HKA wrote:Thanks for the compliments, although I believe if you read my post a little more carefully, some of your answers are there.
I am NOT suggesting that the goal should be to make $30,000, although some might think that should be the goal. Again, to me, the perfect Congress should break even exactly, but, in order to make sure you do not lose money, it is usual that some money is made. When I ran the Congress, I lowered prices from the year before and increased the prize fund. I was diligent in cost controls and some folks complained, and others said I should raise the price since folks paid more last year and make more money. I cannot recall how much profit resulted, but it was under $10,000 and more than I would have liked (by the way, I do not mean to brag - though I take credit for a frugal overal philosophy - Sam Zimmerman handled far more of the detail work and the follow through than I did - he gets 90% of the credit). Because I think we should make it as affordable as possible.
My understanding the loss was approximately $20,000. There were about 400 folks at the Congress, therefore, breakeven would have meant $50 more each to close that gap. Of course, $50 more means a few more folks do not come, and the problem continues.
The Minutes excerpt referred to a $30,000 profit this year - to turn a $20,000 loss to a $30,000 gain with 400 folk would be, I believe, $125 more each.
Yes it is difficult to forcast - which is precisely what I said. You have some per person costs, some fixed costs. You need to charge enough to cover both, but if you set the price point at an attendance of 400, and 500 show, the fixed costs stay the same, and a profit occurs. If only 300 show, a loss results.
Why hold a Congress there? Again, did you read my post? First of all folks were willing to do it. Second, it was thought that finally having a Congress in So Cal was an important thing to do. It was hoped that a new location would bring in fresh locals and more folks from other places with the event being in a new area.
I do not have any inside info on what went wrong, but I have alot of experience with how these things are run. It is easy to not think of everything you need for an event that moves to different locations each time it happens. And it is important that this be a movable feast, because people's first Congress is usually one closest to them, and it is usually not their last.
I don't know if it's your intention, HKA, but t hurts my feelings when you ask if I read your post. Of course I read your post, and that is why I asked some clarifying questions. The purpose of writing is communication, and the fact that I still had questions means that there were some parts of the post that I wanted more clarification on.
I tried to make it clear that I appreciate that you are sharing information with us. I am not involved with the AGA, so even after reading your post, I just wanted some clarification. I didn't realize that asking for clarification would be met with claims that I didn't read what you posted. I am simply trying to communicate here.
That being said, it sounds like the $30000 profit you were mentioning in your post was a different figure than the $30000 loss that Feng Yun cited. I was confused, because these were the same numbers. It also sounds like a loss was not anticipated.
Despite having read both your original post and reply, however, it's still confusing to me why it was decided to hold congress in "So Cal" when it is so expensive there. Sure, people were willing to do it and there may be new locals that would attend, but a $30000 or $20000 or whatever amount loss is quite significant, and it seems odd to me that there aren't other areas in America that would have a good attendance without incurring such a loss.
But I am not asking for any further clarification on this, I have read both of your posts multiple times, and it doesn't seem like clarifying questions are very welcome.
In any case, thanks for the detail that you have provided. I think that it at least gives a better picture of what's going on with the AGA.
