bill Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 So a big increase in gaming investment for a smaller margin. I wonder if that's because they projected decreased returns and so increased the number of games, or nights, or whatever, in an attempt to net the same amount? Or, did they invest heavily in some new gaming project that didn't quite work out as expected? Or maybe it didn't work out yet (in 2010) but once the investment is in place, maybe they'll get the same income at a lower yearly expense. I'm really curious about 2011. Also, does guidestar only show 3 years as a policy? Or is it just that they have only been collecting them that long. In other words, will the 2008 990s go away next year? Good stuff, Garfield! There are other sources to look beyond three years. Here is a look back more than three years for one group: http://nccsweb.urban.org/PubApps/showVals.php?ein=222052456 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 22, 2012 Author Share Posted November 22, 2012 You can upgrade to a plan that will allow you to review 990s and financial data that goes back further, but for free users, 3 years lookback is what you get. RE: BDs expenditures on their gaming operations, it could very well have to do with upgrading the facilities to accommodate local laws and improve their competitiveness with the Indian reservation gaming operations (or it could simply be a loss of income because of greater competition from the Indian operations, which, I suspect, are free from no-smoking policies that affected other bingo operations). Garfield, as you're going through these numbers, are you compiling a spreadsheet that the organizations could use to compare their own numbers with their fellow corps? Ideally that's something that DCI would be offering as a service to the corps, but I've never heard of it happening. Let's see...copy all the numbers a second time into a spreadsheet that I have to build myself...um. Yeah, No. Now, if I could package it up and sell it to them it would be, still, worthless. Especially when I'm posting them here for all my DCP pals. And further, doing analysis for which I get paid, and even when I'm not, requires approval from my industry's regulators in Washington, believe it or not. Even if I don't mention my company, the Washington boys feel I'm representing the training and experience I've received in working for my company and in my industry. For that, they feel they get to regulate what I do. No, anonymously here is the only way for me. I'll do my part by putting it up on DCP to read, even though it appears, from the number of comments anyway, that few people care about this detail of our activity. Se la vie. If anyone wants to see it boiled down they'll have to come to DCP to see it, or Guidestar. It's really not hard to get this raw data. It's reading the darn forms that can be tough for number rookies. :tongue:/> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 22, 2012 Author Share Posted November 22, 2012 There are other sources to look beyond three years. Here is a look back more than three years for one group: http://nccsweb.urban...p?ein=222052456 This is a great website to provide this stuff for free. i didn't know about it. I won't be including more than 3 years of data in my posts unless I get through all the corps; three years is minimum to make a short-term trend, IMO. By reading my summary stuff, just about anyone can go look at older data if they choose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 I'll do my part by putting it up on DCP to read, even though it appears, from the number of comments anyway, that few people care about this detail of our activity. Se la vie. There may be more folks reading this thread than you think G. Especially folks like me who don't have the knowledge to even make it to the on-deck circle to take a crack at breaking these 990's down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 23, 2012 Author Share Posted November 23, 2012 I can post the next two sections in either order, so I flipped a coin, and I won. So, I'm going to show the section from the 990's titled "Statement of Program Service Accomplishments" for all three years. This is the section where the org breaks its operations into operating units; in BD's case there are three corps, a wind ensemble, an event at Stanford, etc. BD is a very deep organization with lots of moving parts. There are usually three or four entries on the form, each describing that operation's purpose and, sometimes, reporting Revenue and Expenses, which is not required. Nor is there a requirement that certain things get bundled together or reported separately. Auditors can decide that two operating units can be reported together in one year, and then separated in the next. In BD's case, things are reported similarly in '09 and '10, but '08 is different. I'll go one section at a time and describe what's in the section so you'll see the major components and their Revenue and Expenses, if reported. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 23, 2012 Author Share Posted November 23, 2012 (edited) Blue Devils 2008, Statement of Program Service BD combined all of its corps into one category this year, showing BD-A, B, and C, and all of the associated revenues and expenses in one number: 2008: Revenue - $1,453,659 minus Expenses - $1,807,332 equals a net "loss" of $353,673 Diablo Wind Symphone is shown separately 2008: Revenue - $8,573 minus expenses - $25,545 equal a net "loss" of $16,972 Color Guard 2008: Revenue - $22,656 minus expenses - $78,362 equals a net "loss" of $55,706 EDIT: While purusing the notes to the 990's I found this entry further explaining another item of program service: Winter Guard 2008: Expenses: $120,085 (No revenue listed. A description is of a typical WGI winter guard program. How this differs from "Color Guard" above, I don't know.) This is a good time to emphasize that "loss" in these cases is actually quite good because it demonstrates that BD's performing units are not dependent on their own gate to survive. BD has other ventures to support its performers, some of which are unrelated to the corps or its members. Edited November 24, 2012 by garfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 23, 2012 Author Share Posted November 23, 2012 Blue Devils 2009 Statement of Program Service A corps Revenue - $1,027,169 minus expenses - $1,635,936 equals net loss of $608,767 B corps Revenue $265,647 minus expenses - $277,101 equals net loss of $11,454 DCI West Regional Revenue $141,678 minus expenses - $111,859 equals net profit of 29,819 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 23, 2012 Author Share Posted November 23, 2012 (edited) Blue Devils 2010 Statement of Program Service A-Corps: Revenue $1,144,504 minus expenses - $1,738,685 equals net loss of $594,181 B-corps Revenue $362,938 minus expenses - $543,227 equals net loss of $180,289 System Blue Revenue $120,979 minus expenses - $197,314 equals net loss of $76,335 Other Program Services Revenue $291,888 minus expenses - $388,032 equals net loss of $96,144 UPDATE: 2011 numbers A-Corps Revenue: $1.240.670 minus expenses - $2,024,654 = net loss of $783,984 B-Corps< Revenue: $566,768 minus expenses - $645,937 = net loss of $79,169 C-Corps Revenue: $161,877 minus expenses - $167,444 = net loss of $5,567 Edited April 18, 2013 by garfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaos001 Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 Blue Devils 2010 Statement of Program Service A corps Revenue $1,144,504 minus expenses - $1,738,685 equals net loss of $594,181 B corps Revenue $362,938 minus expenses - $543,227 equals net loss of $180,289 System Blue Revenue $120,979 minus expenses - $197,314 equals net loss of $76,335 Other Program Services Revenue $291,888 minus expenses - $388,032 equals net loss of $96,144 No wonder they're looking to start their own circuit and control more of the market. But how do they expect to make any money off of a new venture if they can't manage expenses now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted November 24, 2012 Share Posted November 24, 2012 Yowza! That's a HUGE jump in "Receipts". I bet someone can figure out the reason for that big increase in 2010. Forgive me for a dumb question, and forgive me if the answer has been posted... but has this been answered by anyone here yet? BTW, keep it going, Garfield... great thread! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.