[SCA] ok, now what?

[cellio]

SCA Inc. charges a $3 tax per event for people who attend but are not members of the corporation. I find this offensive because SCA Inc. does not bear the cost of putting on events; the local groups do. (So it's not like the higher admission fee you pay a museum if you don't belong.) There are some small benefits that the corporation provides to the hosting group, such as access to insurance, but the last time I ran the numbers this amounted to about $2/person/year. So, the tax is somewhere between price gouging (if you believe they have the right to assess a fee) and thuggery (if you don't).

I don't go to a lot of events these days; my local group doesn't hold very many and I don't travel for them. And I don't really want to be on the membership rolls of this corporation, so thus far I have been paying the fee. The presence of the fee does influence my decision to attend an event; if I'm waffling that can push me. (There is an "out" that is available to local groups, so charging the fee represents a decision on the part of the hosting group. A surprising number of local-group officers feel it is their moral obligation to charge this fee. To each his own. [Edit: I am speaking generally here, not about one group.]) It's not the $3; it's the principle.

The corporation announced today that this fee will be rising to $5 per event.

My goal is to minimize the money the corporation gets from me while enjoying marginal participation in events. (This is not identical to maximizing money in my pocket because of the Pennsic non-member tax. Some of that money -- I've sent email asking how much -- goes to Pennsic, not to the corporation. I am willing to pay a higher price to Pennsic.) An associate membership costs $20, so now I have to figure out how many fee-charging events I am likely to go to in a year. Working against this analysis is the temptation to just say "screw it" except for Pennsic and free local events. I've been drifting away from the SCA (Pennsic is different; that's family vacation), and I wonder how much I care any more.

No decisions, just thoughts.

Comments

[msmemory.livejournal.com]

My issue with today's Finance Committee announcement has to do with their decision to raise membership prices $2 per year. It seems to be a number they pulled out of their asses. If they were serious about evaluating cost and inflation they would do both of: raise the membership price by $5 because raising it by only $2 is a sure route to raising it by another $2 next year; and explore ways to deliver corporate value, most especially kingdom publications, for minimal cost, i.e. electronically.

[mbarr.livejournal.com]

Hmm..

See, my thinking on it was always that Pennsic's non-member price was more than the price of a membership, or at least even. I just tend to join just before going to Pennsic.

That tends to take care of the question for me.

[alaricmacconnal.livejournal.com]

(This is not identical to maximizing money in my pocket because of the Pennsic non-member tax. Some of that money -- I've sent email asking how much -- goes to Pennsic, not to the corporation. I am willing to pay a higher price to Pennsic.)

Pennsic sends the required $3 per non-member adult to the SCA, Inc (no more, no less). For 2005 the amount was $9177 (3059 people) and for 2006 it was $9519 (3173 people).

[yuggazogy.livejournal.com]

I wonder if the rise in rates is to offset declining growth rates and/or drops in membership (as in the sudden increase in "What are we doing wrong/right?" emails and surveys from the BoD/Grand Council reps.

[byronhaverford.livejournal.com]

It always seems to me that you and Dani are anjoying yourselves at events, perhaps as much for the social aspect as for anything medieval. It would be a shame to lose that because the central office has one lousy policy.

[hildakrista.livejournal.com]

my local group doesn't hold very many and I don't travel for them

Can't agree with this one. For the past 5 years, as far as my data goes back, we've had on average about 6 1/2 events per year. Here I include the Pennsic receptions, which represent both financial output from the bank account's coffers and social interaction for the populace. This is only Allegheny County, mind you. If you were to count events held by other local groups that used to be part of the Barony even 10 years ago, there are a lot more, more like one a month or more.

A surprising number of local-group officers feel it is their moral obligation to charge this fee.

Again, I don't agree with this. of the 33 events we've held in the past five years, 12 of them were free events, or about 1 of 3 of them. Even discounting the Pennsic receptions (which I personally wouldn't, since they cost money without specific member contribution towards it), 7 of the 33 were free, or about 1 of 5. I think you'll find that this ratio is much better than other groups, simply because the local officers do actively encourage free events. Perhaps you are remembering resistance from over 5 years ago.

Also remember that it is the autocrats that come up with event bids, not the officers. We just approve them or suggest changes. In fact, I can remember at least 3 specific instances in the past few years where an autocrat came to us with a regular fee structure (which would have meant charging the NMS), and the officers recommended making it a free event. And at least 5 specific instances (probably more that I can't recall) where we recommended a reduced price for minors so they wouldn't be charged.

I don't think the majority of the current local officers see the NMS, or even being a member, as some kind of moral obligation. For example, in fall 2008, we changed election policy so that people who were not members for one reason or another could request a ballot for Baronial elections, which had previously been limited to members only.

I took the numbers from the past 5 years and worked them into the hypothetical situation where the Barony only charged for optional food at events (the "out" available to us). So all profit must come from direct contributions or other areas (fundraising, inventory sales, etc). To be at the same financial place we were at end 2009, we would have had to raise $423 at each event for the past 5 years, including the Pennsic receptions. Since fundraising takes a significant amount of energy and effort from the the local population, I do not believe that we currently have the resources to to sustain such a large-scale, time-intensive funds drive. Yes, we can do it at some events. No, it would not fly at every event, IMO. So I think our current model of 2 free events a year, balanced by traditional events is a pretty good one. Hopefully we can get autocrats to submit more free events.

And I have to add: I think raising the NMS to $5 without real justification is absolutely appalling. Gouging indeed! I could understand where they were coming from, if only they would justify it with numbers.