2002-10-11 SvsG emails
18:58 from Nick
"The Small Balancing Act 2002.xls" was attached.
|Date:||Fri, 11 Oct 2002 22:58:32 -0400|
|From:||"N. Staddon" <email@example.com>|
|User-Agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020611|
|Subject:||financial math, and moving stuff|
From financial discussions Bubba and I had, we agreed I would calculate 2 things:
- 1. A column showing what the RH bank account's balance would be if RDA had not touched it (no deposits, no debits) with an eye towards whether some of the NSFs incurred might have been Red House's responsibility.
- 2. Reconciliation of his figures -- showing a small sales profit (about $600) for RDA -- versus my calculations showing a small loss (about $200) since June 1.
- *** #1:
1a. I've renamed the three main columns "differentials" rather than "balances", in the hope that this will avoid confusion over what the columns mean. For reference & clarity:
- The "RH Differential" is the amount RH would have gained or lost since June 1 if only RH transactions had been made, and neither Nick nor RDA had made any transactions (same as the bank balance IF it had started at $0)
- the "Nick Differential" is the amount of money that would have been gained or lost if Nick had been the only one making any transactions and neither RH nor RDA had made any
- the "RDA Differential" is the amount of money that would have been gained or lost if RDA had been the only one making any transactions and neither Nick nor RH had made any. The "June 1" differential starts the calculations on June 1, and the "July 1" differential starts July 1 (leaving out all the June transactions).
Note that since the account is owned by RH, the Nick and RDA differentials constitute amounts owed to or from RH by Nick and RDA respectively.
1b. I started the calculations with June 1, using RH's balance on June 3 of $953.72 (it had been slightly higher on June 1, but the previous transaction was back in mid-May so I used the closer date).
1c. The numbers were calculated by taking this initial balance, adding the "RH Differential" (i.e. RH's net gain or loss if no other parties were involved), and then also adding in the "Nick Differential", resulting in what the balance would have been if RH and Nick had been the only two entities making transactions -- i.e. if the RDA had not made any.
FINAL NUMBERS: The resulting balance does not go below $0. It gets as low as $198 briefly, but spends most of its time between $800 and $2000. I would consider that a reasonable working balance for a business of this nature.
So -- I still consider all the NSFs incurred during that time to be the RDA's responsibility, until/unless we can agree on figures which show something else.
(For future reference: if the resulting balance had gone negative, that wouldn't necessarily have let RDA off the hook; if I am depending on what the bank says the balance is, plus what debits and credits I know are "out there", to figure how much money there is, is it my fault if there's a transaction which I haven't been told about "out there"? If Lynne had bothered to keep me posted on all the transactions that she had put "out there", it would be a different matter. I raise this issue only to prevent anyone from thinking I had agreed to something I didn't agree to in the event it becomes an issue when we start figuring back further; hopefully it will be totally moot.)
- *** #2
Apparently the pages with Bubba's figures did not make it into the car; I hope they're in my room somewhere. Here are the figures I came up with, figuring it the way I understood Bubba was trying to figure it:
- total sales (since June 1): $4780.64
- total restock expenses (""): $4030.87
- RDA's share of sales: $ 3824.27
- RDA net loss (sales share less restock): $206.60 -- which is only a few cents off what I got earlier.
I've attached a copy of the spreadsheet in case you want to try & find the discrepancy with the figures Bubba was using. It doesn't include the transactions for the past week or two; I will update it when I have time.
I do hope we can have the f2f conversation Lynne wants to have to resolve the discrepancies in our accountings, but I expect to be pretty busy this trip and I won't sweat missing it if y'all won't -- as long as there continue to be no unauthorized transactions. As long as that continues to be the case, I will handle any NSFs from here on out, even though my figures show the balance would be much higher if not for RDA's transactions.
My current plan is to drive down Saturday noonish and stay until I've got the stuff moved out of the shed (Tuesdayish?). I'm planning to store it locally, and do any Big Truck moving later when it's more convenient.
Oh -- and in case people do start moving computer stuff from the shed -- there is at least one set of computer stuff I really don't want to give away, because nobody else would know how to use it (it's very obscure, and I have the manuals somewhere) -- it's an "IBM System 9000", weighs about like 2 laser printers, plus a weirdo monitor that only works with that system, and a pair of 8-inch floppy drives. If you're not sure which one it is, then you'd probably better wait until I get there.
(Actually, I'd love to give it away, but I'd want to make sure that the recipient knew what they were getting AND that they got all the pieces. Otherwise it won't work.)