Budget passed unanimously. Not much discussion, but that's because there was some talk on the AMC elist earlier, including several members speaking strongly about their concerns that our estimate of membership level was too optimistic. The Finance Committee presented a revised version that had a lower number of members... a few cuts here and there and we still have a budget that ends in the black.
Now Guy Conti is leading us on a discussion of dues rates structures-- possibly having different rates for different ages and family members. The key is, how does it impact retention and our budget? Are there different classes of membership?
For now, all the AMC is doing is contributing ideas of data we need to know to make a good decision on this. How much does it cost to serve a member? How do dues increases affect retention? how much do LGs need to serve members? What is the tipping point at which multi-year members are not cost-effective?
A few members are throwing out suggestions for dues structures. but really, we're just preparing to create a background paper on this topic-- not actually thinking up the solution now.
... and now we're all happily me-tooing and tossing out ideas. Sigh. Horse is dead. We're not supposed to be figuring out the solution now. Move on.
Pam is asking for direction-- if we want a younger member dues structure, are there other options we also want to consider?
Now discussing the general notion and ethical implications of having different rates for different members. Guy just talked- hard to sum it up, since I was listening instead of typing, but he's really on top of this and is thinking objectivley. Props!
No comments:
Post a Comment