[Owasp-board] Taking a look at OWASP's current budget projections

dinis cruz dinis.cruz at owasp.org
Mon Aug 23 17:04:45 UTC 2010


So let me see if I got this right:

* our projected income for 2010 is 283k  and in the first 6 months we have
already made is 219k (k = 1000 USD)
* when OWASP doesn't have any revenue from conferences (i.e. the Q1 2010),
we had running expenses of 50k and income of 58k (with profit of 8k). Even
on Q1+Q2, if we take out the conferences income, we see that the running
costs of OWASP 100k just about match the non-conference income. This means
that our current membership model is enough to suport OWASP, which is what I
was hoping for.
* So taking into account that we still have large number of OWASP
conferences coming up in 2010 (and their current profit is not included in
the main budget (see '2010 Conference Income' tab for details)), are we
really ONLY expecting to make 11k profit from those conferences (130k -
119k)???  From the current numbers my only worry is the venue costs, but
that seems to be under control (see '2010 Conference Income' tab for
details).
* Since we are looking at a profit in 2010, it would be good to have the
current Balance Sheet value in there (which would give us the TOTAL amount
OWASP has available). My view is that the cost of the Summit (and other
direct project/chapter/committee sponsorships) should be seen as an extra
activity that OWASP does (funded by the 'yearly profits that we have')
* Missing from that list are: 15k for the Extra Training resource we about
to hire, 5K for support the Testing Guide, 5k for the Development Guide and
5k for the Code Review Guide (although we still have not seen a plan from
their leaders on how they want to spend that)
* why are we not paying for Larry's services/support? (I'm assuming that
that should come under 'Avg Aspect Support'). As far as I am aware, Larry is
still doing a LOT of stuff for OWASP, namely keeping the current
infrastructure running.

Alison, on the membership income, does that 99k value include the part
allocated for the chapters and projects? (which current stands at 54k + 3.5k
(see http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p6IFyntQTi7t-yH-peiD8Aw))

Dinis Cruz

Blog: http://diniscruz.blogspot.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/DinisCruz
Web: http://www.owasp.org/index.php/O2


On 20 August 2010 17:56, Kate Hartmann <kate.hartmann at owasp.org> wrote:

> FYI – some things to consider and discuss.
>
>
>
> Kate Hartmann
>
> Operations Director
>
> 301-275-9403
>
> www.owasp.org
>
> Skype:  Kate.hartmann1
>
>
>
> *From:* Alison Shrader [mailto:alison.mcnamee at owasp.org]
> *Sent:* Friday, August 20, 2010 12:11 PM
> *To:* 'Kate Hartmann'; dinis.cruz at owasp.org
> *Subject:* RE: free passes for training at conferences and 2010 summit
>
>
>
> I definitely agree with Kate that we need to be very cautious with our
> spending!  We had a loss in 2008 and 2009, so it would be really great to
> actually see a profit this year.
>
>
>
> I attached our current budget projections.  However, I had in here a profit
> of $130k from conferences for the year.  Based on some of the emails going
> around, it sounds like the US Conf may not have a large profit this year.
> Counting on the $130k profit from conferences, and putting in a budget of
> $50k for the Summit….we were pretty much breaking even.  So if we think the
> conference profits are going to be down, it may be a wise idea to put off a
> large Summit for now.
>
>
>
> Alison Shrader
>
> OWASP
>
> 9175 Guilford Road, Suite 300
>
> Columbia, MD 21046
>
> 301-575-0197
>
> alison.shrader at owasp.org
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Kate Hartmann [mailto:kate.hartmann at owasp.org]
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 19, 2010 4:23 PM
> *To:* dinis.cruz at owasp.org
> *Cc:* alison.shrader at owasp.org
> *Subject:* free passes for training at conferences and 2010 summit
>
>
>
> Alison, can you please forward Dinis the most recent budget projections?
>
>
>
> Dinis, Tony UV Skyped me today asking to register for free for the training
> for the conferences.  I had to put him off for a day or so until I can
> figure out how to do this.
>
>
>
> I would like to ask that you check about the possibility of these things
> before you offer them to folks.  I agree that we need to take care of our
> leaders – that’s not my concern – my concern is that we are making more and
> more tangibles free yet we want to continue spending as if we had unlimited
> resources.
>
>
>
> From a conferences perspective, the training is the second most important
> source of revenue (next to sponsorship $$$).  The cost of admission to the
> conference is fairly easy to comp since our cost is the equivalent of venue
> rental and lunch and we can probably make that up easily.  The training that
> is associated with the conferences is a bit different in that we have a
> financial obligation to pay the trainer 40% of the fees based on student
> count.  So, for a two day class associated with the conference, we charge
> $1350.  $540 of that comes right off the top to pay the trainer.  Then, you
> can deduct costs for venue and lunch and operations.
>
>
>
> Now, I realize that still leaves some money for OWASP, but if you consider
> that the training is what usually ends up making a profit for the conference
> and the conferences are one of our 2 main revenue sources, if we cut that
> profit out and turn it into a $540 expense for the conference (per chapter
> leader) then we could realize some significant losses.
>
>
>
> Another way to look at it might be to consider that the funds from that
> chapter leader’s training will be used to pay a portion of that chapter
> leader’s expenses to attend a global summit.  If we don’t get it from
> training, then we need to get it from someplace else.
>
>
>
> Sponsorships are better this year than last – although vendors are going as
> cheaply as possible.  Memberships are on the increase from last year –
> although the foundation does not really see much of that revenue yet.  So,
> the conferences are working to help recover the deficit from 2009.
>
>
>
> I would like to be involved in the planning of the 2010 summit.
>
>
>
> It had been originally planned to host a summit in DC very similar to last
> year.  I understand, however, that Europe is where the next summit needs to
> be held.  If OWASP is to grow, then we need to focus on where the needs
> are.  The US market is dense while Europe seems to be quickly catching up.
>
>
>
> I had proposed a compromise based on immediate need for an energy injection
> balanced with cost concerns.  Can we have a smaller, committee chair only,
> summit in conjunction with the DC conference and then prepare for a larger
> summit in Dublin with the EU conference?
>
>
>
> Wait…before you roll your eyes, listen to my questions and statements…
>
>
>
> 1.        Some guys cannot get time off from work (no vacation time) or
> their company will not consider it work related unless it is in connection
> with a conference.  Too much travel…too much time away from family…I can’t
> do both…these are some of the comments I get
>
> 2.       I saw your budget proposal for $150K for a summit.  I presume
> this is based on the numbers from Portugal.  I see you are proposing $100K
> in sponsorships and $50K from OWASP.  I have checked with Alison and while
> the $50K is tight, we could probably do that for an annual summit.  What I
> did not understand was how we could accept sponsorship $$$ for this?  Since
> this is the OWASP summit and is intended to map the direction of the
> foundation, what is in it for the vendors?  We cannot give the impression
> that they are mapping our course, so we need to be cautious and very open
> about the return for their investment.  Unlike conferences, we’re probably
> not giving them a table or letting them sell their products at our working
> sessions?
>
>
>
> Well, so that’s two comments/questions…
>
>
>
> I hate to always whine about where the money will come from, but that’s
> kind of part of my job.  I would love to be able to say “yes” all the time,
> but considering we have come out of a bad year (2009) and we are just now
> getting our bearings back, it seems to make sense to be a bit cautious with
> expenses (that drives creativity).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kate Hartmann
>
> Operations Director
>
> 301-275-9403
>
> www.owasp.org
>
> Skype:  Kate.hartmann1
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20100823/546d5828/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list