🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4450@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> yar@cluster.cs.su.oz (Ray Loyzaga) writes:
>In article <54@quark.ansto.gov.au> frank@iris.ansto.gov.au (Frank Crawford) writes:
...
>>Unfortunately it's not realistic to post it.  It was put together from
>>a number of different sources, but mostly from a Macintosh, and I wouldn't
>>look forward to typing it all back in.  If you are really interest we could
>>FAX or mail you a copy.
>
>Hmmm, you mean it is already on a computer and it is impossible to upload
>it to a machine on the net? Why not kermit it? Why not send me the floppies
>and I'll do it.

Given the amount of trouble we have had in the past get information to/from
ACMS's system I hate to even try.  Remember it isn't in a nice text file
waiting for upload/download it's in various spreadsheets and not
directly under AUUG's control.  It also isn't connect to any network or
such, think back to any small business you have seen and think of the
fun you would have getting such information.

Again if you want a copy let me know your FAX number or postal address
and I'll send it.

>>>							Is it also possible
>>>to report on the average price per sqare metre for a stand at the
>>>exhibition. I need this to work out for myself how a conference
>>>that charges >$400 and has 499 attendees, manages to sell 1902 square
>>>metres of exhibition space, has professional organisers and commercial
>>>sponsorships, still manages to barely break even, and thus is unable
>>>to provide an increased level of service to its members.
>>
>>I haven't got the exact figure on me, but I believe it was about $300/sq m
>>(This year is $270, and Darling Harbour is more expensive).
>
>Ok finally some numbers... 1902 * 300 = $570600
>Now hom much does the fabulously expensive Darling Harbour Exhibition
>hall cost .... $9555 per day, hmmm, thats  $28665,  that only leaves
>us $541935 to spend on hiring carpet, partitions and providing a
>single power point per stand, plus 2 lights. And of course some security
>guards ... so if Darling Harbour cost $0, it would have only meant
>$28665 more profit... sorry the Darling Harbour is expensive line
>doesn't work.

Your figures are close but not quite right, firstly it was $250/sq m
(my mistake) so that brings it down to $458625 + $33750 in sponsorship.

The expenses are more complicated, but come to $205412.76, and includes
4 days hire of the exhibition hall (1 day to move in and set up), 
$62783 for carpets stands, etc, $66273 for marketing (for the exhibition
not the conference - you might not have noticed it but it was going on
through out the preceeding year).

That left a profit of $286962.24 for the exhibition, however it isn't
all ours.  For a number of years the exhibition has been organised by
ACMS and from the exhibition we split the profit 70% ACMS / 30% AUUG
(which is reasonably fair, considering we do no work for it).

This left AUUG with a profit from the exhibition of $99588.67.

>>One major reason is the cost of staging a conference at Darling Harbour
>>(as opposed to an exhibition).  It is very expensive, and there are many
>>additional costs that aren't considered (such as the A/V operator) which
>>are imposed on us by the venue.
>Really, but the cost of 1/3rd of an Auditorium (what we had), seats 1050 people,
>full day (i.e. from 7am until midnight) $3500, so the total cost of
>the room and seats is $10500., or just over $20 per attendee.
>My god of couse it is the A/V operator, says here it is between
>$35-45/hour, now that seems to be ~$500 a day, or $1 per attendee per day...
>To put this hogwash about Darling Harbour being expensive into perspective
>the cost of providing tea/coffee and those cute little almond cookies
>is $4.80 per attendee, twice a day, or $28.80 for the duration of the
>conference, which is more than the conference auditorium and that
>hideously expensive audio/visual man put together.
>Ok, there are other expenses, like the o/h projector and the screen, which
>add a couple of $k to the total expenses, but come on lets not pretend
>that the venue is the problem, most of these other expenses will need to
>be incurred at any location, the actual Darling Harbour costs are pretty
>reasonable to me, i.e. I would pay $20 for three days at Darling Harbour
>rather than under a tent in a park, so where are the rest of the costs?

Unfortunately you forgot all about the food you ate, the proceedings you
received and other bits and pieces, all charged at Darling Harbours
rates.  The dinner was $70/head, lunches, etc, $140/head, printing and
other freebies $70/head + some other bits, giving a total of $343/head
out of a members fee of $395.

Some of the other expenses include ~$15000 for meeting room hire (you
forgot the tutorials), $36000 for speaker support (including airfare
and accomodation for people such as Rob Pike and Evi Nemeth, free
attendance to all speakers, and making slides).

Taken all together the income from the conference was $190116.15 and
the expenses were $273901.00.  This gave us a loss of $83784.85 for the
conference, and a profit of $15787.64 over both events.

However that isn't the end of the story, AUUG also had a stand in the
exhibition and although we didn't have to pay for the space, we did have
to pay for the stand itself, hiring people and a number of other items.
These came to a bit over $10000 which gave a "profit" of less than
$5000.  This figure is not exact because there were somethings related
to the AUUG stand that are hard to allocate.  Also at the time of
printing the final report there were still some organisations owing
money, which (if it was all collected) would give us around $10000.

>>The budgeting and hence approvals for various expenses (such as advertising)
>>were based on a larger number of attendees, however, the smaller number
>>didn't mean any smaller outlay.  Also the tutorials were very poorly
>>attended last year, and they were an area that had previously generated a
>>considerable income.

To give this some perspective, if attendence had of been our budgetted
figure of 450, we would have made a profit from the conference and
exhibition of ~$50000.

>>There are many other points that add to it, but, certainly the committee is
>>very concerned about the same matter.
>>
>
>Send me the data and I will match it up with the numbers that the
>Exhibition Center kindly mails out to anyone that enquires ....
>Oh by the way. my numbers could be wrong, they are effective from
>July 1992, so maybe they are inflated some what, it would have been a
>little cheaper last year.

As you should see from above, your numbers are not wrong, they just
leave out many items.

							Frank Crawford