[Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales in the news

Screamer scream at datascreamer.com
Sat Mar 8 19:04:03 UTC 2008


David Gerard wrote:
> On 08/03/2008, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> Now look
>>  at this from an outside investor's opinion? They not only have to
>>  balance the costs of their spending, but the opportunity cost of not
>>  spending on others groups, with the "warm fuzzy feeling" being to them
>>  much less important, as well as wanting to see something returning
>>  back to them from it, be it money, or other benefit. Then they compare
>>  whether to invest in the foundation vs. another group, and if they are
>>  acting rationally they will go for the one with the best benefit to
>>  cost ratio.  That's the way that I see things.
>>     
>
>
> The intangibles can be hard to measure. e.g.
>
> - Cancer is a good cause, but $50,000 to the American Cancer Society
> has less impact as a single donation than $50,000 to the WMF.
> - But if you had a close relative die of cancer, you might work your
> arse off for the ACS as your favourite cause anyway.
> - But if Wikipedia and the WMF's mission resonates with you, you might
> feel dropping $50k on the Foundation is an obviously good idea if you
> can spare that much this year - so that cost ratio is not an issue at
> all, just how much you can spare this year.
> - And some wealthy donors like a thank-you of whatever prominence, but
> others are really quite averse to publicity.
>
> What donors get out of donating is *incredibly* squishy and intangible.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>   
squishy?  :)
./scream


More information about the foundation-l mailing list