Definition of Corporate Member

[SteveColes]

When we had the meeting, it was the consensus that we should charge dues and add the qualification of "active user".

Well after watching our donation patterns, I think perhaps, we/I are wrong.

We have people who donate quite a bit, as high as $250 at a time. We have others who donate repeatedly $10 here and $25 there, based on some scheme of their own. Then we have those have who donated in small amounts only once.

I suspect, if we establish dues at $45, the large donors will mostly just pay their udes and stop giving. The small donors will stop giving all together. The end result will probably be less total income.

Given that, perhaps we should have active user and the opt-in be the only qualifications.

 

[ScottM]

Steve, how about a level system (e.g. Gold, Silver, Bronze, and Wood)? Wood Level is the $45 and makes you a voting member. Bronze is say $100 and includes a coffee mug. Silver is $150 and includes coffee mug and hat. Finally Gold is $250.00 and includes coffee mug, hat and shirt?

You get the picture.

 

[Bas]

I think you're right. I think it's important to keep the dues, but it is very important that you make dues and donations separate items. People like structure, that's why we give presents during Christmas, birthdays and anniversaries. So perhaps charge dues once a year in August, and do fund drives twice a year, say at the extravaganza and during the picnic. It has to be clear what the funding is for - one being corporate membership, the other for NC WW activities.

 

[Jon]

Maybe also have fringe benefits for donating Members ?

 

[TracyP]

I for one would be totally happy paying dues, after all I am a 2008 Contributor on another forum, I will not re-up in 2009 though. This site will get my $$$. My point is that I think that this site and the friendships that it has afforded me is worth whatever the dues are, and much more!! The only reason that I even go to the other place is a close relative that is responsible for getting me interested in woodworking frequents that site. No matter what the dues are, as long as they remain reasonable, the core folks here will be more than happy to pay what is required. :icon_sunn:icon_sunn

That is my long winded opinion, thanks for listening!!:gar-La;

 

[Bas]

Steve, how about a level system (e.g. Gold, Silver, Bronze, and Wood)? Wood Level is the $45 and makes you a voting member. Bronze is say $100 and includes a coffee mug. Silver is $150 and includes coffee mug and hat. Finally Gold is $250.00 and includes coffee mug, hat and shirt?

You get the picture.

These kinds of things do work. Every fund drive I've seen has giveaways. It cuts into the budget of course, and it takes away from the selflessness, but it works. Although for this group, Wood should be the highest level, not Gold And I'm sure some creative soul out there will select levels such as Pine, Oak and Ebony.

 

[SteveColes]

Let me try this in another way.

Will we raise more money if we have Corporate Memberships?
Will users see us a "Free Site" if we start charging for Corporate Memberships.
Etc, Etc.

 

[Douglas Robinson]

I think we are missing the point. Steve stated at the meeting that the purpose of the corporate membership dues was NOT to raise $'s, but rather keep the number of corporate members manageable, e.g. getting a quorum, sending notifications, etc. Donations were to be a separate thing. Most people would not want to be a corporate member.

Now Steve raises a valid point: will such a system have a negative effect on donations? If so we need to rethink it.

Finally Steve has always been vocal about NOT having a tiered system as it goes against the equality concept of the site.

Doug

 

[Bas]

Now Steve raises a valid point: will such a system have a negative effect on donations? If so we need to rethink it.

Let me ramble for a bit.

There is a small group of dedicated people that will support NC WW in whatever fashion possible. Donations, dues, etc. No worries there.
There is a group of very casual users that will never be interested in donations or dues, no matter what the structure. No point about worrying about that group.
Then there is the group of people that care and want to support the site, but are not as obsessive compulsive as some of us are

I think dues will to a point cannibalize donations. But I don't think people will give less overall. They may decide to lower the donation to take into account the dues. I might do that myself. But someone who is willing to donate, say, $100, would probably still donate $50 in addition to the dues . But that's a guess.

During the meeting, the point was made that the dues are not meant to be a significant amount of income. It's just to keep everyone and their mother's uncles brother's neighbor twice removed from being a corporate member. (Personally, I think promoting dues to be a steady source of income would be better, but that's a separate discussion).

Since being a corporate member does not offer any benefits beyond being able to vote for the Board of Directors, who is going to sign up? That small group of people that will support the site no matter what. Plus, if the dues were never meant to be a significant source of income, they shouldn't significantly cannibalize donations. At least not if dues and donations are managed separately and clearly identified as such. One way to counteract this is when people pay the dues (preferably via a web form), they can also add a donation.

I completely agree the # of corporate members has to remain manageable. But too few and you run the risk of inbreeding. While it's understandable that Steve was the only member, the Chairman, Vice president and Grand Chief WebMaster-At-Large for the formation of the corporation, it would be healthy if more than just the board showed up at the corporate meetings. I'm sure our elected officials feel they could do a lot more work more efficiently if they didn't have to worry about voters and elections, but that's just how things work. How do you get to the "right" number? Supply and demand. Set a price and see how many sign up. If it's not enough, lower the price or increase the benefits.

Side ramble in parentheses: One reason people shy away from donations is because they aren't sure how much to donate. They don't want to spend too much (gotta buy tools), but giving a small amount may look cheap/stingy. So instead people don't give at all. Annual dues gives people a tangible number, and they know the amount is acceptable relative to their peers.

I completely support the policy of keeping the site and the services free. But there are other ways to make membership attractive, e.g. $10 discount on the calendar. Or buy one get one 50% off. 25% more picture storage space . Preferential seating at the picnic

As far as how people would feel about paid corporate membership and this site being free - it's all in the marketing. Simply state the policy: Every service offered by NC WW is free and will remain free: The web site, the demo's, the discount, etc. If you feel you want to help organize and contribute, we'll charge you $45 for that privilege (no good deed goes unpunished).

If someone feels this creates a tiered system - we have that today. There is Steve Coles, Master Of All, and the rest of the world. Steve can ban anyone, yank the discount, disallow access because someone's name has an odd number of letters, and decree everyone must have "I love model ship building" in their signatures. If anything, the new system is reducing the difference! Some people already feel there is an in-crowd. This might reinforce that notion. But, now they have an option to become a member and help set the policies.

After all is said and done, it's entirely possible that people yawn their way through the announcement, only the folks at the September meeting become members, and everyone gets back to discussing power tools.

(This boring conference call I'm on is coming to an end, so I better hit submit)

 

[gator]

All comments have merit and I can't give an answer that would solve the entire situation. I might suggest though, that the first $45 of any donation buys a membership. This being known up front would allow users to determine their level of giving (dues/donations/gifts/whatever).

George

 

[sapwood]

Let me try this in another way.

Will we raise more money if we have Corporate Memberships?

I like having Corporate Members (dues) and Donors. But I prefer to avoid titles, etc., that visibly differentiates . . . with the exception of staff designations that are essential to web operations.

However, I'm clueless as to the impact that will have on fund raising.

Will users see us a "Free Site" if we start charging for Corporate Memberships.
Etc, Etc.

Yes, if it is clearly stated on the site and the by-laws.


Furthermore :mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:
1) Clarifying Members/dues and Donations/Donors enables an individual to allocate how much they choose to contribute. Uncertainty has influenced my giving. Gave big initially (relatively speaking ) and reduced later amounts.

2) If we do decide to give recognition to Donors, I would like only one level . . . Donor or Contributor or whatever. Another site I frequent does this by denoting the status under avatar and providing "special" forums that are only visible to Donor/Contributors.

Hope this helps and feel free to disagree :wtongue:
Roger

 

[toolman]

Well this is my $.02! :widea:
Looking at the top of our forum it says:


An Educational Service Of North Carolina Woodworker, Inc.


To me North Carolina Woodworker, Inc. is giving me and all users of North Carolina Woodworker.NET a educational forum free, and without titles! (The only titles are the ones we have now, Staff titles).

So let’s keep North Carolina Woodworker.NET Free!!!! Have fund drives 4 times a year to meet our operation cost! :icon_thum

Now if you want to become a Corporate Member you need to go to the North Carolina Woodworker, Inc. web site / page, not a forum. Sign up and pay your yearly dues of $45. You will still need to donate at the fund drives.

On this web site the corp. would have info on NCWW, INC is all about? Educational forum, Spring Picnic, Klingspor demonstration and Exhibits, Calendar Contest, and anything the corp. supports.

 

[SteveColes]

Ok, let me try this again. The only reason I agreed to corporate dues was to limit the number of members, because I was told to for reasons of meetings, votes, etc,. Well in another post, I provided a link to the actual NC law that governs non-profits. As I read it, we could use 10% as a quorum. Well that is easily managable for quite a while. There would seem to more room for "electronic" means of communications, etc.

So my reasons for wanting dues is no longer valid.

I have looked at the donation patterns since we started taking them. It is both better and worse than you think. I honestly believe that if we charge corporate dues, we will get a lot less in donations that we are now. and the donations aren't close enough to even being close enough to survive, without my $500/month. The best we can hope to raise via donations is about $750/quarter:swoon: and I don't want to risk that. That's why I have been spending so much time trying increase our advertising revenue. They are pretty good right now, but that's only becuase of DeWalt's new SCMS and that won't last.

 

[Douglas Robinson]

Steve:

There are many ways to softly encourage more regular donations. Some have be listed here. We can talk about it.

Doug

 

[SteveColes]

This discussion drifted off of wanted I wanted, and then I just made it worse.:slap::embaresse.

So one more attempt at getting back to the main point. If we assume that raising money is not the reason, but rather distributing control (indirectly of course) of the corporation, then what advantages are there to charging money for a membership?

 

[ScottM]

If we assume that raising money is not the reason, but rather distributing control (indirectly of course) of the corporation, then what advantages are there to charging money for a membership?

In this case there would be no reason. As the current board you can set the number of board members and then appoint them. Then I believe you can state that only the appointmented board are the actual members of NCWW INC..

 

[McRabbet]

First, let apologize for my recent silence and lack of input -- I have been spending 10-12 hours a day for the last 2 weeks in the shop meeting a deadline our WNCWA has established for making toys for needy kids for the holidays. When I've not been in the shop, I've been playing nurse maid for my wife and am being her chauffeur to/from doctors and physical therapy sessions and her hair dresser since she cannot drive since her shoulder surgery 3 weeks ago... Last week we assembled 60 Doll Cradles and tomorrow we assemble 45 boys wagons.

Okay, that said, here are my thoughts on corporate membership and any impact on donations. As Steve pointed out in an earlier post in this thread, state law allows a quorum to be set at almost any level. When the $45 amount was established, it was done under the premise to try to limit membership and was arrived at by dropping the amount until everyone present would agree they would accept that amount. Would that consensus be more broadly accepted? Frankly, I doubt it.

I've been President and founder of three non-profit organizations: a computer club, a golf club and a woodworking club. All three established an annual membership at $25 for an Individual membership and $35 for a Family membership. All three organizations grew and were self-sufficient, although they never had the monthly cash flow demands seen with NCWW. The golf club is now twenty years old and thrives today (I left the helm 6 years ago, a year before I retired). The woodworking club was started here 3 years ago and has over 50 members (we gained 4 new members at our last meeting).

How does this relate to our issue here? I'd recommend an annual fee of $25 for a membership. Non-voting memberships within a family can be added for $10. Despite Steve's desire to maintain a site-wide "equality", such a global ideal cannot exist with a corporate membership requirement. Certainly, the site is not a pay site, per se, but there is a pecking order already. There will always be free users and there should be, but members and contributors and staff are all different levels. As Roger pointed out, there are other sites that simply use the term Contributor, and I think that is a good term for anyone who donates to the site. If they apply and pay for a membership, then they should be called a member. We already have a privilege classification which will be based on activity level and will get the "Active User" a discount privilege. I'd suggest that be a modifier to the other classes of user -- a User (not dues, no donations) can become an Active User; a Contributor can become an Active Contributor and a Member can become an Active Member. We should still encourage donations and run a quarterly fund drive -- my point is I believe more money will come in as donations with a lower Member dues, and dues themselves could be a significant revenue generator because more people could afford it. Despite thoughts by some that this forms a privileged class, I believe that many users would welcome the added status of being formally recognized as a member or a contributor. And the addition of Active status is already a lure to many to get the site discount.

My .02 -- now back to the shop because I've got more stuff to do tonight!

 

[sapwood]

. . . .
So one more attempt at getting back to the main point. If we assume that raising money is not the reason, but rather distributing control (indirectly of course) of the corporation, then what advantages are there to charging money for a membership?

Money:
I agree, that if nothing is gained . . .then separate money/dues/donations from control (where control equals Corporate Member).

Membership:
Assuming goal of membership is to control organization, then consider this. We may not have to be a "membership" organization to obtain 501c3 or function with a BOD, Officers, and staff. It is my understanding (though not 100% legally researched) that NCWW Inc., can be incorporated and function without "members". I'm pretty sure some nonprofit BODs are self-electing, though with term limits, etc. Of course, I'm not a NC attorney :crossedlips: and is this what NCWW Inc wants to be?

Roger

 

[SteveColes]

Money:
I agree, that if nothing is gained . . .then separate money/dues/donations from control (where control equals Corporate Member).

Membership:
Assuming goal of membership is to control organization, then consider this. We may not have to be a "membership" organization to obtain 501c3 or function with a BOD, Officers, and staff. It is my understanding (though not 100% legally researched) that NCWW Inc., can be incorporated and function without "members". I'm pretty sure some nonprofit BODs are self-electing, though with term limits, etc. Of course, I'm not a NC attorney :crossedlips: and is this what NCWW Inc wants to be?

Roger

Roger, you are correct. When we created the "articles of incorporation", we could have made this a non-profit without members. If we want to go that we would have to amend the Articles and get the state's permission.

But I specifically wanted members becuase I wanted more than the usual suspects to have at least the opportunity to have a say. The only reason, to control the number of members was becuase I was told it would be easier to administer all the legal processes, voting, etc. At the time, I thought a quorum of members meant at least 50%. But that has not turned out to be true. We can easily state that quorum is 10%, so removes my only motivation of controlling the number of members.

I've been President and founder of three non-profit organizations: a computer club, a golf club and a woodworking club. All three established an annual membership at $25 for an Individual membership and $35 for a Family membership. All three organizations grew and were self-sufficient, although they never had the monthly cash flow demands seen with North Carolina Woodworker. The golf club is now twenty years old and thrives today (I left the helm 6 years ago, a year before I retired). The woodworking club was started here 3 years ago and has over 50 members (we gained 4 new members at our last meeting).

We are NOT a club, and we have never been. We were a website that had a very unique perspective on how to be a website. I honestly believe that it is that perspective that is the primary reason we are what we are and why there is so much loyality to the site and the people. We honor and accept everyone who joins. We don't judge. We have people come to the "free" picnic, just a couple of days after they joined and made to feel welcome. We accepted no money and we didn't advetise and we flourished and people loved the site.

This year, 2 things happened. One, the move to make sure that we existed past my involvement became very important for a variety of reasons. Second, even without knowing what was going to happen to the economy and my personal cash flow, it became obvious that the site financial requirements would shortly exceed my ability to pay them.

So when I decided we would have to allow for donations and advertising, I was very worried what it would do to our chemistry. The ads have not been a problem, becuase we have kept them to a minimum and the donations have not been a problem, becuase no one knows who gives what and we have not allowed any gloating about.

I am really concerned about messing with the chemistry, but we do need to have people to vote for a board of directors and we eventually need a board that is not us.

So I still feel very strongly that there should be no public acknowledgement of donations, no special privlages, there is no reason to change what is currently working. So I am back to my question, should we charge for a corporate memebrship? Why? What advantages are there? how much?

 

[Douglas Robinson]

Well I have read everything that has been said so far and I have an opinion:

1. We should NOT have a separate corporate membership. It create unneeded tiers and could discourage donations.

2. We should organize and develop regular (quarrterly?) fund drives. There have been a lot of suggestions on this toipic.

3. Without dues we will need to create some criteria for being a member. Mininum website interaction probably makes the most sense. 10% of over 2000 members is still 200+ people for a quorum. Too much! Since there are between 200-500 very active users at any given time we need to quantify that to determine membership. Maybe we evaluate this every quarter to add or drop people whose status changes. That makes a quorum 20-50 people.

4. Keep membership and donations separate.

My 2 cents.

Doug