meal plan math, or why it’s better not to think about things like this
Some time ago, my dear pal Adlai made a post on my Facebook page. Adlai decided to break out his calculator and do some number crunching because he was deciding which mandatory meal plan to choose.
Not that this should surprise anyone, but according to our calculations, it’s actually almost $1000 cheaper to buy every meal with cash (even more so with flex points) than it would be to use a meal plan.
Here’s how I see it:
With 14-flex, the most popular and most-recommended meal plan, a student can attend fourteen meals a week. The two most expensive meals are dinner and lunch, $8 and $6.75 respectively. If we assume that a person attended every single lunch and dinner possible (on the weekends, it’s brunch, but brunch is also 6.75–so it’s moot), taking into account that the Fall’s finals period ends mid-week, and that there’s no food service for Thanksgiving break, we get something that looks like this:
((6.75+8)*7) * 16 – (6.75+8)*2 – (6.75+8)*4 = $1,593
In English, that’s:
((cost of food in a day)*(days in a week)*weeks in semester – (mealtimes without food service)
Then calculate it for the Spring semester:
((6.75+8)*7) * 16 – (6.75+8)*7 – (8+6.75) = $1,534
How much is a 14-flex plan? $2178/semester.
2178-(1593+150) = $435
2178-(1534+150) = $494
Edit: To clarify–that’s (cost of meal plan) – (cost of meals with flex + 150 flex points included in 14flex plan) = difference, in dollars, between having a meal plan and not. The sums are per semester, so add them together to get our annual total of $929.
By this math (which doesn’t even factor in the 10% bonus if we purchase flex points), it is at least $929 cheaper not to be on the most popular meal plan, even if one were to pay to eat the same amount of the most expensive meals.
I don’t know *why* this discrepancy exists, but it’s certainly interesting to think about. I can’t find any information on the website about where the meal plan money actually goes (I imagine that the school gets a cut and Bon Appetit gets a cut). Perhaps there’s a different arrangement between the college and Bon Appetit for food that is purchased directly? Regardless… even if the explanation is innocuous (which I expect it probably is), I think we deserve to know why it looks like we’re being fleeced out of $1000.
[Administrator]
Cary
kennner
dshack
maishaparadox
angelalc
I think, unfortunately, as long as the meal plan cost can be factored into your financial aid package while the out of pocket cost estimate for food costs comes in lower, it potentially screws you out of some aid not to take the meal plan.
This is a good reason to get the cost closer to reality, IMO. I’m just saying, even knowing I was getting screwed, I would have kept the meal plan if it meant more money from my grant pool or subsidized loans, especially if finding a job to cover those costs meant being forced to look off campus when I didn’t have a car and couldn’t have afforded a parking permit even if I’d had one.
Hey Cary, thanks for the article, and for translating the equation into English for all us unmathematical thinkers. Could you also provide an English translation of that last pair of equations, for the sake of clarity? (After staring at them long enough I understood what all the numbers meant, but it may be helpful for your other readers who don’t want to take the time to work out the meaning of the arithmetic.)
Unfortunately, figuring this out did me no good, as I soon learned that only apartment-dwellers may go with a flex-only plan. It was a sad day for me.
Thanks for putting this somewhere more people will read it, though.
I’m not sure if the apartment-dwellers actually get to go with true flex-only plan either…
…that is to say, if you were simply giving the Bon $500 directly for flex points, you would actually get more than $500 worth of flex (I think it’s something like $1 –> 1.1 flex) — I am not sure if the same holds true for the $500 apartment plan.
Unless it has changed since last Spring, the flex-only plan is 1:1; you don’t get the cool discount.
I actually calculated this years ago when I was a student there and yeah it’s been like that for a long time. I asked around about it and was told the costs of running the Bon is higher than what they charge at the door, so basically the students with their financial aid covered plans have to pitch in extra for the costs while not completely screwing over visitors who just want to eat. Is it fair to charge basically 25% more on people for that? Not sure.
But if you did the other calculations you’d find out that the most cost efficient plan (outside of 500 flex) is actually the 19 meal plan. It’s still more expensive than paying for all the meals, but only by a few hundred if I remember correctly. The 7 flex (or was it 10 flex, I can’t remember what it was) was the biggest rip off, which really makes no sense. I feel like it should be a flat percentage hike. Why punish those who are trying to save money? If they really want that money, it wouldn’t hurt them that much to throw more flex points in there.
I would agree. I think the answer here, assuming what you say is accurate, and I think it is (I actually did a lot more math than that which I posted, but it all led to the same conclusion, so I just chose to illustrate the point with 14-flex), is simply “because they can.” The financial aid explanation makes sense, as far as capitalism’s concerned–if the large pools of aid cash are going to pay for a good portion of the student body’s food, why not charge more for it?
That being said, I think that it’s a deceptive practice, and we at least deserve an official explanation.
I did the math as well at the start of the term. Needless to say I wasn’t really happy about it either. I arranged a meeting with Jeff Feld-Gore to ask some questions, here are some of the answers that I got:
-The college takes some of the money out of our meal plans to pay for the upkeep of the Templeton’s food service facilities. If I recall correctly this money also goes to Maggies and the Dovecote.
-Ergo, the Bon gets less money than the student body believes it is getting. Jeff could not tell me how much the school is taking off the top, though he suggested that the accounting books were closed since this is a private institution.
-I asked why students who are living off campus don’t have to pay a part of food facilities’ upkeep, as they eat on campus as well, albeit with less frequency than the rest of us. Jeff said that it’s assumed that everyone will pay their two years in fees when they’re required to live on campus. (So what about people like me who choose not to leave after two years? I’m all for helping other people out, but I’d like to know that I’m doing it.)
-Finally, there was some waffling on why there is such a huge discrepancy between the 19 and 7-flex meal plans. Jeff explained that approx. 95% of students get a 14-flex meal plan, to indicate that most students are only paying $9.50 a meal. This is great and all, but it’s very likely that many students are choosing this plan because it’s the most economically sensible. i.e. The plans that cost more money for less food aren’t realistic options for most college students. ($12 per meal on 10-flex anyone?)
Anyhow, the statements above should be accurate. If not I’ll add addenda as necessary. I’m on the Bon Advisory Committee, so if anyone has issues they’d like addressed please send them to ajaneba@lclark.edu. I’ll bring them up when we start meeting :)
Peter Klym wrote a letter to the Piolog doing the same calculations three years ago. One of the Bon staff wrote in a response. If I recall correctly, they explained that the Bon only receives money equal to walk-up prices for their services. The rest of the money is skimmed off by Campus Living and used for some other mysterious spending.
Interesting. I guess I’d like to know how the college uses the money that makes up the difference. I don’t mean to imply that I think this is somehow unjust–I’m just disappointed that there isn’t an official answer, so that people like me, who do this math, aren’t left to conclude that there is some evil plan at work. Obviously, the school needs to make money and the Bon needs to make money. I just think it’d be better if that process was more transparently conveyed to the people who are paying for it.
Cal Poly’s solution to obfuscating the value of its meal plans is to sell everything a la carte at twice-inflated prices. And so while having $12 to spend looks like a good deal for dinner, it won’t buy you much more than a plate of over-cooked animal flesh, vegetable-flavored salt, potatoes, and a 32 ounce soda. All of this is done through the Cal Poly Corporation, a private auxiliary company with a separate budget and mission statement than the state-funded Cal Poly University.