Hi Richard Thanks for your analysis.
Richard Darst <r...@zgib.net> writes: > Hi, > > This email presents different scenarios based on the amount of > fundraising accomplished. For each amount of amount of fundraising, I > list one option of what we can afford. Of course, money can be > shifted around in various ways, but the general magnitudes hold. The > goal here is to allow everyone to see the trade-offs, and judge for > themselves what is acceptable and likely. I really like this way to look at the problem. Each amount of sponsorship we get has an associated number of sponsored people we can afford. I much prefer to execute our flexibility in this way if it's really necessary than to cut on the food for everyone. > > Base assumptions: > - DC12 fundraising at 60 kUSD ~= 60 kCHF. So below, 100% = 60 kCHF. I don't think the DC12 numbers are a good point of reference. For DC12 looking for sponsors started very late (around March IIRC). We still have more than double the time to look for sponsors. Also the possiblities to find local sponsors in Nicaragua and Switzerland are not the same. > - 44 Professional and 2 corporate, or about 30 kCHF of money from this > source. Even this much is not guaranteed [see recent concerns on the > lists]. 44 is based on the number of single/double rooms we have to > sell. I think 44 Professionals is a very very conservative expectation. I think we should base our expectations around the numbers we had for DebConfs of similar size (~300 attendees). I also disagree that we have to promise a single or double room for professional attendees. I think we should at most promise a room with "literie nordique" and strive to put them into rooms with 4 or less beds. We have 80 of these beds. I suggest calculating with 60 professional attendees. I also don't think that people won't attend DebConf because of Le Camp. In my experience people are paying professional either because their company pays it or because they want to help Debian. Not to have more comfort. To convince me otherwise there should be multiple persons actually saying "I will skip this DebConf because of the poor accomodation and I paid professional in previous years." Without such statement I don't think we should base our decision on rumors. > - 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). If we want to make a worst case budget I think we should include these incomes. A more conservative estimate could be 7k CHF. This is still the same as 10 professionals. Gaudenz > > > 100% of DC12: > - We have 45 person-weeks. (zero sponsored attendees). We barely > have enough money to pay for food for professional attendees. No > travel sponsorship. > > 150% of DC12: > - 50 DebCamp attendees, 100 DebConf attendees (about 100 sponsored > person-weeks). Zero travel sponsorship. > > 200% of DC12: > - 50 DebCamp attendees, 150 DebConf attendees. (About 150 sponsored > person-weeks). About 20 kCHF travel sponsorship. > > 250% of DC12: > - 75 DebCamp attendees, 200 DebConf attendees. (About 230 sponsored > person-weeks). About 30 kCHF travel sponsorship. > > 250% of DC12, Option 2: > - 100 DebCamp attendees, 300 DebConf attendees. (About 355 sponsored > person-weeks). No travel sponsorship. > - This was the most recent budgets proposed by localteam, 1-2 weeks ago. > > 300% of DC12: > - 100 DebCamp attendees, 300 DebConf attendees. (About 355 sponsored > person-weeks). About 30 kCHF travel sponsorship. > - This was the "original budget" of localteam, several months ago, > before moderating it to make it a bit more realistic. (This email is > different also because it has new estimates of attendee fees). > > ~~~~ > > Commentary: > > This should show things are possible, but not ideal. For the more > realistic numbers, we would be undergoing a huge cost, for few > attendees and no travel sponsorship. The higher ranges here seem > unlikely until proven otherwise. This isn't to say that Interlaken is > necessarily better than Interlaken, because both are expensive [though > Interlaken will allow more attendees at 100%--250%, due to lower > forfait]. > > If we took the option of renegotiation to make it one week instead of > two, these numbers would look much more favorable due to halfving the > 63kCHF forfait for reserving the whole camp. > > So, which of these lines do people think are a) achievable in terms of > fundraising and b) a trade-off worth making? > > If anyone has questions about how this could be adjusted, let me know. > > ~~~~ > > My opinions: > > This is why I have proposed waiting a bit before deciding: time is our > friend, and lets us have a better idea about which of these categories > we can fall in, and then we can see if that's okay, or want to cost > cut more. At least I have reasoned myself out of total fears of > bankrupcy, but giving up attendees isn't a much better option... > > hug and I talked and (I think) we agreed that 150% is safe, 200% would > be optimistic. > > (hug and )I consider(ed) ~100+ professional attendees unrealistic, and > even 60-100 is pushing it unless I hear other new information. > > - Richard > > -- > | Richard Darst - rkd@ - pyke: up 1:28, 4 users > | http://rkd.zgib.net - pgp 0xBD356740 > | "Ye shall know the truth and -- the truth shall make you free" > _______________________________________________ > Debconf-team mailing list > Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org > http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team -- Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. ~ Samuel Beckett ~ _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
