Casey Brown wrote:
We've already begun expanding: the job openings
have already been
posted, we've already moved the office. These are more "done-deals"
that I am sure Anthere would have taken into account when saying what
she did. I could be wrong, of course.
On Jan 4, 2008 9:04 PM, Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Doesn't mean we have enough money to suddenly start expanding the staff.
> Just means the lights aren't going dark for another year. Enough money to
> sustain and enough money to expand are two different things.
>
> Chad H.
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2008 8:58 PM, Casey Brown <cbrown1023.ml(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe see this might give a little insight?
>>
>> <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Summary_of_a_year-_2007>, 5th line:
>>
>> "We successfully were able to collect enough funds to run through the
>> year, whilst retaining our independence;"
>>
>>
>> On Jan 4, 2008 8:50 PM, Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This is great and all Sue, but I'd love to know how we're financing
>>> all this. I mean,
>>> the fundraiser did great, but not quite as high as we'd like. Things
>>> like keeping the
>>> servers online would be a slightly higher priority in my book.
>>>
>>> But maybe that's just me.
>>>
>>> Chad
>>>
>>>
Yeah, it's a reasonable question, Chad. And the answer is pretty simple:
the purpose of hiring a biz dev person is to make money. That role
creates revenue, it is not a net cost.
All the initial hires fall into one of two categories: they are either
basically core & essential (we cannot function without, for example, an
accountant). Or they are revenue-generating (e.g., the biz dev position,
the fundraising position).
I certainly aspire, later, to be able to expand into hiring people whose
work will be more directly mission-focused - for example, people to
create distribution partnerships with other non-profits, or people to
support community members who want to write grant proposals. But the
priority obviously needs to be the core stuff.