Corps applying for World or Open Class status on 2018

[Stu]

5 hours ago, mjoakes said:

This sounds pretty harsh, but I agree with you. Those of us who donated did so given a very fuzzy situation and we should accept the risk that it might remain fuzzy - and for some of us, even unsatisfying.

On the other hand, I also agree with the general point coming out of Tim K's comment: The director and board of a good organization ought to have offered something substantial regarding that plea for help and the response from so many donors. 

A massive amount was given by an emotional response to an emotional plea; for a moment that gave people donating a warm-fuzzy feeling and it saved the day for a touring corps.  That is what you all wanted, and that is what you all got.  Continue to enjoy that warm-fuzzy feeling; in there is your satisfaction!! 'Now' there is concern for a lack of substance being placed out there?  No sympathy on that from this guy; nada, zero, nope, ziltch!!!!

[garfield]

6 hours ago, Tim K said:

I can tell you from experience that is not how the non-profit world works. Ethically Legends would be shooting itself in the foot, and legally if you can't account how money was spent prior to the plea and afterwards, you're an investigation waiting to happen.

For BAND?

Not likely, IMO.

[xandandl]

12 minutes ago, garfield said:

For BAND?

Not likely, IMO.

I have to back TimK and because of experience.  The smaller the non-for-profit the more likely the inspectors of late have been checking up to make sure the account is not some terrorist cash hide-away, etc. The big time inspectors for the big time accounts break their skill sets in with the little accounts looking for a career op. Just like drum corps have feeder corps, experience corps and destination corps. Don't be so arrogant to think it's only the elitists get looked over. That's a G-7 mentality applied to math, ho, ho.

PS. My accounting guys are good which is why we don't get charged penalties even after inspections and audits.

[garfield]

6 minutes ago, xandandl said:

I have to back TimK and because of experience.  The smaller the non-for-profit the more likely the inspectors of late have been checking up to make sure the account is not some terrorist cash hide-away, etc. The big time inspectors for the big time accounts break their skill sets in with the little accounts looking for a career op. Just like drum corps have feeder corps, experience corps and destination corps. Don't be so arrogant to think it's only the elitists get looked over. That's a G-7 mentality applied to math, ho, ho.

PS. My accounting guys are good which is why we don't get charged penalties even after inspections and audits.

What terrorist would launder money through a non-profit where his laundry would represent such a significant portion of the NP assets?  I don't think the IRS thinks this way, and they sure don't express that opinion in the investment industry's efforts to prevent money laundering.

I'd choose United Way, Susan Koman, or Peletonia where it wouldn't be so obvious.

And bones are made in Washington by bringing down the goliaths, not the Davids, IMO.

[Stu]

34 minutes ago, xandandl said:

I have to back TimK and because of experience.  The smaller the non-for-profit the more likely the inspectors of late have been checking up to make sure the account is not some terrorist cash hide-away, etc. The big time inspectors for the big time accounts break their skill sets in with the little accounts looking for a career op. Just like drum corps have feeder corps, experience corps and destination corps. Don't be so arrogant to think it's only the elitists get looked over. That's a G-7 mentality applied to math, ho, ho.

PS. My accounting guys are good which is why we don't get charged penalties even after inspections and audits.

My point is two-fold. 1) the organization is only required to provide accurate reporting of revenue and expenditures to the IRS; and that the organization's 990's can be viewed by the public on Guidestar. And 2) if a doner is seeking an explanation, do that prior to forking over the cash instead of just donating on a quick emotional response and then whining about no explanation after the fact.

Edited September 15, 2017 by Stu

[xandandl]

1 hour ago, garfield said:

What terrorist would launder money through a non-profit where his laundry would represent such a significant portion of the NP assets?  I don't think the IRS thinks this way, and they sure don't express that opinion in the investment industry's efforts to prevent money laundering.

I'd choose United Way, Susan Koman, or Peletonia where it wouldn't be so obvious.

And bones are made in Washington by bringing down the goliaths, not the Davids, IMO.

just relating what the IRS agents said to us when we called them about the letters received and their concern ultimately found to be without merit.

Edited September 15, 2017 by xandandl

[Tim K]

3 hours ago, Stu said:

A massive amount was given by an emotional response to an emotional plea; for a moment that gave people donating a warm-fuzzy feeling and it saved the day for a touring corps.  That is what you all wanted, and that is what you all got.  Continue to enjoy that warm-fuzzy feeling; in there is your satisfaction!! 'Now' there is concern for a lack of substance being placed out there?  No sympathy on that from this guy; nada, zero, nope, ziltch!!!!

I was surprised Legends campaign was successful, and while some may have given just to say they saved the day or to feel good, I gave because I did not want kids stranded, and Legends has a good reputation. My guess is that's why most gave. There are many generous people who donate to drum corps. Some people on this site sponsor marchers. Most do not want recognition but most of those who gave who want accountability are concerned for the good of the corps and the activity. This is not an outrageous claim.

[Tim K]

1 hour ago, garfield said:

What terrorist would launder money through a non-profit where his laundry would represent such a significant portion of the NP assets?  I don't think the IRS thinks this way, and they sure don't express that opinion in the investment industry's efforts to prevent money laundering.

I'd choose United Way, Susan Koman, or Peletonia where it wouldn't be so obvious.

And bones are made in Washington by bringing down the goliaths, not the Davids, IMO.

The larger charities are investigated far more often, especially if the chairs have large salaries or operating expenses are high.

[Stu]

2 hours ago, Tim K said:

I was surprised Legends campaign was successful, and while some may have given just to say they saved the day or to feel good, I gave because I did not want kids stranded, and Legends has a good reputation. My guess is that's why most gave. There are many generous people who donate to drum corps. Some people on this site sponsor marchers. Most do not want recognition but most of those who gave who want accountability are concerned for the good of the corps and the activity. This is not an outrageous claim.

Easy to grasp: the phenomenon was not one of logic but one of emotion.  Even I, on first viewing, thought that there was yet another corps stranding kids in grave danger out on the road; and that initially burnt my buns!!!  And I am not blasting the altruism of people; that character trait should be encouraged and nurtured!!  And I am all for supporting 'the kids' who perform with any corps that is ran in a responsible manner!! And I do commend corps for their competitive performance success!! But instead of immediately going to my debit card moments after my initial reaction, I decided to re-watch the vid a couple of times, listening closely to the words, and also did a quick read through their website to cross-reference what was said on the vid.  Well lo and behold…. the explanation answers you now want on what they were seeking and why they were seeking it are on both the video; and what got them in that shape in the first place was listed on their website; at least all of that info was there.... ‘that night’.

Edited September 15, 2017 by Stu

[N.E. Brigand]

On 9/14/2017 at 6:21 PM, Stu said:

You forked over your money without first securing an explanation, that is on you not them. So other than a receipt, you are not due anything from them at this juncture.

You are correct; Legends doesn't "owe" its donors anything. But obviously it would be very wise of them to reach out to the donors with their plan for the future.