[macintux]

The alternative for this event though seems to be no payment at all, so escrow would seem to be better than “I promise I’ll pay you later”.

[Raed667]

Unless they have a relationship with the shop, they probably already advanced the payment or a large portion of it.

[inkcapmushroom]

The escrow is not for you and the print shop, the escrow is for the sponsor and you. If this is a typical case where you have to front the money for printing and then get the sponsor money after the fact, then escrow would protect you from companies deciding they would rather not sponsor four days before the event, and well after things have been printed.

If on the other hand companies usually pay up front for a sponsorship, then escrow would not be needed.

[robertlagrant]

So then escrow would be better than the current situation?

[JumpCrisscross]

> escrow would be better than the current situation?

Print shops won’t accept escrow, so you’d still need a guarantor. They’re screwed if escrow is revoked or payment never comes. You also won’t use escrow for a €5,000 donation on account of cost: to the agent, for the contract and in the added search cost for a sponsor.

[hgsgm]

Techfest pays anyway. That's the point. Escrow protects techfest from sponsor reneging, and protects sponsor from techfrst embezzlement.

[jen20]

The alternative is get paid up front before producing any collateral with the sponsor name on it.