restricted process. A public team list usually needs far less detail than the staff record. Avoid publishing personal contact numbers, dates of birth or a child's access requirements alongside the leaderboard. Tell people why you need information, who receives it and how long you'll keep it.

Set a roster deadline before you produce passes and field schedules. Explain how a team changes a competitor, appoints a replacement supervisor or withdraws its robot. An email asking to substitute someone should lead to an updated authorised record, rather than a second unofficial list at reception.

Use separate statuses for paid, roster complete, checked in and robot approved. A team can be paid and present while still waiting for inspection. Harbour's field crew accepts only the competition lead's current approval record; a receipt or an admissions wristband isn't enough.

Test this distinction with your reception team. Someone should be able to answer a payment query without granting technical approval, and an inspector should be able to reject an unsafe robot without improvising the refund decision. Send commercial disputes to the event manager while the technical team keeps the field safe.

Publish technical rules before teams spend money building

Your technical lead needs to turn the challenge into rules people can prepare against. That includes the permitted robot size and mass, power sources, moving parts, control method, communications, materials, starting configuration and any prohibited mechanisms. The actual limits must come from competent assessment of your game and equipment.

Make the course specification equally clear. Teams need the surface, objects, starting position, scoring zones and permitted tolerances. If a robot relies on detecting a particular colour or following a line, lighting and printing differences can change performance. Explain which environmental conditions you will control and which teams should expect to vary within published limits.

Decide what happens during an attempt. Who positions the robot? When may a competitor touch it? Who starts the timer, who can stop the run and what score follows an early stop? A rule that says only "complete the course autonomously" leaves a lot to argue about when someone reaches across the table to rescue a stuck machine.

Then settle how the results produce a winner. Harbour uses the best score from three approved qualification attempts. Its fictional rules publish the tiebreaking order before entry opens and explain whether timing is part of the score. The top eight progress to a final where qualification scores no longer determine the ranking, except for the declared fallback if a safe final cannot be completed. Those are independent format choices, not rules for another programme.

If you offer a design award, write a separate rubric and judging process. A robot that performs well on the course doesn't automatically have the best documented design, and judges shouldn't invent a new award halfway through the event because a sponsor likes a particular team.

Publish a dated version of the rules and retain the version buyers accepted. Use a visible change record for corrections, with a clear contact and response deadline. A change affecting hardware may cost teams far more than updating a sentence on your website. Give the affected teams a fair remedy when a material change alters the offer, with advice appropriate to your location.

For an independent event, have local advice on any legal requirements affecting paid entry, prizes, intellectual property and participation terms. Describe prizes accurately and secure the money or items before advertising them. If you're borrowing a recognised game, confirm permission to use its materials and the conditions attached to that use. Public availability doesn't automatically give you commercial permission.

Build an inspection process that has time for corrections

Inspection needs its own appointment plan, trained people and decision record. Asking a volunteer to glance at each robot as teams enter the hall won't tell the queue manager which machines are cleared to run.

The RECF robot inspection guide requires robots in its programmes to pass inspection before competing and calls for reinspection after modifications. Your independent competition needs a process appropriate to its own rules and risks. A competition inspection also doesn't replace the venue's wider safety arrangements or competent equipment assessment.

Have the technical lead produce a repeatable checklist, explain how inspectors use measuring equipment and decide who resolves uncertain cases. Record the robot reference, inspector, time, outcome and exact correction required. A team should leave a failed inspection understanding what needs to change and how it can request another check.

Here's Harbour's fictional scheduling calculation. Two inspection stations each have 90 minutes before the competition briefing. If a first inspection takes six minutes, each station can complete 15 first inspections in theory, or 30 across both stations. With 24 teams, the first inspections require 144 station-minutes, leaving 36 of the available 180 station-minutes.

That spare time isn't a guarantee that every problem can be fixed. Six rechecks lasting six minutes would consume it all, before late arrivals or difficult decisions. Measure inspection duration in rehearsal and stagger arrivals. If the process takes longer, start earlier, add trained inspection coverage or reduce the entry cap before selling it.

Harbour runs inspection from 08:00 to 09:30, with assigned arrivals timed to finish first checks before the briefing. The crew is ready before the first team arrives. The briefing begins at 09:30, followed by field preparation and the first scheduled attempts at 10:00. Teams needing a recheck remain unapproved until it is completed; they don't receive permission because the first run is getting close.

Keep reinspection available after the opening period. A team may replace a damaged mechanism or change a power component during the day. The rules should identify which changes require approval and how the field crew checks the current status. If your morning inspectors move to other duties, name the qualified person who takes over this work.

There also needs to be a route for stopping a robot that has already passed. A loose component, damage or changed behaviour can create a problem later. Explain who has that authority and how a robot returns to service. Approval is a recorded decision about the checked configuration, not a promise that nothing can go wrong afterwards.

Calculate field capacity using the complete turnaround

Watch a full rehearsal and time the interval between the start of one attempt and the start of the next on the same field. That interval includes the attempt, confirming the score, making the field safe, removing the robot, restoring the course and preparing the next team.

For Harbour, suppose rehearsal supports a six-minute interval on each of two equivalent fields. The fictional allowance includes a two-minute attempt and four minutes for the remaining work. Those four minutes have actual tasks and assigned people; they aren't an unexplained buffer you can remove to accept another team.

At 24 teams receiving three qualification attempts each, you need 72 attempts. Two fields running concurrently can serve two teams every six minutes, so 36 intervals take 216 minutes. That calculation assumes both fields are staffed, usable and genuinely equivalent throughout. It doesn't include lunch, briefings, finals or extra time for disruptions.

Harbour schedules three qualification rounds, each allowing every team one attempt. Each round needs 12 intervals across the two fields, or 72 minutes. The first runs from 10:00 to 11:12, the second from 11:12 to 12:24, and the third from 13:09 to 14:21 after a 45-minute lunch break.

The same team order gives a team 72 minutes between its first and second scheduled starts. Check the actual pairing and field assignment, including walking, queueing and any practice or judging commitments. A total attempt count can fit the day while a particular team is expected in two places at once.

Harbour then holds 14:21 to 14:45 for authorised reruns and delays. At the assumed pace, that is four further intervals on each field, or eight extra attempt positions. It isn't inventory for eight extra paid teams. A new team requires three qualification attempts as well as inspection, a worktable and all the associated support.

Now suppose rehearsal shows that a complete interval actually takes eight minutes. The same 36 intervals require 288 minutes, adding 72 minutes to the qualification programme. Your 24-minute recovery block cannot absorb that difference. Reduce capacity, extend the approved schedule or change the production with proper testing. Don't advertise six-minute turnaround because the budget needs it.

Allow a separate period to check standings and resolve permitted queries. Harbour uses 14:45 to 15:00, then gives eight finalists one attempt each between 15:00 and 15:24 across the two fields. It reserves time for final checks and the awards before a 16:00 public close. Load-out happens after public areas are cleared under the venue agreement.

The RECF field reset guide describes accurate resetting and waiting for the referee's all-clear. Apply the same discipline to your approved process. Resetting an object while a score is disputed can destroy the evidence needed to decide it.

Choose the venue around working robots and people

A hall needs space for preparation, inspection, controlled practice, competition and spectators. Teams also need somewhere to put their cases without filling escape routes. Walk the complete journey with the venue manager and technical lead before agreeing the layout.

Follow a team carrying a robot from unloading to reception, its worktable, inspection, the queue and its assigned field. Then follow it back. Avoid a route that cuts through public seating or forces a wheelchair user to take a substantially different route to participate. Check table heights, working reach, toilet access and the viewing position for someone who can't stand behind a crowd.

The W3C's accessible event guidance covers accessible venues, information and communication. For a robotics event, apply that thinking to the competitor's practical experience too. Written calls, readable schedules and a way to ask for adjustments help people who cannot rely on hearing their team number shouted across a noisy hall.

Ask a competent electrical provider to assess power requirements for the actual chargers, laptops, displays and competition equipment. Include the periods when everyone may charge at once. Agree approved charging locations, compatible equipment, supervision and what staff do if they discover damaged batteries or chargers. Teams shouldn't improvise extra supplies because their assigned socket is inconvenient.

In Great Britain, HSE's event electrical safety guidance addresses suitable installations, equipment and cable routing. Use the relevant local requirements where you operate. Don't treat extension lead availability as evidence that the electrical design can support the event.

Agree where repairs are allowed and which activities require a separate supervised area or are prohibited. The simplest first edition may exclude on-site hot work and powered cutting altogether. Tell teams before they travel so they bring a robot ready to compete and understand the limits of permitted adjustment.

Book enough access time to assemble, measure and test both fields before team arrival. Confirm storage, loading doors, security, cleaning, parking, insurance responsibilities and the cost of an extended finish. If borrowed fields must be dismantled by a particular time, the awards cannot drift into that collection window without consequences.

Put borrowed equipment on a written inventory. Record the owner, the exact components, collection and return arrangements, the agreed condition and who pays for loss or damage. Confirm that using the equipment at your paid event is permitted. A friendly offer to lend "a field" may omit the scoring equipment, game objects or transport that made the offer look affordable.

Ask what happens if the owner needs the equipment back or finds a fault before delivery. Identify a suitable replacement and the latest date you can obtain and test it. Include replacement transport and hire in your weaker budget case if those costs are plausible. It is better to know that the loan is essential to the event before selling entries than to discover it while teams are travelling.

Keep technical communications separate from assumptions about public Wi-Fi. Have your supplier test the actual controllers, scoring devices and event network together under the intended conditions. Our event Wi-Fi planning guide helps with the wider brief. The permitted radio configuration and any interference response still need to follow your competition's technical rules.

Staff the competition by simultaneous jobs

List the jobs happening at the busiest moment and assign trained people to them. A name appearing against several roles doesn't create coverage when two of those jobs happen together.

During Harbour's qualification rounds, both fields need the approved officiating, scoring and reset coverage, while teams need queue management and a person responsible for the work area. Reception, spectator admission and safeguarding still operate. The technical lead must be available for problems rather than permanently occupied taking public payments.

Some duties can change over during the day. A trained inspector might later help with queueing, provided someone else covers reinspection. Work out the handover, breaks and absence arrangements, and include them in the staffing cost. Don't make the schedule depend on everybody working continuously until the final trophy is handed out.

If minors attend, appoint a safeguarding lead and agree responsibilities with teams and the venue. Specify supervision, restricted areas, reporting concerns, photography and what happens if a young person becomes separated from their group. A team supervisor doesn't relieve the organiser of its own responsibilities.

FIRST's Youth Protection Program provides policies, training and reporting arrangements for its activities. An affiliated event must follow the requirements that apply to it. For an independent event, establish your own appropriate local arrangements with qualified advice, rather than claiming compliance with a programme you aren't part of.

Recruit for impartiality as well as technical knowledge. Ask officials about team connections and decide how conflicts are handled. Sponsors and entry-paying teams shouldn't be able to overrule inspections or select winners. Our children's event safeguarding guide develops the organiser's wider planning responsibilities when young participants are involved.

Check the budget against the entry cap

The financially useful question is whether the event works at the capacity you can deliver. If the budget requires 40 teams and inspection, tables and field time support only 24, you haven't found a marketing problem. You need to change the offer, funding or costs.

Here's a fictional USD budget for Harbour, used only to demonstrate the calculation. The fixed event cost is $9,000. It comprises $1,800 venue hire and access, $1,600 equipment and transport, $3,000 paid staffing including the organiser's work, $900 insurance and event support, $500 awards and printing, and a $1,200 reserve. The awards are already funded within that cost.

The staffing allowance must cover the full delivery roster and hours, including setup, breaks and relief. These invented amounts aren't recommended supplier rates. Replace them with quotes for your production and add any other costs you need to pay, including travel, accommodation or specialist support where required.

Harbour charges $250 per team. For this exercise, transaction costs, team materials and other entry-related costs total $30 per team, leaving $220 towards the fixed bill. That allowance covers the included participant and supervisor admissions; don't deduct their same costs again elsewhere. The model assumes no sales tax is due. Your actual tax treatment may change the calculation.

Confirmed sponsorship contributes $3,000 after its transaction and fulfilment costs. This is the amount available towards the fixed bill, not a headline sponsor invoice. Costs subtracted to reach it aren't also included in the $9,000. Spectator admission is $15, with $3 in associated costs, leaving $12 per paid spectator.

At 24 paid teams, the team contribution is $5,280. Add the $3,000 net sponsorship and you have $8,280, leaving $720 to cover. At $12 contribution each, that requires 60 paid spectators to break even. If 80 pay, the event makes $240 under these assumptions. That's a small surplus for a production with technical and staffing demands.

Now test a weaker entry result. At 20 paid teams, team contribution is $4,400. With the same sponsorship, the shortfall is $1,600, requiring 134 paid spectators after rounding up. If Harbour's approved paid public allocation is only 100, selling every one still leaves a $400 loss. The venue's allocation is a separate planning assumption, not a capacity standard.

At 24 teams and 100 paid spectators, the model produces $480 profit. Losing the sponsor turns that into a $2,520 loss. Those scenarios show how much depends on one income source. Our event budget guide explains the wider cost planning, but your robotics schedule determines how much entry income is possible.

Check cash timing as well. Deposits, equipment transport and staff commitments may need payment before entry receipts or sponsor funds become available. Keep a dated payment plan and money available for the refunds your terms and local obligations require. A profitable forecast doesn't pay a deposit if the cash arrives after it's due.

Give spectators a worthwhile visit without disrupting teams

Public admission needs an offer of its own. Families may come to support a team, while other visitors need an explanation of the challenge and a reason to stay. Publish the expected competition periods, lunch break, final and awards, including when the public can enter.

Harbour's spectators can watch the fields and final, but public tickets don't include worktable access, handling robots or entering controlled practice. Explain that before purchase. If you offer a public demonstration, give it dedicated equipment, staff and time rather than letting visitors interrupt teams preparing for their next attempt.

Work with the venue to establish the safe occupancy and allocations for the exact layout. Harbour's 24 teams can bring up to 96 competitors and 24 supervisors before you count staff, officials, sponsor guests or public tickets. Even if fewer competitors register, that doesn't automatically release more safe public capacity. Viewing space and exit arrangements still govern the approved allocation.

An announcer can explain what the robot is trying to do, why a reset is taking place and which scores are provisional. Show readable results that identify teams without exposing unnecessary personal information. Avoid making the only useful explanation a fast-moving display or a commentary people cannot hear clearly.

For public admission, Loopyah's ticketing tools let you offer ticket types and prices, take payment and send a confirmation email linking to QR tickets. That gives spectators a clear purchase and ticket-retrieval process. Keep robot eligibility, rosters, inspection records and the competition schedule in the system your event requires.

Before sales open, test a public purchase through to arrival. Check the ticket description, included areas, date and confirmation. Then test someone with several guests on one order and someone who bought public admission but expected competitor access. Fix the wording while the misunderstanding is still an inexpensive test.

Sell to prepared teams and promise sponsors only what fits

Team recruitment should start with the technical offer and preparation time. Contact relevant clubs, schools, colleges and independent teams with the rules, fee, eligibility and deadline. A general robotics audience may love the idea but lack a compatible robot or the time to build one.

Ask likely captains about the practical commitment. Can they arrange supervision, transport, the entry payment and a working robot by the date? Which rule is unclear? Their answers can reveal a weak offer before you sign the largest nonrefundable costs. Expressions of interest still aren't paid entries, so keep both figures distinct in the budget review.

Publish useful preparation information and a fair shared clarification process. You might run a technical question session, with answers recorded on the event information page. Make it clear that attendance doesn't secure an entry or confer approval. Every team should receive material rule clarifications, including those that couldn't attend the session.

For sponsors, sell specific deliverables you can fulfil without changing the competition. An approved sign, a staffed demonstration area outside the team route or an acknowledgement in the programme is easier to define than unrestricted access to competitors. Don't promise participant contact details or informal influence over results as part of the package.

Loopyah's event sponsorship tools let you define priced packages, included perks and quantities, with approval available when you want to review the brand before payment. You still decide what rights exist, whether the technical team can support an activity and how you will deliver it. A paid package shouldn't become an unplanned robot demonstration inside your recovery time.

Review sales on a decision date before the next major commitment. Harbour's weaker-entry calculation gives the organiser a reason to renegotiate costs or secure more confirmed funding. Increasing the team cap is available only if inspection, workspace, staffing and rehearsed field time all support it.

Rehearse the failures before event day

Run a complete test using the actual fields, scoring process, network and staffing positions. Bring representative robots and include a slow team arrival, a failed inspection and a disputed score. Time what people really do, including walking back to a worktable and fetching the next robot.

Check whether both fields produce comparable conditions. Measure the course and inspect objects, lighting and scoring equipment. Decide how field assignments work and how you handle evidence that a field caused a different result. Teams should understand the published rerun policy before the first attempt, rather than negotiating one after losing.

Use a test competition in whatever scoring software your format permits. Keep rehearsal data separate from live registrations and results. Confirm who can edit scores, how corrections are recorded and how you restore a recent checked copy if equipment fails. A spare laptop is useful only when someone knows how to load the event onto it.

Write an interruption plan for the loss of a field. At Harbour's assumed pace, one remaining field needs 432 minutes for 72 qualification attempts, before breaks and finals. You cannot quietly retain the two-field timetable. Decide in advance who can pause the event, authorise a safe replacement or apply the disclosed changed-programme and refund arrangements.

Rehearse a field stop and restart under the technical lead's procedure. People need to know who declares the area safe, who records the result and who speaks to the team. Avoid a restart simply because an announcer is worried about losing the audience.

Finally, walk the public and team arrival routes with reception staff. Check an unpaid entry, a missing roster member, a late supervisor replacement and an attendee asking for an access adjustment. Send the final team pack only after these tests confirm that your instructions describe a process the crew can actually follow.

The pack should answer the questions a captain is likely to receive during the journey. Include the unloading location, parking arrangements, permitted equipment, appointment time, roster reference, included admissions, food arrangements and the contact for a travel delay. Provide the rules and day schedule in an accessible format people can retrieve on a phone, with a printed alternative available on arrival.

Keep staff instructions more detailed. The public pack doesn't need private emergency contacts or the full incident procedure, but the reception lead does need to know whom to call when the named supervisor hasn't arrived. Check that every instruction has a responsible person available at the time it matters. "Ask the organiser" is inadequate when that person is managing a field fault on the other side of the hall.

Run the day from one current competition record

Start with the staff briefing and field checks before opening team reception. Confirm the current rules, inspection authority, team contacts, communication channels and emergency responsibilities. If a key person is absent, resolve coverage before the duty begins.

At reception, connect each arriving team to its approved roster and inspection appointment. At inspection, record the actual robot outcome. At the field, check the current approval and scheduled attempt. These are connected steps, but none should be assumed complete because the previous desk waved someone through.

Keep the recovery block under the competition lead's control. Authorised reruns, equipment faults and late running need recorded decisions. If you spend that time early, update the forecast finish and tell the event manager. A sponsor visit or extra informal attempt shouldn't consume it without anyone noticing.

Handle scoring queries through the published process. Preserve the relevant evidence, distinguish a recording mistake from a referee's judgement and document the authorised correction. Tell teams when standings are final before they pack away or leave. A quiet edit after the awards can change who should have reached the final.

After the event, reconcile paid entries, actual attendees, refunds, sponsor receipts and every outstanding bill. Compare planned and actual inspection duration, field turnaround, reruns and staffing hours. Ask teams whether the rules and preparation pack allowed them to arrive ready, and ask the crew which task repeatedly made the next attempt late.

Use those findings to decide the next edition's entry cap before announcing it. If the same format only worked by using every recovery minute and keeping staff beyond their booked finish, price or redesign it before offering more places. The next sale should be based on the competition you've proved you can deliver.