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/run P2Ps. I suspect the lower numbers I outlined above are more realistic for this parameter.
Could you explain how you got these ratios?
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/run 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, you’d 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, you’d need them to run for 75 years to get to $7.5m with no further investment.
If we also include discounting they’d need to run for much longer (something like 5x as long).
This doesn’t seem “identical” to “other calculation methods”. What are these other methods?