[Ncdxf-bod-sub] Navassa Island DXpedtion revised budget and letter of explanation...

Thu Nov 20 09:45:53 PST 2014

N1DG votes a grant of $30,000.
As always I will change my vote to match the majority decision.

Don
N1DG

At 12:17 PM 11/20/2014, W6OTC wrote:
>        I agree with the following points made by Don:
>
>        1.  QSL income (thanks to OQRS) has become more and more important to
>the "most wanted" DXpeditions and has increased substantially over the past
>5 or so years, and US hams are the major donors to OQRS.  Whatever the need
>in EU/AS, those hams are not major contributors to DXpeditions.  QSOs for
>this operation will certainly equal at least 150,000; I personally expect
>200,000.
>        2.  UEE finances are never transparent.  I don't know if he even
>gives his own team all the real numbers especially re income.  We need
>access to his raw data, particular the geographical distribution of OQRS
>income.  That has been half-promised in the past but never delivered.
>
>        I don't agree entirely with the following points made by Don:
>
>        1.  EU should give more, especially where the need is greater for
>them than for the US.  Yes, but the fact is they do not have a history or
>culture of giving and indeed there is a strong faction in Europe (centered
>in G-land and which we have discussed before) that thinks QSLs should be
>instant and free for all--a view that would destroy the economic basis for
>major DXpeditions.  The US does have a history and culture of private giving
>to support public good, hence tax deductions for charitable giving and the
>existence of the NCDXF.   I don't think our lesser contribution will produce
>a greater contribution from EU.  I do think that since we are the big dog in
>Foundation giving, we can and should be more assertive in conditioning our
>grants on more full disclosure of financial results of DXpeditions we fund,
>at least those above some significant grant level, perhaps $20,000.   But
>that is a separate discussion for full implementation (e.g. the application
>needs to be modified).
>        2.  This is a Caribbean DXpedition, instead of a Southern Ocean or
>the Pacific one so we should give less.  The specific location  is not
>controlling for me.  The issues are rarity, the cost of the DXpedition and
>the contribution/op.  If, as in the past, it was easy to get permission to
>land on KP1 and KP5, we wouldn't be dealing with a 15-man UEE DXpedition at
>all.  Many small groups would find more economic ways to go there
>frequently.  But since UEE is the only one to have gotten permission to
>reactivate these two entities (only once so far) we have to deal with him
>and the idea of rare and large DXpeditions instead of frequent and small
>DXpeditions.  To the list of likely future DXpetitions that Don lists, we
>now know from today's Daily DX that we can add Palmyra which will have
>similar problems.  I still say we deal with each application when it is
>made, rather than let potential future DXpeditions influence what we give
>now (whenever "now" is).  Some of the expected future ones may not
>materialize in the near future; others we don't yet know may appear.  But
>note that we have never developed a working philosophy of the amount of our
>assets we should spend/yr.  That is another issue for separate discussion.
>
>
>        So, at the moment, we have no stated opposition to the idea of making
>a grant, and we have before us a range of $30-40k.   Please comment and/or
>be ready to vote by tomorrow (Friday).  We need to make a decision on this
>application.
>
>        73, Glenn, W6OTC
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ncdxf-bod-sub [mailto:ncdxf-bod-sub-bounces at kkn.net] On Behalf Of Don
>Greenbaum
>Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 7:24 PM
>To: ncdxf-bod-sub at kkn.net
>Subject: Re: [Ncdxf-bod-sub] Navassa Island DXpedtion revised budget and
>letter of explanation...
>
>As I wrote earlier this month, the budget spreadsheet either totally
>misrepresents the income they can expect from this expedition or it reflects
>that it is not rare enough in North America to generate the
>QSL/donation responses one would expect from a top 5 needed entity.   As
>our studies have shown, expeditions today get the bulk of their income from
>North America.   This is based on both club and foundation funding (NCDXF
>is a major part of this portion of  fundraising) and US hams typically give
>more donation $ with their OQRS requests.   The demand in Asia and Europe
>far outstrips the demand in the US.   Why must the US finance the bulk of
>this operation if the entity is not as rare here?  Even so, this group of
>15 should make a minimum of 150,000 QSOs given the proximity to NA and EU.
>
>  From your Treasurer's point of view, so far this year we have taken in
>around $70,000 in donations (95% North America).  We have given out so far
>$30,500.  In the next year, we have expeditions to the South Atlantic,
>Heard, Bouvet, and several more rumored in the Pacific.  If we finance a
>Caribbean expedition to the tune of $40,000 or more what should the hard to
>get to places expect next year?  What can we afford to give the hard to
>reach destination DXpeditions.
>
>This is a DXpedition in our back yard.   Fish and Wildlife specified a
>Helicopter must be kept on emergency standby, not that a Helicopter must
>make all the trips to the Island.  The helicopter transportation is not the
>cheapest route, but the fastest and easiest.  I am happy to see the team is
>putting up a bigger chunk of money than originally stated and raised their
>contributions to $10,000 each.   By the way, even at $10,000 their share of
>the total costs is less than the total budget % than other
>mega-expeditions.  It scares me that KP1 is a mega-expedition.   Just last
>week a member of the team to KP1 who is also a board member here mentioned
>the 2.5X rule for funding.   That would make our contribution on that
>formula $25,000.
>
>While we can also expect that if there is a surplus (as almost all of
>K4UEEs trips generate) KP1 will probably see a refund.   However, we have
>never gotten a full accounting of past K4UEE finances and we have no idea if
>the refunds Bob makes are based on a formula.  Does our Foundation get back
>the same percentage as other Foundations, team members, etc.  This lack of
>transparency has always bothered some of the Board.
>
>I would like to suggest a grant of $30,000 and if we are wrong in our
>analysis, they can always ask for more when they return.
>
>Don
>N1DG
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------
>N1DG--Licensed since 1962
>EX-WB2DND, A61AD (GUEST OP, QSL MGR), A52DG, C92DG, /VP8O, /KH4,  / KH9,
>/BV, /VS6, /4X, /9V /A7
>Webmaster:  VP8O, K4M, BS7H, 3Y0X, K5K, A52A, VK0IR, 9M0C, ZK1XXP,
>WB2DND/KH9, BQ9P, ZL9CI
>2006 inductee into the CQ Magazine DX Hall of Fame
>Member:  NCDXF, CWops, ARRL, DDXA, YCCC
>
>AIM SKYPE:  aurumtel
>
>
>Please consider the environment before printing this email
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ncdxf-bod-sub mailing list
>Ncdxf-bod-sub at kkn.net
>http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/ncdxf-bod-sub
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ncdxf-bod-sub mailing list
>Ncdxf-bod-sub at kkn.net
>http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/ncdxf-bod-sub

Don Greenbaum
Aurum Telemedia Co. 27 Pill Hill Lane, Duxbury, MA 02332 phone: 781 934 5534
Aurum London:  319 EndsleIgh Court, London, UK phone:  97150 553 5528
Aurum Middle East: Qatar  97150 553 5228
www.gulftrackservices.com
www.aurumtel.com
www.artificialcognition.com
AIM:  aurumtel

* * * Powerful Solutions Start with the Right Questions * * *