Re: [Debconf-team] Budget tradeoffs vs amount of fundraising
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 07:40:12AM -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> Richard Darst <rkd@zgib.net> writes:
>
> > - All options have sponsored day trip / conference dinner. With the
> > large magnitude of monies we are talking about, removing this this
> > doesn't affect very much. Removing this last minute could close ~10
> > kCHF deficits.
> > - I exclude income based on bed upselling or bar profit, I'm not sure
> > it'll be so much. This is small compared to magnitudes below (~10
> > kCHF in localteam budget).
>
> I hesitate a bit to comment on this, because I recognize it is
> tangential to your main point. However, I do think that budgeting a
> sponsored day trip while budgeting zero travel sponsorship will leave a
> bad taste in many people's mouths. To put it another way, I'm fine with
> waiting to see if all the essentials are paid for before considering
> travel sponsorship, but I don't consider a sponsored day trip to be an
> essential aspect of DebConf.
Agreed. Here's my reasoning. At the no travel sponsorship range,
there are 50-100 attendees, costing 2000 for day trip / 2000 for
conference dinner. That's just small change, and probably would be
chosen to be moved to travel sponsorship anyway.
In general (and more of a suggestion for future years than anything),
I consider anything less than 10 kCHF (or really 20-30 kCHF) within
the uncertainty. It's more important to have a budget that can
gracefully expand or contract depending on many details which can vary
up to the last minute. So everything in my last emails is very, very,
very approximate.
- amount of sponsorship
- number of attendees
- number of paying attendees
- any discounts we get
- etc...
- Richard
--
| Richard Darst - rkd@ - pyke: up 15:46, 4 users
| http://rkd.zgib.net - pgp 0xBD356740
| "Ye shall know the truth and -- the truth shall make you free"
Reply to: