I’ve always assumed, in the absence of clarification, that a campus visit is simply worth two home visits based on pricing. Does anybody have more calculated insight?

Posted by ab90 on 10/1/2021 9:33:00 AM (view original):
I’ve always assumed, in the absence of clarification, that a campus visit is simply worth two home visits based on pricing. Does anybody have more calculated insight?

CV is more bang per buck than HV, period. I always do a CV before any HV

i had kinda assumed seble raised the HV:CV in 3.0 and therefore it was about 5:1. but i read something where he said he didn't adjust. which would mean its still the old value of ~2.7. i can't confirm either way on my 3.0 experience, its too thin and i've been too lazy

I had always used something like 2.4:1. I think that figure was based on average cost, but that was before 3.0. I don’t recall any discussion about the value being changed. I think what might have changed is that the relative cost of CVs came down a bit, because they’re no longer more than twice the cost of HVs.

if it didn't change then 2.7:1 is the number to use. i don't exactly remember how but that was a very tight bound. it might be 2.6 or 2.8, but anything outside that...

Posted by gillispie on 10/1/2021 1:43:00 PM (view original):
if it didn't change then 2.7:1 is the number to use. i don't exactly remember how but that was a very tight bound. it might be 2.6 or 2.8, but anything outside that...

I don’t know one way or the other if it changed or not. Honestly, if I recall, I think it’s one of the things seble wouldn’t talk about. 2.7 makes sense, if we assume “more bang for the buck” because like I said, I was just going on cost alone. If CVs were designed to give a little more value, then a higher HV:CV ratio would be in order. The one thing I’m pretty sure of is that CVs are a little cheaper now, relatively speaking, anyway. If they retained the same value advantage, I would assume that means even more bang.