Re: [Debconf-team] A better budget analysis
Hi
Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.com.au> writes:
> On 30/10/12 03:20, Richard Darst wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This email is from darst (who takes responsibility for most editorial
>> opinions) and hug, about budget things.
>>
>> Le Camp:
>> - ~ 95 kCHF fixed costs, which about matches a "safe" initial
>> sponsorship estimate.
>> (65 kCHF all accom and 30 kCHF other)
>> - This is with no attendees. Each additional attendee costs ~225/week
>> (due to food only).
>> - Each extra professional registrant, (600 CHF/week), allows 2.6
>> attendees to come [so 1.6 sponsored attendees]
>> - But these 1.6 sponsored attendee-weeks must also cover DebCamp
>> people
>> - Each extra bronze sponsor allows 9 attendees to come, gold, 50 to
>> come.
>> - This is with NO travel sponsorship at all.
>> - Each 10 kCHF travel sponsorship costs 45 attendee-weeks
>> - There seems very little potential for reducing overhead costs (70
>> - kCHF lecamp) or per-person (34 CHF/person-day food)
>> - If we get to more than 400 person-weeks, per-person costs go up,
>> - since we must pay more accom. (324 beds total, it is unlikely we'll
>> - get to this much without > 100 at DebCamp).
>>
>>
>> Interlaken:
>> - ~50 kCHF of overhead costs (20 kCHF venue + 30 kCHF other)
>> - Each attendee costs about 350/week (since we must pay per-attendee
>> accom)
>
> It would be interesting to see two variations of the Interlaken figures,
> one without food, the other with food (and possibly a third variation
> where we budget lunch only/no dinner, 20 CHF/day). This would showcase
> the inherit flexibility of the Interlaken plan.
IMO this is a flexibilty that I don't agree to. I'd prefer to limit the
amount of sponsored participants instead of not providing food.
>> - The savings of overhead allow about 140 attendees to attend.
>> - Each 600 CHF prof attendees allow 1.7 attendees to come. [so .7
>> sponsored attendees]
>> - Each sponsor...
>> - Each bronze sponsor allows 5.7 attendees to come
>> - Each gold sponsor allows 34 attendees to come
>> - This is also with NO travel sponsorship at all.
>> - Each 10 kCHF travel sponsorship costs 30 attendee-weeks.
>> - Due to all the options and time before commitment, there is a lot of
>> - potential to reduce the costs.
>>
>> Common to both:
>> - We assume 100 kCHF income. This is still quite a lot more than past
>> years, but not totally fanciful.
>> - All "person-week" things above include DebCamp. So if we can afford
>> 150 person-weeks, that could mean 50 DebCamp and 100 DebConf only.
>> - **NO* travel sponsorship included*! This means this DebConf will
>> exclude many people who can't afford to come. I think this is a
>> problem for both of these options so far...
>>
>>
>> Comparison:
>> - Le Camp and Interlaken cost the same for 360 attendee-weeks. Below
>> this, interlaken is cheaper, above this, lecamp is cheaper
>> - Above 400 person-weeks, we have to pay per-person accom at le
>> camp, so it becomes more expensive.
>
> In other words, Le Camp is only cheaper for 360-400 people, and ONLY if
> those extra people all agree to sleep in tents.
That's wrong. As these are person weeks. So with 360 people we can
expect at least 40 for DebCamp, so nobody has to sleep in tents. And
with 400 I'd still assume about 80 DebCamp participants and then still
nobody has to sleep in tents.
>
>> - According to these calcs, we need 133 professionals (at 600
>> CHF/week) to achieve 360 person-weeks at le camp (or lots of extra
>> sponsorship). So given our likely situation, le camp remains more
>> expensive.
>
> It has previously been speculated that the professional fee should ONLY
> cover the actual per-person cost. If professional fees subsidise other
> attendees, it is more like the professionals are mini-sponsors and
> should get to put their name and logo on the web site. However, the
> issue is more significant than that: by not reducing the fee, it
> actually means less people will be tempted to self-pay and more people
> will try to line themselves up for fully sponsored attendance.
In my understanding the professional fee was always intended to cover
the per person costs. These include their share of the fixed costs. The
numbers darst and hug presented as per person costs are the marginal
costs of an additional person per week. While this is a useful number
for internal calculations I don't think this is a reasonable basis for
any fee.
>
>> Notes:
>> - Interlaken 350/week = CHF25 accomodation (including breakfast) +
>> CHF25 food (lunch+dinner) / day
>> - if we lower to food budget to CHF 20? CHF315/week
>
> We had meals at the Chinese place by the station on Friday, main dishes
> between 15 - 20 CHF. People can get a 1.5L water bottle at CoOp for
> 0.25 CHF. Therefore, I think the budget can be 20 CHF/meal maximum.
I don't understand your reasoning here. The CHF 25 above include two
complete meals while the restaurant price was only one main dish. And
this was a surprisingly cheap restaurant.
Gaudenz
--
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter.
Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
~ Samuel Beckett ~
Reply to: