Prev: Emirates faces protectionism
Next: how are you?
From: semiretired on 14 Jul 2010 21:10
On Jul 12, 6:52 am, "Buddenbrooks" wrote:
>semiretired wrote
> On Jul 11, 5:21 pm, "Buddenbrooks" wrote:

> >You can be certain that the staff payrole for the
> >week they are charging E25 is a lot less than when
> >the higher charge applied.

> You may be certain, but I am not.
> You really have no idea of the inelasticity
> of hotel wages and salary costs, particularly
> at the higher end of the market.

>An assumption on your part, however I do understand
>human nature and where a premium rate is charged a
>premium service is expected, Even when a company
>is paying the sort of people in the sort of position that
>their company is willing to pay 'executive' expenses are
>the sort of people who desire things their way.
>As for inelasticity, all service industries are elastic in their
>staffing costs. My wife is in the service industry and has
>a contract for 20 Hrs per week, which unless laid off
>happens. She is normally expected to work 45 Hrs. If work
>is slack staff are wound down to contract hours with no notice.
>If things get busy and contract staff are unable to add
>any more hours then agency staff are brought in, which
>are at a much higher hourly rate.
>The local pub has rooms which are only occasionally
>booked. One girl works at the bar weekends only if the
>rooms are occupied. This is to release a girl to take
>up the extra load of servicing the guests.
>In fact I can't think of any business I deal with that does
>not have flexible staffing costs through overtime, temporary,
>agency or locums.

You are seeing things from the edges and do not appreciate
that the difference made to total wages and salary costs
is relatively small when management salaries and the costs
of covering all departments for all trading hours must be
met regardless of a greatly reduced customer demand.
However if you cannot accept this, there is little point of
arguing further.
From: Buddenbrooks on 15 Jul 2010 02:00

<semiretired(a)my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:147e96d2-e801-47d4-9c50-e59bdb5d17fd(a)q12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

>On Jul 12, 6:37 am, "Buddenbrooks" <knightstemp...(a)budweiser.com>
>wrote:

>You seem to have a talent for misreporting.
>Please try harder.

Maybe, but I think you underestimate the ingenuity of accountants to
minimize tax liability of their clients.

From: Buddenbrooks on 15 Jul 2010 12:20

<semiretired(a)my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:ee8e77be-52a7-4ed4-8bb0-2ba73e2cf909(a)k39g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 12, 6:52 am, "Buddenbrooks" wrote:

>However if you cannot accept this, there is little point of
>arguing further.

There is always a point where views become entrenched. I dont run a Hotel so
I can only view
from the 'edges'. I have a computer model for a Prague hotel produced by a
German Accountency firm
which allows occupancy, staff wages etc to be entered and the profitability
to be predicted..

A glorified Excel spreadsheet really, but it does allow for a lot of
flexibility of parameters, which you seem to suggest are 'fixed management
costs' .

In any case my original point was that to run a hotel you have to understand
where your costs are, down to room servicing per night. Room pricing is
another issue.



First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Emirates faces protectionism
Next: how are you?