Re: [Debconf-team] Budget tradeoffs vs amount of fundraising [Interlaken]

[Richard Darst <rkd@zgib.net>]

Hi,

This email concerns the idea of another venue (Interlaken) which has
lower fixed costs.  As stated previously, this should be much more
affordable for small amounts of sponsorship.

Base assumptions are same as before:
- Going in terms of DC12 fundraising, 100% = 60 kCHF.  hug and I
consider 150% safe and 200% a lot.
- 44/2 prof/corp.
- Sponsored day trip / conf dinner
- 50 CHF per person per day (food + accom)
- 50kCHF fixed costs (20 kCH F for venue and 30 kCHF for other things)
- [In the descriptions below, I use the same amount of travel
sponsorship for each percentage level as my last email, otherwise it
is hard to mentally compare.]

100% of DC12:
- 120 person weeks (40/80) (vs 45 le camp), about 75 sponsored (vs
zero sponsored at lecamp) 
- no travel sponsorship

150% of DC12:
- 225 person-weeks (50/175) (vs 150 person-weeks lecamp).
- (no travel sponsorship)

200% of DC12:
- 250 person-weeks (50/200) (vs 200 lecamp)
- 20 kCHF travel sponsorship

250% of DC12:
- 305 person-weeks (75/230) (vs 275 lecamp), 
- 30 kCHF travel sponsorship

300% of DC12:
- Same as lecamp numbers.

~~~~

Commentary: I think this illustrates the main point about having a
contract with lower fixed overhead costs.  For smaller amounts of
money, we can sponsor many more people to attend.  By the time it
becomes equal, le camp is maxed out.  The same will be true anywhere
we don't have such a large fixed cost (or with a shorter time).

- Richard

-- 
| Richard Darst  -  rkd@          -  pyke: up 5 days, 19:14
|            http://rkd.zgib.net  -  pgp 0xBD356740
| "Ye shall know the truth and -- the truth shall make you free"