Fundraising - New facilities

[GopherinPhilly]

nsmike is on to something: research shows (sorry don't have time for a link) that funding goals where big donors commit always beat the final mark, and frequently exceed it greatly. Meanwhile, those that start with small amounts, barely ever meet the final goal.

Humans like to be part of a winner, and can later brag about their successes. Whereas if they cannot see a high likelihood for success most people just give up.

Not sure anymore who the researcher is, but could be either Robert Cialdini or Daniel Kahneman as I've read those two rather extensively.

When was this research done and did it account for changes in behavior related to the Internet? I have no doubt that the big donor approach has been more effective in the past when press was controlled by newspapers, television and radio. But the past couple of years have seen a remarkable trend in funding options based on small donors via the Internet that has impacted the opportunities that exist.

Also, I never said no big donors, I just expressed a question as to why wait. Why not publish a list of donation options big and small and check off the boxes as larger donations come in, using social media to keep donors and followers updated on donations big and small. The excitement when the big ones fall will drive more smaller donations from existing donors (see Obama 2008 & 2012) and the news will be spread among social circles of Gopher fans.

Can even use sharing reward tools where if someone in your social network responds to a share you made with a donation, you get credit towards some prizes. I manage about 100 Facebook contests per year for my clients and 75% of our entries come from this kind of share/reward program. Don't think it works, see Groupon and it's rapid growth built primarily on social networks.

Contrary to Highwayman who thinks this thread is a deeply hateful criticism of the administration and accusation that they are doing nothing, it is in fact a simple trading of ideas of how to do better based on some of our shard experiences and expertise and a common desire to have a fundraising system that succeeds and remains as an ongoing program so that we can catch up and stay caught up with our competition.

 

[atsgopher]

When was this research done and did it account for changes in behavior related to the Internet? I have no doubt that the big donor approach has been more effective in the past when press was controlled by newspapers, television and radio. But the past couple of years have seen a remarkable trend in funding options based on small donors via the Internet that has impacted the opportunities that exist.

Also, I never said no big donors, I just expressed a question as to why wait. Why not publish a list of donation options big and small and check off the boxes as larger donations come in, using social media to keep donors and followers updated on donations big and small. The excitement when the big ones fall will drive more smaller donations from existing donors (see Obama 2008 & 2012) and the news will be spread among social circles of Gopher fans.

Can even use sharing reward tools where if someone in your social network responds to a share you made with a donation, you get credit towards some prizes. I manage about 100 Facebook contests per year for my clients and 75% of our entries come from this kind of share/reward program. Don't think it works, see Groupon and it's rapid growth built primarily on social networks.

Contrary to Highwayman who thinks this thread is a deeply hateful criticism of the administration and accusation that they are doing nothing, it is in fact a simple trading of ideas of how to do better based on some of our shard experiences and expertise and a common desire to have a fundraising system that succeeds and remains as an ongoing program so that we can catch up and stay caught up with our competition.

First, I love the crowd funding idea. Just want to add a nugget that I read, consistent with your point on finding the best way through sharing experiences.

Sorry don't recall the source, but it was definitely while doing research in regards to equity crowd funding and SEC (the gov version) proposals. Either way, it is not criticism of using crowd funding nor small donors, it is simply the order of donors (or even the perceived order of donors).

The gist of the research was when large donors are announced along with a goal, crowd funds push well past the goal. The best part is the donors need not even contribute, all that's required is a promise to contribute a large amount.

In the converse, people and funding drives are highly likely to fizzle out when only small donors are publicized.

I am pretty sure the effect follows the announcement of a large donor/gift. Strange, but consistent with other persuasion studies.

However, none of that precludes the crowd funding idea. Nor does it mean we shouldn't use that as an avenue for funding facilities. Heck, could even be on Norwood's radar and why the announcement of the feasibility study (maybe he was lining the a few large donors first).

All in all, it certainly begs the question: why doesn't gopherhole (members I mean, the admin has enough to do) start their own kickstarter campaign with proceeds going to Gopher facilities campaign? What rewards do we need?

 

[BleedGopher]

per the STrib:

• During punting drills, balls kept hitting the decrepit roof of the Gibson-Nagurski Football Complex, bringing chunks of dusty insulation to the turf. Kill could only shrug. “Keep kicking until that roof comes out, and then we can get a new building,” he said.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/249678351.html

Go Gophers!!

 

[Johnny Olson]

per the STrib:

• During punting drills, balls kept hitting the decrepit roof of the Gibson-Nagurski Football Complex, bringing chunks of dusty insulation to the turf. Kill could only shrug. “Keep kicking until that roof comes out, and then we can get a new building,” he said.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/249678351.html

Go Gophers!!

Add to that a leaking roof and the players eating Spaghetti in the Lobby.

A new facility is needed MUCH SOONER THEN LATTER!