Basically the biggest difference in the higher ratios vs the lower ones listed above is in the higher ratios we assumed different numbers for how long people continued to donate/ârun P2Ps. I suspect the lower numbers I outlined above are more realistic for this parameter.
Basically the biggest difference in the higher ratios vs the lower ones listed above is in the higher ratios we assumed different numbers for how long people continued to donate/ârun P2Ps. I suspect the lower numbers I outlined above are more realistic for this parameter.
To get to a ratio of 66-128 on financial costs, youâd need to expect to move $5-10m in net present value if you closed down charity science.
Given that the P2P fundraisers are raising about $100k per year, youâd need them to run for 75 years to get to $7.5m with no further investment.
If we also include discounting theyâd need to run for much longer (something like 5x as long).
This doesnât seem âidenticalâ to âother calculation methodsâ. What are these other methods?