Re: [AGA-sc] [AGA-conheads] Projections

["Karen Randall" <krandall@rdrcpa.biz>]

The Danes are staying 6 nights, if I count right... Thurs, Fri., Sat., Sun., 
Mon., Tues. Leaving on Weds.)

Karen

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "S. Hieber" <shieber@yahoo.com>
To: "Aquatic Gardeners Association Board" <aga-sc@thekrib.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [AGA-sc] [AGA-conheads] Projections


> I'm glad you asked. We're going to have Cheryl confirm my work and then 
> there will be a short quiz later this afternoon.
>
> In some scenarios it might make sense to boost the roomnights but I don't 
> think we're going to be in that situation.
>
> There are two penalties that come into play andthey are both based on the 
> number of roomnights sold:
>
> First, if we don't sell 90% of the 115 roomnights we asked for, we have to 
> pay for the rooms not rented (not counting the 10% allowance) - This means 
> we have to pay for the diff between roomnights rented and 104. Let's call 
> this the sleeper room penalty. So calling it will help us tell the two 
> penalties apart -- I asked them to wear diff color carnations but hey 
> wouldn't cooperate.
>
> Second, if we sell less than 115 roomnights, there is a sliding scale for 
> the cost of the meeting rooms. Let's call this the meeting room penalty.
>
> Here's why we won't pay for sleeper room penalties:
> Given the number of rooms that AGA2K6 will be renting, which I believe 
> comes to 24 if we include Ray Lucas (we buy him 3 night, rights?) in the 
> total count, and given current figure, excluding speakers and Ray, of 78 
> roomnights reserved/sold, we have a total of 102 roomnights. So we only 
> need 104 to make our threshold on the sleeper room penalty. I think we're 
> bound to make that between now and the convention. But even if we were 
> facing sleeper room penalties, it wouldn't help to just rent more nights 
> since each one we rented would offset the penalty with an additional 
> roomnight charge.
>
> Here's why we might face meeting room penalties and why it might make 
> sense to buy roomnights just to avoid meeting room penalties.
> We are 13 short of the threshold for the meeting rooms penalty. The 
> penalty if we sell between 100 and 115 roomnights is $500. We know we will 
> sell at least 100 roomnights so we don't have to worry about the higher 
> penalties for selling less than 100. Suppose we end up with 111 -114 
> roomnights sold. Then, it will be worth the $448 to $112 to buy more 
> roomnights to bring the total up to 115 and avoid the $500 penalty.  If we 
> sold less than 111 roomnights, then the cost of buying up the 5 or more 
> rooms would cost more than $500 penalty we would be trying to avoid.
>
> I still need to narrow down some things:
>
> Are the Danes staying 5 nights in the hotel or 4?
>
> Are we buying Ray 2 nights or 3?
>
> What is the current count of roomnights and does that include any AGA-paid 
> roomnights?
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Karen Randall <krandall@rdrcpa.biz>
> To: AGA BOD <aga-sc@thekrib.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2006 9:11:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [AGA-sc] [AGA-conheads] Projections
>
>
> Do these figures meam that at some point it makes sense for us to pay for
> the extra regs, even if they aren't use, rather than take the penalty hit?
> It would seem so from the amounts you have mentioned.
>
> Same thing with room nights.  How far off are we?  For an $8,000 loss, we
> could buy 80 room nights, right?
>
> Karen
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "S. Hieber" <>
> To: "Convention Planning" <aga-conheads@thekrib.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 8:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [AGA-conheads] Projections
>
>
>> For those wondering why the big swings in financial results with what
>> might seem small diffs in the number of paid regs, the reason is that the
>> hotel contract was negotiated on and estimated turnout and there are
>> penalties in the form of charges for unsold roomnights and for the 
>> meeting
>> rooms if the thresholds are not met. In each case the charges are based 
>> on
>> proportional or sliding scales, so as you move move farther from the
>> threshold, the financial effects are greater. As you get closer to the
>> threshold, those charges dwindle down to nothing. So at 90 regs AGA2K6 is
>> estimated to about breakeven, at 80 it's estimated to have about a $3,000
>> loss and if the convention were held today, with 67 regs, a net loss of
>> over $8,000.
>>
>> Compounding this, the average number of roomnights reserved per paid
>> registrant is lower than it has been for other AGA conventions, which
>> means, for AGA2K6, we need more registrants to make our roomnight
>> threshold. Apparently, we aren't getting tourist extra-day stayovers that
>> we had hoped for. At this point, purely form a financial point of view,
>> it's really roomnights that will help more than the number of
>> registrations, although we are unlikely to get more of the former without
>> more of the latter.
>>
>> sh
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: S. Hieber <shieber@yahoo.com>
>> To: aga-conheads <aga-conheads@thekrib.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2006 6:36:28 PM
>> Subject: [AGA-conheads] Projections
>>
>>
>> Right now, I'm projecting a financial breakeven if we hit 90 paid regs 
>> and
>> about a $3,000 net loss if we have ten less than that. We currently have
>> 67 paid regs, so hopefully we can pick up another 23 paid regs between 
>> now
>> and the convention.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aga-conheads mailing list
>> aga-conheads@thekrib.com
>> http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-conheads
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AGA-sc mailing list
> AGA-sc@thekrib.com
> http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-sc
>
> _______________________________________________
> AGA-sc mailing list
> AGA-sc@thekrib.com
> http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-sc
> 


_______________________________________________
AGA-sc mailing list
AGA-sc@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-sc