<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for lobue</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/lobue/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/lobue/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 09:46:18 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Associations and the Free or Fee Decision: Associations Now</title><link>http://associationsnow.com/2013/03/the-free-or-fee-decision/#comment-822985054</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I read this article and can't help but wonder:  "Are there any membership-based organizations left concerned with creating come impact in their professions or market segments, or have they all become transaction-based entities treading dangerously on their tax exempt qualifications?"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm not suggesting that it was wrong for ALTA to start charging for its forms after years of not charging for them.  But I do think it matters why they started charging for them.  If organizations charge for their benefits because they want a return for their intellectual property, that's very different than charging because the organization requires funds to sustain and add to that intellectual property for some higher purpose and for the future.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In my experience -- organizations that are too concerned with what goes on "inside their organizations" vs. "creating impacts outside their organizations" are organizations that hollow out eventually.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 09:46:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Dues Decisions: Even in Recession, Member Dues Increases Still Common: Associations Now</title><link>http://associationsnow.com/2013/02/even-in-the-recession-member-dues-increases-still-common/#comment-814567440</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Precisely!  So a more dispassionate examination of actual data, vs. what executives "think" is going on (always a weak survey structure), we can begin to question all the "chicken littles" telling us the "dues revenue sky is falling" ;-)  I'm working on a short white paper analyzing actual decisions made by members and association execs vs. what we've been hearing from thought leaders about all the "new normals."  So far there's reason to be skeptical of all the claims.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:37:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Dues Decisions: Even in Recession, Member Dues Increases Still Common: Associations Now</title><link>http://associationsnow.com/2013/02/even-in-the-recession-member-dues-increases-still-common/#comment-814185264</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This is an especially interesting finding when compared with the fact that there's been a slight reduction in dues revenue in the operating ratios over at least the last 19 years (since 1993 - 9th Edition).  The reduction is 2.6 points (not percent); this is a snail's pace of change.  During that period it took about 7 years to drop a single percentage point using 1993 as the basis year.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, given that we're talking about ratios, this data does not tell us if the dues portion of revenue is due to attrition, despite more than half of the polled associations raised their dues, or if all revenue sources have collectively increased and the average association is enjoying a bigger revenue-pie with non-dues growing faster AND sufficiently to really expand the pie.  Keep in mind - a large increase by a small revenue source to begin with may have no material impact on the overall budget.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for this article!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:29:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Powerful Tea Party Group&amp;#039;s Internal Docs Leak—Read Them Here</title><link>http://www.motherjones.com/node/212071#comment-756786764</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Mitchell -- sorry to tell you, but most young people like Ron Paul and Libertarianism for the same reason we fall hard for our first love.  It's called infatuation.  Please don't take this as patronizing; it's not meant to be.  Fortunately, most folks grow up politically and realize that Ayn Rand was a fiction writer and not a scholar.  Unfortunately, some never grow out of it, like Ron Paul.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 05 Jan 2013 09:49:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: KKSF 103.7 - Smooth Jazz</title><link>http://www.kksf.com/main.html#comment-9824767</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Wow!  Bad move!  As others, I too am disappointed, have been listening since you came on the air, but will now have to find an alternative.  Please find a way to let all your loyal listeners know when you wake up and revive the Smooth Jazz format -- after all, if Coke realized their mistake in changing a winning format, there's hope that you will too.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 10:25:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: KKSF 103.7 - Smooth Jazz</title><link>http://www.kksf.com/main.html#comment-9811660</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Wow!  Bad move!  As others, I too am disappointed, have been listening since you came on the air, but will now have to find an alternative.  Please find a way to let all your loyal listeners know when you wake up and revive the Smooth Jazz format -- after all, if Coke realized their mistake in changing a winning format, there's hope that you will too.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 19:01:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Wordle is worth a thousand words&amp;#8230;</title><link>http://www.principledinnovation.com/blog/2008/09/30/a-wordle-is-worth-a-thousand-words/#comment-2823065</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure it means anything.  What's it suppose to mean?  Is this the "word version" of the Roschach inkblot test?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 12:05:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Interesting application of free</title><link>http://www.principledinnovation.com/blog/2008/09/04/interesting-application-of-free/#comment-2302907</link><description>&lt;p&gt;On the surface, this might seem like an interesting idea, but it could also be a disaster.  Fortunately, there are existing constructs for thinking this idea through and when it might apply and when it should be avoided.  I think the right place to start is with a clear understanding of the purpose of dues.  It clearly is a means of collecting revenue to cover operations.  But it is also a proxy for commitment.  In the area of trade associations I would argue that "a proxy for commitment" is more important than the revenue stream generated.  When dues are too low, the decision to join a trade association may not be made high enough in a member company to get the additional needed involvement of member representatives to support and drive the organization's mission.  So, organization type and purpose dues serve are critical first steps in any analysis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's also important to note that this is NOT a new idea.  Thousands of independent, and increasingly public schools, are assessing parents a fee (dues?) if they don't log their "volunteer hours" to support school programs.  This is not meant as a penalty, but a recognition that all families need to support school activities and some are just not able to put in the time, so they are assessed a fee.  Isn't this also a variant of the historical practice of "buying your way out of military service"?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 12:16:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A secret session</title><link>http://www.principledinnovation.com/blog/2008/07/26/a-secret-session/#comment-1014322</link><description>&lt;p&gt;So, why is it "secret"?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lobue</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 13:21:32 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>