Please forgive my indolence (and perhaps slothfullness). Communal work is
the best.

I have a salary for 2008. I want to calculate a 3.5% increase, year over
year, until 2013. Any slick way to do this?


Not Good Good
2008 480,658.00
2009 497,481.03 497,481.03
2010 514,304.06 514,892.87
2011 531,127.09 532,914.12
2012 547,950.12 551,566.11
2013 564,773.15 570,870.92


I found the current year's ordinal from 2008 and multiplied this by .035,
added a 1 and it looked good (not). I realized that it was not an
accumulation, but rather based on the original salary.

Many thanks.

MarkMcG wrote:
> Please forgive my indolence (and perhaps slothfullness). Communal work is
> the best.
>
> I have a salary for 2008. I want to calculate a 3.5% increase, year over
> year, until 2013. Any slick way to do this?
>
>
> Not Good Good
> 2008 480,658.00
> 2009 497,481.03 497,481.03
> 2010 514,304.06 514,892.87
> 2011 531,127.09 532,914.12
> 2012 547,950.12 551,566.11
> 2013 564,773.15 570,870.92
>
>
> I found the current year's ordinal from 2008 and multiplied this by .035,
> added a 1 and it looked good (not). I realized that it was not an
> accumulation, but rather based on the original salary.
>
> Many thanks.

With your salary in B2, put the following in B3 and copy down:

=B2*1.035

=ROUND(B1*1.035,2)

and copy down

--
HTH

Bob

(there's no email, no snail mail, but somewhere should be gmail in my addy)

"MarkMcG" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:479A6C20-1019-4621-9D17-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Please forgive my indolence (and perhaps slothfullness). Communal work is
> the best.
>
> I have a salary for 2008. I want to calculate a 3.5% increase, year over
> year, until 2013. Any slick way to do this?
>
>
> Not Good Good
> 2008 480,658.00
> 2009 497,481.03 497,481.03
> 2010 514,304.06 514,892.87
> 2011 531,127.09 532,914.12
> 2012 547,950.12 551,566.11
> 2013 564,773.15 570,870.92
>
>
> I found the current year's ordinal from 2008 and multiplied this by .035,
> added a 1 and it looked good (not). I realized that it was not an
> accumulation, but rather based on the original salary.
>
> Many thanks.

That should have been

B2: =B1*1.035

and then copy down

--
HTH

Bob

(there's no email, no snail mail, but somewhere should be gmail in my addy)

"MarkMcG" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:479A6C20-1019-4621-9D17-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Please forgive my indolence (and perhaps slothfullness). Communal work is
> the best.
>
> I have a salary for 2008. I want to calculate a 3.5% increase, year over
> year, until 2013. Any slick way to do this?
>
>
> Not Good Good
> 2008 480,658.00
> 2009 497,481.03 497,481.03
> 2010 514,304.06 514,892.87
> 2011 531,127.09 532,914.12
> 2012 547,950.12 551,566.11
> 2013 564,773.15 570,870.92
>
>
> I found the current year's ordinal from 2008 and multiplied this by .035,
> added a 1 and it looked good (not). I realized that it was not an
> accumulation, but rather based on the original salary.
>
> Many thanks.

On Aug 28, 11:02 am, MarkMcG <Mark...@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote:
> Please forgive my indolence (and perhaps slothfullness). Communal work is
> the best.
>
> I have a salary for 2008. I want to calculate a 3.5% increase, year over
> year, until 2013. Any slick way to do this?
>
> Not Good Good
> 2008 480,658.00
> 2009 497,481.03 497,481.03
> 2010 514,304.06 514,892.87
> 2011 531,127.09 532,914.12
> 2012 547,950.12 551,566.11
> 2013 564,773.15 570,870.92
>
> I found the current year's ordinal from 2008 and multiplied this by .035,
> added a 1 and it looked good (not). I realized that it was not an
> accumulation, but rather based on the original salary.
>
> Many thanks.

If B1 is the original salary, put =B1*1.035 into B2. Then copy B2 down
as far as you expect to live.

With 480,658 in B1, in B2 enter:

=B1*1.035 and copy down to display:

480,658.00
497,481.03
514,892.87
532,914.12
551,566.11
570,870.92
590,851.41
611,531.21
632,934.80
655,087.52

--
Gary''s Student - gsnu200802


"MarkMcG" wrote:

> Please forgive my indolence (and perhaps slothfullness). Communal work is
> the best.
>
> I have a salary for 2008. I want to calculate a 3.5% increase, year over
> year, until 2013. Any slick way to do this?
>
>
> Not Good Good
> 2008 480,658.00
> 2009 497,481.03 497,481.03
> 2010 514,304.06 514,892.87
> 2011 531,127.09 532,914.12
> 2012 547,950.12 551,566.11
> 2013 564,773.15 570,870.92
>
>
> I found the current year's ordinal from 2008 and multiplied this by .035,
> added a 1 and it looked good (not). I realized that it was not an
> accumulation, but rather based on the original salary.
>
> Many thanks.

My apologies for not being clear. The last col of sample I gave was a copy
down of the formula. The sample shows the two results, one right, the other
nefarious.

A "copy down" is not possible in the table, which can have different cost
elements per row (labor, capital, expense, etc).

My calculation, which is driven by the row being "Labor", looks over at the
type of labor, gets a Base Salary, looks at the Year, calculates the number
years from 2008, multiplies .035 by the Number of Years + 1.

Base_Salary * ((YEAR(B126)-2008)*0.035)+1)

For 3 years for 100K this looks like:

100,000 * ((3 * 0.035)+1) = $110,500

Which results in .035% * number of years of the BASE salary for 2008, which
is not correct. I need it to accumulate the salary from a base which would
look like this.

((Base_Salary*1.035)*1.035)*1.035 = $110,871.79

Any ideas?

MarkMcG wrote:
> My apologies for not being clear. The last col of sample I gave was a copy
> down of the formula. The sample shows the two results, one right, the other
> nefarious.
>
> A "copy down" is not possible in the table, which can have different cost
> elements per row (labor, capital, expense, etc).
>
> My calculation, which is driven by the row being "Labor", looks over at the
> type of labor, gets a Base Salary, looks at the Year, calculates the number
> years from 2008, multiplies .035 by the Number of Years + 1.
>
> Base_Salary * ((YEAR(B126)-2008)*0.035)+1)
>
> For 3 years for 100K this looks like:
>
> 100,000 * ((3 * 0.035)+1) = $110,500
>
> Which results in .035% * number of years of the BASE salary for 2008, which
> is not correct. I need it to accumulate the salary from a base which would
> look like this.
>
> ((Base_Salary*1.035)*1.035)*1.035 = $110,871.79
>
> Any ideas?



= Base_Salary * 1.035 ^ Years

Sweet! Thanks Glenn!

"Glenn" wrote:

> MarkMcG wrote:
> > My apologies for not being clear. The last col of sample I gave was a copy
> > down of the formula. The sample shows the two results, one right, the other
> > nefarious.
> >
> > A "copy down" is not possible in the table, which can have different cost
> > elements per row (labor, capital, expense, etc).
> >
> > My calculation, which is driven by the row being "Labor", looks over at the
> > type of labor, gets a Base Salary, looks at the Year, calculates the number
> > years from 2008, multiplies .035 by the Number of Years + 1.
> >
> > Base_Salary * ((YEAR(B126)-2008)*0.035)+1)
> >
> > For 3 years for 100K this looks like:
> >
> > 100,000 * ((3 * 0.035)+1) = $110,500
> >
> > Which results in .035% * number of years of the BASE salary for 2008, which
> > is not correct. I need it to accumulate the salary from a base which would
> > look like this.
> >
> > ((Base_Salary*1.035)*1.035)*1.035 = $110,871.79
> >
> > Any ideas?
>
>
>
> = Base_Salary * 1.035 ^ Years
>

MarkMcG wrote:
> Sweet! Thanks Glenn!
>


You're welcome!