I built MeetCost to make the hidden expense of meetings visible. The tool takes the hourly pay of each attendee, multiplies it by the meeting length, and adds the results to show a total cost. It then rolls that number up to weekly and monthly totals so you can see how much time and money are spent in recurring gatherings.
The core calculation is straightforward: for each participant I pull their annual salary, convert it to an hourly rate (assuming 2 080 work hours per year), then multiply that rate by the meeting duration in hours. The sum of all attendee costs gives the meeting price. I store each event so you can review a history of costs and see trends over time.
I ask you to enter either an annual salary or an hourly rate for each attendee. If you give an annual figure I divide by 2 080 to get an hourly baseline. This keeps the math consistent across roles and locations.
You enter the start and end time of the meeting or simply the total length in minutes. I convert minutes to hours (divide by 60) before applying the hourly rate. The tool accepts decimal values so a 90‑minute session becomes 1.5 hours.
Meeting cost = Σ (hourly_rate_i × hours_i). I display the result in your local currency with two decimal places. The same formula runs for each logged event, allowing me to aggregate later.
To get accurate numbers you need three pieces of information for every attendee: their compensation, the meeting length, and how often the meeting repeats. I keep the entry form short so you can fill it in during a prep call or after the meeting ends.
Once I have the cost of a single meeting I scale it up to show the financial impact over longer periods. This helps you see whether a recurring stand‑up, a weekly review, or a monthly all‑hands is eating a large slice of your budget.
I multiply the per‑event cost by the number of occurrences you specified. For weekly totals I use the weekly frequency; for monthly totals I use the monthly frequency. If you gave both a weekly and a monthly pattern I compute each separately so you can compare.
| Meeting type | Attendees | Avg hourly rate | Length (hrs) | Cost per event | Weekly cost | Monthly cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Daily stand‑up | 6 | $45 | 0.25 | $67.50 | $472.50 | $2 025.00 |
| Weekly design review | 8 | $60 | 1.5 | $720.00 | $720.00 | $3 120.00 |
| Monthly all‑hands | 20 | $55 | 2 | $2 200.00 | $2 200.00 | $9 600.00 |
The table shows how a short daily check‑in can add up to over two thousand dollars per month, while a longer monthly gathering approaches ten thousand. Seeing these numbers side by side makes it easier to decide where to trim.
After I calculate the cost I run a lightweight rule set that looks for common patterns of inefficiency. The suggestions are not generated by a large language model; they are based on observable data such as meeting length, attendee count, and frequency.
For each flag I output a short action:
You can turn off any tip that does not fit your culture. I store your preferences so the next run shows only the advice you chose to keep.
MeetCost is a decision‑support aid. I encourage you to treat the numbers as a starting point for conversation, not as a final verdict. Always review the context before you act on a suggestion.
The tool does not know the strategic value of a discussion. A costly meeting might be essential for aligning a product launch, while a cheap meeting could be unnecessary. Use your judgment alongside the cost data.
I do not automatically change any calendar invites or send messages to participants. All changes remain under your control. This keeps the tool safe to use in environments where meeting policies are strict.
I want to be clear about the limits of MeetCost so you do not expect capabilities it does not have.
Showing a cost does not automatically reduce spending. You must act on the information for any change to occur.
The tool cannot assess whether a meeting is critical for risk mitigation, compliance, or innovation. It only adds a financial lens to the discussion.
I do not track who speaks, what is said, or any personal data beyond the salary and duration you provide. The focus stays on aggregate cost, not individual behavior.
I keep a written checklist next to every release that touches this topic. The list is boring on purpose: name the owner, name the evidence artifact, and name the rollback. If a step cannot produce a file, a ticket, or a log line, it is not a step — it is a wish.
| Signal | What to record | Stop-ship? |
|---|---|---|
| Unexpected write or send | Tool name, args, identity | Yes until gated |
| Missing confirmation on destructive action | Call path and bypass | Yes |
| Untrusted text treated as instruction | Source surface and resulting action | Yes for agent reach |
| Scanner clean, judgment open | Deferred items + owner | Only if core path safe |
meeting-cost-calc helps with the measurable first pass. Architecture choices, legal sign-off, and customer-facing claims still need a human owner. Treat every checklist row as decision support, not a certificate.
When a prospect asks whether the product "covers everything," I answer with the boundary: automated checks catch known patterns; novel chains and policy judgment still need review. That honesty keeps support load down and keeps the blog aligned with what the product actually does.
If you need a second opinion, pair this write-up with the references below and with your own staging reproduction. Do not skip the reproduction step just because a model wrote a confident summary.
MeetCost shows the real price of any meeting from attendee salaries and duration, projects weekly and monthly cost, and suggests AI tips to cut wasted meeting time.