splitting a house - do you split by rooms, or people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whatever makes the most sense, just keep it simple. If you're doing it by bedrooms, all bedrooms are worth the same. If you're doing it by people, all people count the same. If you're splitting groceries, everyone pays an equal share (except maybe kids seven and under count as half, but it's easier just to count everyone as whole people).

I don't do group vacations with high-maintenance people. If you're going to split hairs over the exact square footage of your bedroom closet to try to pay less for your room, I don't travel with you. If you claim you're going to cram yourself, your spouse and your teen into one bedroom to save money over two bedrooms, only to have your teen sleep on the couch in the common room so everyone else feels like they have to tiptoe around until they wake up at noon, I don't travel with you. If you're going to divide grocery bills down to the level of whether you ate the steak or the chicken the night someone grilled for everyone, I don't travel with you. If it's more stress to figure out the bills with you than the vacation was worth, I don't travel with you.

+1

that is the correct answer

at the same time don't be a dick to the people who really should be paying less. think about what's fair - if the single adult is really occupying fewer resources than the families - which, they definitely are - then make sure you (if you are a family) offer to pay a bigger share of the costs. the single person might not take you up on it. but, don't have someone get a windfall and someone else get screwed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hybrid approach: half of rental cost is allocated per room, half is allocated per person to cover use of common space.

Assuming $1000 rental. $500 is split between 5 rooms ($100 per room); $500 is split between 10 people ($50 per person)

Family 1 (assuming 2 rooms): $200 for rooms + $200 for people = $400
Family 2: $100 for room + 150 for people = $250
Family 3: $100 for room + 100 for people = $200
Family 4: $100 for room + 50 for person = $150

This seems very fair

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's ours:

5 bedroom house:

Group 1: 2 adults, 2 kids
Group 2: 2 adults, 2 kids
Group 3: 2 adults
Group 4: 2 adults
Group 5: 1 adult
Group 6: 1 adult

Kids are all preschoolers/lower elementary

If the kids are young and will sleep in with their parents, all the couples get a room and pay an equal share (1/5) and the two singles share a room (one with 2 beds if one exists), and they pay one share, so each person pays 1/2 what a couple pays.

This is what seems fair to me. One person in our group is passive-aggressively suggesting that we pay by person, but it seems unfair given that we will be sleeping 4 to a room (with our kids on air mattresses on the floor).

See, I don't think that is passive aggressive at all. That single person sounds like s/he is advocating for his/her rights.

I'm saying this as a mom of more than a handful of kids but I think the single people usually get screwed in these group house situations. I think you should all pay a per person rate with adults in their own rooms, kids in a dorm room, and babies with their parents in a crib/pac-n-play.

Passive aggressive isn't the message. Passive aggressive is the method of communication.

Also, there are no babies in this situation. Everybody needs a bed. All of the kids will be sleeping on air mattresses or mats on the floors of their parents' rooms. If there were babies would you propose that the babies also pay equally to the adult who gets her own room?

Re the passive aggressive, the poster didn't identify the method and just indicated a message was passive aggressive. So take it up with that poster, not me.

I think anyone under 2 is free but any kids over 2 are full freight. We have 5 kids so, yes, my money would be where my mouth is. Honestly it sounds like you all need more than one house if you're going to be complaining so much about where everyone is sleeping. Get your own place and then this isn't a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How would you split this? 5 bedroom, 10 person house- adults and older kids (no babies).

Group 1 (2 adults, 2 teens)
Group 2 (2 adults, 1 kid)
Group 3 (1 adult, 1 teen)
Group 4 (1 adult)

I'd split it six ways just based on the number of adults. Kids sleep free. If any of the adults complain I would not consider them family or friends.

If you make your single or childless friends subsidize your 9, 15, or 19 year old, I wouldn't consider you a friend or family.

Most people don’t travel with single or childless friends if they have kids.

Here is what we have done: Ask each group (before house-hunting) how many rooms they need. You pay based on the number of bedrooms you require. Rental prices go up as the bedrooms do. If a single person wants to sleep on the couch I can see cutting them a deal, but if they’d like their own room, they have to pay.

For example, one year we went with 3 other families. My family and 2 of the others wanted 2 bedrooms each. The last family was looking to spend less and was happy to share 1 bedroom. So we did 2/7, 2/7, 2/7, 1/7 (7 bedroom house.)

So which is it? You pay based on the bedrooms, but you still have to pay (but cut a deal) if someone sleeps on the couch?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever makes the most sense, just keep it simple. If you're doing it by bedrooms, all bedrooms are worth the same. If you're doing it by people, all people count the same. If you're splitting groceries, everyone pays an equal share (except maybe kids seven and under count as half, but it's easier just to count everyone as whole people).

I don't do group vacations with high-maintenance people. If you're going to split hairs over the exact square footage of your bedroom closet to try to pay less for your room, I don't travel with you. If you claim you're going to cram yourself, your spouse and your teen into one bedroom to save money over two bedrooms, only to have your teen sleep on the couch in the common room so everyone else feels like they have to tiptoe around until they wake up at noon, I don't travel with you. If you're going to divide grocery bills down to the level of whether you ate the steak or the chicken the night someone grilled for everyone, I don't travel with you. If it's more stress to figure out the bills with you than the vacation was worth, I don't travel with you.

+1

that is the correct answer

at the same time don't be a dick to the people who really should be paying less. think about what's fair - if the single adult is really occupying fewer resources than the families - which, they definitely are - then make sure you (if you are a family) offer to pay a bigger share of the costs. the single person might not take you up on it. but, don't have someone get a windfall and someone else get screwed.

I would co-rent with these two posters. The rest of you, not at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How would you split this? 5 bedroom, 10 person house- adults and older kids (no babies).

Group 1 (2 adults, 2 teens)
Group 2 (2 adults, 1 kid)
Group 3 (1 adult, 1 teen)
Group 4 (1 adult)

I'd split it six ways just based on the number of adults. Kids sleep free. If any of the adults complain I would not consider them family or friends.

If you make your single or childless friends subsidize your 9, 15, or 19 year old, I wouldn't consider you a friend or family.

Most people don’t travel with single or childless friends if they have kids.

Here is what we have done: Ask each group (before house-hunting) how many rooms they need. You pay based on the number of bedrooms you require. Rental prices go up as the bedrooms do. If a single person wants to sleep on the couch I can see cutting them a deal, but if they’d like their own room, they have to pay.

For example, one year we went with 3 other families. My family and 2 of the others wanted 2 bedrooms each. The last family was looking to spend less and was happy to share 1 bedroom. So we did 2/7, 2/7, 2/7, 1/7 (7 bedroom house.)

So which is it? You pay based on the bedrooms, but you still have to pay (but cut a deal) if someone sleeps on the couch?

Well obviously a couch sleeper would complicate things in a variety of ways, and I would not prefer it.

[Anonymous]

We did a mixed system, something like 50% of the rental divided by bedroom, and the other 50% per person. I can’t remember the exact ratios. This was to appease the singles with no children, who felt they were subsidizing thecommon areas. It worked out but I willnever vacation with them again.

[Anonymous]

Who are all these families vacationing with singles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who are all these families vacationing with singles?

Who are all these people nickel & diming it to death trying to spend $200 less on a vacation? Yikes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are all these families vacationing with singles?

Who are all these people nickel & diming it to death trying to spend $200 less on a vacation? Yikes!

The same could be asked of the singles!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are all these families vacationing with singles?

Who are all these people nickel & diming it to death trying to spend $200 less on a vacation? Yikes!

The same could be asked of the singles!

All of them. Families want to pay by the room so they pay less, singles want to pay by the person so they pay less. Way too much resentment floating around because no matter what, everyone is convinced that they paid too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are all these families vacationing with singles?

Who are all these people nickel & diming it to death trying to spend $200 less on a vacation? Yikes!

The same could be asked of the singles!

All of them. Families want to pay by the room so they pay less, singles want to pay by the person so they pay less. Way too much resentment floating around because no matter what, everyone is convinced that they paid too much.

Probably because this type of trip isn’t even fun.

[Anonymous]

I don’t get the concept that singles use less of the common areas than couples with kids? Are you in a 15 person house with one couch? I guess I’m assuming no one would unilaterally take over a common space (and that adults get seating preferences over kids for example). Otherwise a house that fits 5 sets of people should have enough space for them to comfortably exist without confining themselves to bedrooms only.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are all these families vacationing with singles?

Who are all these people nickel & diming it to death trying to spend $200 less on a vacation? Yikes!

The same could be asked of the singles!

All of them. Families want to pay by the room so they pay less, singles want to pay by the person so they pay less. Way too much resentment floating around because no matter what, everyone is convinced that they paid too much.

Probably because this type of trip isn’t even fun.

Yes, why do people do this to themselves?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who are all these families vacationing with singles?

You don't have any unmarried and childless adults in your family/circle?