scrap the membership fees?
Peter Deitz
I've been mulling over the membership fees issue this week. First,
talking with Christine. Second, brainstorming with Joe Solomon about
the web applications and potential earned income programs. Third, a few
promising conversations with other people who know the space very well.
I'm beginning to think that the membership fees for social action
platforms is simply not creative enough. In the same way that
advertisements and commissions on donations made me uneasy, I'm getting
the same feeling about the membership fees.
Christine is getting ready to start contacting the platforms about
formalizing our relationships. She'll be asking them what they need
from us. The last thing I think they'll say is, "we need you to charge
us membership fees."
Suffice to say, I've put my thinking cap back on. Updates to follow.
All the best,
Peter
Amy Sample Ward
a
Amy Sample Ward
http://amysampleward.org
amyr...@gmail.com
503-780-8578
Dedicated to supporting and educating nonprofits and the progressive social change sector about evolving technologies that cultivate and engage communities.
Frerieke vanbree
JoeSolomon
democratic inclusion & and potentially act as a barrier of entry & a
hindrance to collaboration.
While I think integrating membership fees in such a way that it was
still inclusive might work (this is something that has been
discussed), I don't think it would have enough return on investment to
make it worth going through the trouble.
Hope my 2 cents makes sense,
---Joe
On Jul 10, 2:15 pm, "Frerieke vanbree" <freri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> peter, as always, committed
>
> and that is the way you'll create the extraordinary results!
>
> only when everybody is winning, that is when the social action team wins
>
> if membership fee will not make a member win,
>
> nobody will
>
> i'm here for a brainstorm session!
> skype on?
>
> fre
>
>
>
> > Just to quickly chime in, Peter; I mirror your uneasy feelings about
> > memberhip fees. Looking forward to more ideas and conversation about it
> > though.
>
> > a
>
>
> >> Hi all,
>
> >> I've been mulling over the membership fees issue this week. First,
> >> talking with Christine. Second, brainstorming with Joe Solomon about
> >> the web applications and potential earned income programs. Third, a few
> >> promising conversations with other people who know the space very well.
>
> >> I'm beginning to think that the membership fees for social action
> >> platforms is simply not creative enough. In the same way that
> >> advertisements and commissions on donations made me uneasy, I'm getting
> >> the same feeling about the membership fees.
>
> >> Christine is getting ready to start contacting the platforms about
> >> formalizing our relationships. She'll be asking them what they need
> >> from us. The last thing I think they'll say is, "we need you to charge
> >> us membership fees."
>
> >> Suffice to say, I've put my thinking cap back on. Updates to follow.
>
> >> All the best,
> >> Peter
>
> > --
> > Amy Sample Ward
> >http://amysampleward.org
>
> > Dedicated to supporting and educating nonprofits and the progressive social
> > change sector about evolving technologies that cultivate and engage
> > communities.
>
> Frerieke van Bree
>
> www.lovetotheworld.orgwww.umeebee.com
> +27(0)782080548
> skype: frerieke
Beverley
Social actions is social actions because of the collaborative of all those involved, people resources and platforms themselves.
The value lies in the content platforms are providing...and roles reversed social actions is in some ways a community notice board for social platforms. Where people can sit with their cup of coffee and leisurely read the board of opportunities.
If the idea of a membership is to create revenue and the membership concept not inline with social actions philosophies...then an alternative revenue model needs to be discussed and developed.
I guess I need to ask...what was the basis for thinking about a membership fee structure? To gain revenue or to entrench participation or?
My two cents...
Bc
Beverley Claire Pomeroy
PincGiving
-----Original Message-----
From: JoeSolomon <joso...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:34:43
To: Social Actions<social-...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [social actions] Re: scrap the membership fees?
Peter Deitz
Happy to brainstorm. I'll be on Skype most of the day tomorrow.
I'm heading out now for a summer jog up Mount Royal in Montreal.
See you soon,
Peter
> http://amysampleward.org <http://amysampleward.org/>
> amyr...@gmail.com <mailto:amyr...@gmail.com>
Peter Deitz
The membership fee was designed first and foremost to provide a basis
for sustaining the operation. In a conversation earlier this week with
marketing guru Debbie Lamb, I realized that our membership program was
caught between two models: 1) payments in exchange for the distribution
service (ie, Social Actions as advertisement venue even though that's
not how we would refer to it) and 2) payments in exchange for the
collaborative opportunity (ie, Social Actions as an industry
association, again not the words I would use to describe it.)
In either case, there has to be a strong value _promised_ to the
platforms to encourage them to pay. And the fact is, not all platforms
have the money. So in some strange scenario, with a sliding scale, we
would be getting a bigger platform to underwrite the cost to participate
of the smaller "competitor" platforms. The value proposition breaks
down pretty quickly. And as Joe said, the return for introducing this
complicated dynamic would be pretty small.
So I'm now looking to create a revenue stream from foundations and
corporate philanthropy programs -- not with Social Actions being a grant
recipient, but rather a service provider connecting foundations and
corporate philanthropy programs with simple ways to embrace grassroots
grant-making: either through direct donations to specific platforms or
specific 'types' of actions. I'm fleshing through this model in mind at
lightning speed and think it has tremendous potential. After all, this
is where the money is in the first place. This strategy turns the
membership on its head... we would end up paying the platforms to
participate!
See this brain-dump I wrote on the wikispace:
http://socialactions.wikispaces.com/
"PD: /Earned income plugin/: we could create a program that invites
companies and foundations to sponsor platforms. As people click through
to an action, we could alert the user through a bar at the bottom of
their browser that XX has just made a donation to support Social Actions
and the platform that hosts the action they clicked on. In fact, this
idea could be applied across all of our widgets. I think we could find
the companies / foundations that want to support the micro-philanthrop
sector on a transaction basis. I like this idea because it links our
revenue to the number of people we reach, but it doesn't impose a
commission or rely on advertising."
All the best,
Peter
Frerieke vanbree
what comes up for me the whole time is:
Social actions could really be THE 'online language school of philanthropy' (www.worldspeaking.com)
what do I mean? ... creating a feature on the social actions platform that powerfully allows any 'consultant' to setup online meetings, classes, connect with individuals/groups through a shared communication system. Students/participants/companies pay for the class/consult, small amount of this payment goes to social actions.
tomorrow i'll be in and out,
but we'll make it happen
morning your time?
cheers, fre
Frerieke van Bree
www.lovetotheworld.org
www.umeebee.com
+27(0)782080548
skype: frerieke
Beverley
Peter, can we schedule a call next week. I think you will be interested in a technology Pinc has just developed that would accommodate what Fre articulated below. In fact, it would kick it up a notch.
Cheers
Bc
Beverley Claire Pomeroy
PincGiving
From: "Frerieke vanbree" <frer...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:23:48 +0200
To: <social-...@googlegroups.com>
Ingmar Redel
idea Frerieke!
Best wishes,
Ingmar
Peter Deitz
Sure. Are you free on Monday at noon PDT?
All the best,
Peter
Beverley wrote:
> This is a fantastic concept. Thank you for sharing Frerieke.
>
> Peter, can we schedule a call next week. I think you will be
> interested in a technology Pinc has just developed that would
> accommodate what Fre articulated below. In fact, it would kick it up a
> notch.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bc
>
> Beverley Claire Pomeroy
> PincGiving
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From*: "Frerieke vanbree" <frer...@gmail.com>
> *Date*: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:23:48 +0200
> *To*: <social-...@googlegroups.com>
> *Subject*: [social actions] Re: scrap the membership fees?
> peter that was one of your initial ideas, while you were still here in
> Africa...and yeah i still think that is a great idea
>
> what comes up for me the whole time is:
>
> Social actions could really be THE 'online language school of
> philanthropy' (www.worldspeaking.com <http://www.worldspeaking.com>)
> <mailto:social-...@googlegroups.com>>
> > Subject: [social actions] Re: scrap the membership fees?
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree that membership fees will subtract from the ethos of
> > democratic inclusion & and potentially act as a barrier of entry & a
> > hindrance to collaboration.
> >
> > While I think integrating membership fees in such a way that it was
> > still inclusive might work (this is something that has been
> > discussed), I don't think it would have enough return on
> investment to
> > make it worth going through the trouble.
> >
> > Hope my 2 cents makes sense,
> >
> > ---Joe
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jul 10, 2:15 pm, "Frerieke vanbree" <freri...@gmail.com
> <mailto:freri...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >> peter, as always, committed
> >>
> >> and that is the way you'll create the extraordinary results!
> >>
> >> only when everybody is winning, that is when the social action
> team wins
> >>
> >> if membership fee will not make a member win,
> >>
> >> nobody will
> >>
> >> i'm here for a brainstorm session!
> >> skype on?
> >>
> >> fre
> >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Amy Sample Ward
> <amyrsw...@gmail.com <mailto:amyrsw...@gmail.com>>
> >>> amyrsw...@gmail.com <mailto:amyrsw...@gmail.com>
> >>> 503-780-8578
> >>>
> >>> Dedicated to supporting and educating nonprofits and the
> progressive social
> >>> change sector about evolving technologies that cultivate and
> engage
> >>> communities.
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Frerieke van Bree
> >>
> >> www.lovetotheworld.orgwww.umeebee.com
> <http://www.lovetotheworld.orgwww.umeebee.com>
> >> +27(0)782080548
> >> skype: frerieke
> >>
> >
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Frerieke van Bree
>
> www.lovetotheworld.org <http://www.lovetotheworld.org>
> www.umeebee.com <http://www.umeebee.com>
> +27(0)782080548
> skype: frerieke
>
>
>
> >