Re: [AGA-sc] One little thing

[Erik Olson <erik@thekrib.com>]

As of late, I have been noticing that I really have immediately zoomed in 
on some odd triviality and completely missed the more important bigger 
message in several posts.  So, over dinner, while I was grousing about the 
bookstore income not looking right, Kathy asked me: "How much money did 
the AGA lose this year?"  "Lose?  We're actually fifteen grand ahead!"

Which led to us thinking back over the year or two and all the programs 
folks have been putting in place to make the AGA viable without counting 
on convention revenue... so I'd like to give a big pat on the back to 
everyone who helped make this happen.  Having the website and paypal stuff 
streamlined is nice, and the DVD's are cute (and will be a bigger blip in 
2005 :), but the real heart of the changes are:

  * Kathy for getting the ad program up and running (and Phil for shifting
    it into third gear)

  * Cheryl and Karen for figuring out how to reduce the printing costs

  * Fixing the bookstore rates so that we actually made money on each sale
    rather than losing money

  * Cheryl, Scott, Karen, David et. al. for blanketing conventions with
    flyers & bringing up the membership numbers

   - Erik

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Erik Olson wrote:

> Something's bugging me about these numbers... OK, the $640 net for media 
> sales sounds right, but I know that we sold a boatload more CD's and DVDs 
> than books last year.  So why does Book Sales show a disproportionately high 
> net revenue, which then feeds in and allows it to grab a proportionately 
> higher slice of the allocation pie in your final analysis?
>
> Ah, I think I know...Didn't we buy those books (APHB and Tropica) in previous 
> years?  So there would be no expenses for the actual cost of the books in 
> 2004, and any books sold would appear as pure profit (minus mailing). So we 
> probably didn't REALLY make $2200 in book sales, it's just that if a similar 
> analysis was done for 2003 or 2002 it would show it as a loss or closer to 
> break-even.  Had we been replenishing stock at the same rate of sales, the 
> net would have been lower.
>
> I'm also note sure of how back issue sales related to books in the Allocation 
> analysis... guessing it was one of the categories that got eaten up and fed 
> into the six that were analyzed.
>
>  - Erik
>
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, S. Hieber wrote:
>
> > Hearing Dave's name mentioned made me think about money.
> > And that's when I remembered my deadline for stitching
> > together a 2004 financial report.
> >
> > Letting the quest for neither quantity nor quality stand in
> > the way of progress, I am submitting for question and
> > comment a draft report.
> >
> > If it flies, we can commit it to the archives. Those that
> > misbehave will have to stay after class and commit it to
> > memory.
> >
> > ciao,
> > sh

--
Erik Olson
erik at thekrib dot com
_______________________________________________
AGA-sc mailing list
AGA-sc@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-sc