Sean Triner Blog

Raising capital for fundraising investment: A new future?

Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011

Good fundraising programs have excellent returns. Despite the constant nonsense about high cost of fundraising, most charities achieve extraordinary results from little funds.

Investing in direct mail, phone or face to face / direct dialogue can achieve amazing results for charities – an investment of $1m could generate between $500k and $1m net ‘profit’ every year for five years or more – a great return and better than the stock market.

According to Givewell, the top 100 Australian charities* by investment portfolio have about $6.8bn in reserve. These reserves will be invested in property and traditional investment markets.

I have argued before that charities should consider fundraising as part of their investment portfolio. The chart below shows how a decent fundraising program would outperform investments in property or shares, assuming they achieve an average of 8.4% and 10% respectively – both excellent returns in this day and age.

Clearly fundraising can be a better option, but it needs to be good fundraising built on proven techniques to be invest-worthy.

But what if you have no money to invest? Although these big charities have plenty of money, most charities are simply not rich. So how do they take advantage of the excellent returns fundraising can offer?

I know of one charity in the UK that borrowed money from a bank to invest in fundraising. Another decided to use all of it’s income to reinvest in fundraising – not doing any charitable work until it had enough capital.

But Scope in the UK has taken this to another level. Their fundraising shops are doing well, and they want to increase the number of shops from 250 to 350. This will cost more than they have spare, so they are launching a bond. This is the first I have ever heard of at this scale.

They are asking investors for $30m. Just like a company would raise capital. They will repay investors just like a company would.

Brave and Brilliant, and hopefully the start of a new trend of social investment portfolios.

More info here.

* As declared in annual reports 2009/2010. Some charities in Australia do not produce annual reports, including some very big ones with very large reserves.

PS – thanks Jan Chisholm for the info!

Tags: Fundraising, Givewell, invest, Scope, Sean Triner, social bond
Posted in Sean Triner Blog | No Comments »

Dan Pallotta

Tuesday, October 25th, 2011

By Sean Triner

At the final hours of the IFC conference in the Netherlands. Nearly 1,000 Fundraisers here including 27 from New Zealand and Australia. Lots of great learning, and a very worthwhile conference to invest in.

The closing plenary was delivered by Dan Pallotta – and evangelist on cost of fundraising and fair compensation for charity employees. Great stuff, really great structured arguments and well worth listening to.

For you Australians, you don’t need to leave the country to see him. He is presenting at FIA in February 2012 at the Gold Coast. As well as lots of other learning opportunities – with lots of great local trainers and Tony Elischer, Kay Sprinkel-Grace and Adrian Sargeant – the conference looks fantastic. I reckon this is one Fundraisers should drag their CEOs and CFOs along.

http://www.fiaconference.org.au/index.php for the conference.

http://www.danpallotta.com/ for information on Dan.

Tags: Cost of Fundraising, Dan Pallotta, Fundraising, IFC 2011, Sean Triner
Posted in 2012 FIA Conference, International Fundraising Congress 2011, Sean Triner Blog | No Comments »

A fundraiser, fundraising

Monday, October 24th, 2011

By Sean Triner

Please will you help me raise money for Amnesty International – and enjoy a good yarn too?

I am running a storytelling masterclass at the International Fundraising Congress and thought I would get it off to a good start with a story which has nothing to do with fundraising!

For just $3.99 (GBP2.49) you can buy my ‘e-book’ Haruki The Knife Maker and all the proceeds that I receive will go to Amnesty International.

Telling a good story is essential for making fundraising work. It doesn’t matter what tactics you use, what good data selections or targeting you do or what staff you employ, you have to tell a good story.

For years now, I have been writing and directing stories to raise money for fantastic charities. So I thought I would write a special story that is not in my normal forte. I have decided to dedicate this story to Amnesty International and all the staff and volunteers there as well as the people who have survived human rights abuses – or are surviving right now.

The story is just 4,500 words. It took my friend Tom Ahern about fifteen minutes to read in an airport lounge so it shouldn’t take you long. This is what he said.

5.0 out of 5 stars

Unforgettable tale, exquisitely illustrated

By Thomas Ahern (Foster, RI USA)

This review is from: Haruki the Knife Maker (Kindle Edition)

I wasn’t prepared for Haruki to take over my life … but he did. Sean Triner is a soulful writer. His folkloristic tale is poetic, clear-eyed, and quick … a brilliant evocation of how the simple, orderly world of a masterly village knifemaker is torn to pieces by modern economics … and Haruki’s heart-wrenching journey to recover his livelihood. The surprise ending … well, I’ll leave that for readers to savor. The matching illustrations are lovely and apt. And all proceeds go to Amnesty International, a cause Sean Triner has advanced for years. Read it. Share it. Gift it to your Kindle-loving friends.

Joan Clarke at the Bedford Foundation had a glimpse of the story on my iPhone. The illustrations got her interest at first but “I started reading the story and was gripped straight away, it was thought provoking and very poignant. Without noticing, I had ignored my red wine and the rest of the group. Fifteen minutes flew by and I had finished the story, disappointed it had ended. Thoroughly recommend it.”

The official reviews have been great so far too. I do hope that you can spare the time to read it, and the $3.99 that it costs to buy. All the proceeds will be donated to Amnesty International.

The story is published as an ebook. If you have an iPad or iPhone, you can buy it easily through iBooks. It is also available on Amazon Kindle and various other ereaders. If you haven’t an ereader, then you can buy it at Smashwords, or else donate at least $5 on my fundraising page and send me your email address and I will send you a copy.

Still not convinced? A load of reviews are below…

Thank you, and I hope that you enjoy it.

Airdre Grant, 5 stars.

“I found this to be a very elegantly written tale. It works as a fable for me as it tells an egaging story and also invites us to think about the relationship between violence and beauty, and the collision between old words and new, greed and sacrifice. I recommend it.”

Review by: Sharon Dopson, 5 stars

“What a beautiful fable, a sad very realistic view of our greedy changing world. I will recommend to all my friends.”

Review by: Alexbecky: 4 stars “This modern fable is beautifully illustrated and is a fascinating read. It really makes you think about the beauty of simplicity, and what can happen when both greedy capitalism and monolithic communism combine to destroy an ancient way of life.”

Review by: Christiana Stergiou, 5 stars

“This is a wonderful, meaningful and easy to read book. It’s simple language conveys a deep story that is a fable for our times. It is beautifully illustrated, too. It’s sad to think that there have been many Harukis whose simple and sustainable existence have been sacrificed for our modern, convenient and consumerist lifestyle. I would love a set of Haruki’s knives!”

Tags: fundraiser, Fundraising, haruki, storytelling
Posted in Sean Triner Blog, Story telling | No Comments »

Tom Ahern at F and P Forum

Tuesday, September 6th, 2011

By Sean Triner

Short lesson from from F and P Australasian fundraising forum…

Tom Ahern on newsletters. The purpose of the newsletter is kind of like the lessons from ‘How to Win Friends and Influence People’. Tell your donors how good they are.

For example, the Gillette children’s charity, instead of saying how good your work is ‘At Gillette, medical pioneers set the standards for spine care’ tell the donor how good they are. ‘Zawadi says “Thank you” you helped Tanzanian girl stand tall on her own two feet’.

This lesson should of course apply to all donor communications.

It is not about you, it is about the donor.

Getting this right will increase your income, period.

Posted in F&P Magazine, Sean Triner Blog | No Comments »

Better Story Telling

Friday, September 2nd, 2011

By Sean Triner

Many charities have proven that telling individual stories is more motivating for potential donors than throwing statistics and numbers at them.

Telling people that there are 10,000 people diagnosed with x disease per annum is not as effective as telling a story about one person with that disease, and what you can do to help.

Story telling hammers fact sharing when it comes to soliciting donations.

Assuming that you have already been convinced that this is the case, then the next stage is to write those stories in a really engaging way.

I often get involved in writing copy and a trick that I have found is that stories flow better, and are more engaging if they are personal, involving, directly thank the donor, and are witnessed.

By witnessed, I mean kind of like what preachers do. Don’t just tell someone a story, make it personal. Since good direct mail letters should be written in first person singular, to a donor, the writer should be telling the story from their perspective,

In a story about someone with x disease, the writer should have met that person or their family. It is more compelling to say ‘when I met Bill, I was shocked when he told me that…’ ‘it brought me close to tears…’ than just saying something like ‘let me tell you about Bill. He was diagnosed with ….’

Take a leaf from preachers – witness change.

Posted in Fundraising Appeals, Sean Triner Blog, Story telling | No Comments »

How many times to mail?

Monday, July 4th, 2011

By Sean Triner

Last week the UK Fundraising Group on LinkedIn began a thread about how often to mail people.

So how often should you mail?

At Pareto we look at data and try to work out what the optimum communications program should be to maximize lifetime value from donors. Donors are very expensive to get on board, and it is imperative that you look at your data to maximize return on that initial investment.

The most important factor for whether someone will give to you is whether they gave to you previously. Then, the most important variables are how recently and how many times. The more recent someone gave, the more likely they are to give again.So, mailing, emailing or phoning more often means that you are constantly communicating with donors more recently, and therefore more likely to get gifts from them.

Also, the biggest cause of attrition is not giving for a while (!). Fewer communications mean that the gap between giving is greater. If you don’t communicate very often your attrition goes up, not down. Unless your communications are not very good.When it comes to asking donors for a monthly gift we also note that there is an optimum time. It does vary slightly, depending on cause, channel of solicitation etc but it is always going to be within a couple of months of a gift.

Four to six weeks is the right place to start. We are not alone with this approach, anyone else who measures life time value and optimum ‘conversion’ timings finds the same answer.

And this does not appear to vary between countries. We took that learning from data in the UK and applied it in Australia to find the same. Analysing data across other countries gives us the same result.This approach is not aggressive, and is not subjective or an opinion. It is maths. Across any given data set, increasing communications tends to increase the lifetime value of that data set. Not just short term income, but overall giving.

Managed well it should also increase your number of bequestors.Jeff Brooks of the best fundraising blog, Future Fundraising Now advocates at least thirty asks per annum. That seems a lot, but he says that he has never seen increasing the number of asks decrease the total value given.The limit on the number of communications is likely to be forced on you for internal reasons – your capacity to produce multiple communications.

Also, increasing the number of asks is likely to increase total given, and increase retention but each time it also increases costs and reduces the amount given on that occasion. Consequently an initial increase in ROI as you go from say four to eight communications will reverse and you will probably begin to see a decline as you go from say eight to sixteen.

Even so, net income is the best measure – not ROI – from warm mailings to your own donors. It is better to raise $700k at a cost of $300k than $500k at a cost of $100k. More donors, more security, more room for error, more legacy potentials etc = more money in the end.

Posted in Fundraising Appeals, Sean Triner Blog | No Comments »

What’s in a name?

Friday, April 1st, 2011

By Sean Triner

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.”

William Shakespeare, through Romeo and Juliet, may have had a point. But actually, a common knowledge is useful, especially in teaching.

I presented two sessions at AFP last week, to a mostly American audience and spoke about two things – what we in Australia call regular giving and a method of recruiting them, called face to face.

By regular givers, I mean someone who has money debited automatically again and again in an agreed time period, usually monthly.

By face to face, I mean the act of speaking with someone, in person, and asking them for such an automatic donation.

These two names don’t really work.

To many fundraisers, a regular giver is, understandably, someone who gives – um – regularly. This could include people who donate every Christmas. So regular givers is not the right term. The Canadian approach is to call them monthly givers, but this doesn’t quite work either, since some are quarterly and some are fortnightly.

As for face to face, many fundraisers have, for decades, referred to the act of asking major donors for money, in person, as face to face. So this confuses people. Even if you define what you are talking about, people need to train their minds to the crossed meaning, which reduces the impact of the point of the teaching.

My proposed solution is to grab the best descriptions that exist and make them universal (for English speakers anyway – I don’t know where to start with Chinese or Spanish equivalents).

I recommend for monthly donors / regular donors / automatic debitors we take on the American descriptor: “Sustainer”. It makes sense, isn’t a re-branding of the word and is not ambiguous.

For face to face / street fundraising / chugging we should go with the old British descriptor:
“Direct dialogue”. I won’t even complain about the inevitable American misspelling (dialog) which is more environmentally friendly anyway. (Think about it).

Anyone want to help me with the re-branding campaign?

Posted in 2011 AFP Conference, Face to Face, Regular Giving, Sean Triner Blog | No Comments »

Is nuclear energy a viable solution?

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011

By Sean Triner

The pain and fear for people in Japan is truly horrible. The government has lost credibility in what it is saying about the partial meltdown of the now infamous reactor 2 at Fukushima. But what is the real data?

I am currently in Canada, having spent some time in the US where Americans have been buying iodine to such a degree that there were TV ads running in the USA informing people about scams around radiation treatments.

And when they said on the news that a pool of water had one million times the safe dose of radiation – what did that actually mean? No wonder people – even across the Pacific – are worried with statements like that.

This superb graphic puts into perspective in a very easy way. Whilst the graphic makes you realise things aren’t that bad (at this point in time) it doesn’t take into account indirect effects of the nuclear industry – weapons and waste in particular.

I am still torn on nuclear energy as part of a solution for energy needs. Just because it is not as bad as coal* does not necessarily make it a good thing. Especially when weapons and waste are taken into account. But what, real alternatives are we going to actually take up?

* In terms of anticipated deaths, environmental impact etc – even including a Chernobyl size disaster every couple of decades, coal power appears to be worse than nuclear.

Posted in News, Sean Triner Blog | No Comments »

Cost of fundraising is the wrong measure

Monday, March 28th, 2011

By Sean Triner

Several people at the AFP conference talked to me about how cost of fundraising (or required return on investment – ROI) was a challenging obstacle for their fundraising efforts. Especially if they were a small organisation or had a challenging ‘type’ of cause. For example, it is easier to raise money for breast cancer than cystic fibrosis.

The state of Oregon in the USA is the latest place to totally misunderstand this concept.

Dan Pallotta tells you more here. He also puts out a useful argument to present to your board about why it is the wrong measure.

Posted in 2011 AFP Conference, Sean Triner Blog | No Comments »

Pareto Fundraising

Sean Triner Blog

Dan Pallotta

A fundraiser, fundraising

Tom Ahern at F and P Forum

Better Story Telling

How many times to mail?

What’s in a name?

Is nuclear energy a viable solution?

Cost of fundraising is the wrong measure

News & Articles

Categories

Archives