[OpenID board] Funding Proposal

Artur Bergman sky at crucially.net
Mon Apr 9 23:11:50 UTC 2007


I would agree in general  with Dick. Membership is a cost of doing  
business while sponsorship is more fuzzy marketing and feelgood. I  
not entirely convinced about the gold and platinum levels, since it  
is an incentive to get them to donate more, but I have no strong  
opinions either way.

Artur

On Apr 9, 2007, at 4:02 PM, Dick Hardt wrote:

> I would keep it simple and keep the sponsorship and membership
> revenue separated.
>
> Organizations will have different motivations for each financial
> commitment, and it creates an unfair value to larger organizations to
> combine them.
>
> -- Dick
>
> On 9-Apr-07, at 3:58 PM, Recordon, David wrote:
>
>> I've added you to be able to edit the wiki article.
>>
>> 1) I don't think there is a problem condensing it into "Members" and
>> "Donors/Sponsors".  I think we separated it to really call out the
>> difference in this document to how participation is possible.  Agree
>> though that it may make it easier to understand with Donors and
>> Sponsors
>> merged into one group.
>>
>> 2) I'm having a bit of trouble with the math for what you  
>> proposed.  I
>> think in some cases it may incent an additional donation, though in
>> the
>> case where membership fee is $2,500 a year it gets them membership
>> plus
>> Bronze sponsorship for only $5,625 which is much lower than the
>> currently proposed $7,500.  So really membership (for organizations
>> <=1000 employees) turns into 25% of membership fee + Bronze
>> sponsorship.
>> Thinking (if my math here is right) that it is better to keep it for
>> Gold and Platinum to include membership (maybe Silver as well for
>> organizations <=1000 employees) both from the financial side and to
>> keep
>> all the math simple.
>>
>> My $0.02.
>>
>> --David
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On
>> Behalf Of Drummond Reed
>> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 3:37 PM
>> To: board at openid.net
>> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Funding Proposal
>>
>> I too agree this is a very good proposal that offers a nice "hybrid"
>> model.
>> Two suggestions for how to simplify/strengthen it further:
>>
>> 1) Currently it has three $ categories: donations, members, and
>> sponsors. We could simplify it down to two: "Members" and
>> "Donors/Sponsors". Members has associated fee table based on type/
>> size.
>> Donors/Sponsors is unstructured and just has categories (the category
>> for contributions under $5K would simply be called "Donor", and the
>> four
>> higher categories would be "Bronze/Silver/Gold/Platinum Sponsors").
>>
>> 2) Currently only Gold and Platinum Sponsors have membership  
>> included.
>> If we made the rule that any Donor or Sponsor whose contribution  
>> is at
>> least 25% greater than their membership fee shall have their
>> membership
>> included, then it would incent all potential Members to become
>> Donors or
>> Sponsors for an incremental contribution. (However it is still an
>> option
>> for a company/org to be a Donor/Sponsor and decline membership.)
>>
>> If these revisions make sense I'm happy to help with wording edits if
>> David wants to add =drummond to the wiki.
>>
>> =Drummond
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On
>> Behalf Of Dick Hardt
>> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 1:20 PM
>> To: board at openid.net
>> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] Funding Proposal
>>
>> Nicely done Artur, Bill and David.
>>
>> I'm supportive of floating this proposal out to the Community where
>> pay-to-play happens at the membership level rather then the board
>> level.
>>
>> Note the attached charter was an old copy as I was not listed as a
>> board
>> member in the copy you sent out to the board.
>>
>> -- Dick
>>
>>
>> On 9-Apr-07, at 12:44 PM, Recordon, David wrote:
>>
>>> Hey all,
>>> This morning Bill, Artur, and I finally got a chance to sit down and
>>> put together another funding proposal for the organization.  This
>>> document was based upon the approach Dick proposed [1] as well as  
>>> the
>>> OCO Charter sent to the general@ list [2].
>>>
>>> Certainly looking for feedback and thoughts, happy to give others
>>> editing rights on the wiki page if you send me your OpenID.  Once
>>> again, sorry for how long this took us to take on this work.
>>>
>>> http://daveman692.schtuff.com/oidf_proposal
>>>
>>> --David
>>>
>>> [1] http://openid.net/pipermail/board/2007-March/000071.html
>>> [2] http://openid.net/pipermail/general/2007-February/001550.html
>>> (charter attached since it seems it wasn't archived) <OpenID
>>> Foundation Charter.txt>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> board mailing list
>>> board at openid.net
>>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board




More information about the board mailing list