No, you're not. And that's why non-profits have to spend large sums of money on marketing to convince people to give more.
But you say: "Marketing is a waste of money for a charity! Feed more starving kids with it!" That sounds good, until you realize that the ROI on marketing is positive and if the charity wants to grow, it has to spend a portion of each $1 you give to it trying to get the next $1 to help it grow.
Thus we end up with overhead, which ironically, can upset people more and make them want to give less.
It's a vicious cycle people. Spread the love and give.
Marketplace on NPR interviewed an economist researching charity fundraising. Some highlights from the interview:
* 1-to-1 match works well, but increasing the match to 2-1 or 3-1 doesn't do any additional good.
* Raffles. If you're serious about raising money, offer people a prize. And just by doing that you end up increasing gifts by as much as 100 percent.
* "Once-and-done" policy: Since charities know it's annoying to constantly get solicitations in the mail, they give you a choice: if you send in some money today, and check a box opting out, we'll never bother you again. People who are given the once and done proposition, they not only give more money in that particular fund-raising drive, but they do not check the box. And in future months they end up giving more money that people who never received the once-and-done proposition.
But you say: "Marketing is a waste of money for a charity! Feed more starving kids with it!" That sounds good, until you realize that the ROI on marketing is positive and if the charity wants to grow, it has to spend a portion of each $1 you give to it trying to get the next $1 to help it grow.
Thus we end up with overhead, which ironically, can upset people more and make them want to give less.
It's a vicious cycle people. Spread the love and give.