Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis-134
I'm curious what you define as "overhead"...
I guess what I'm trying to say is, what is it that you thing FIRST is spending its money on that is NOT the programs they support?
|
I am not saying overhead isn't justified. I am certain that everyone at FIRST HQ works hard for a salary (in fact from what I understand many are underpaid).
But I get to choose who I vote for, and I want to know what they are going to spend that money on. I think I have that right.
Every year we pay $6,000 for our first regional, $4,000 for every regional after that... yet the regional committees never see a dime of that. If our team registered for 6 regionals, all of that money would go to FIRST HQ. I still don't understand why something like even $1K of that doesn't go to the regional.
Every year teams drop out of FIRST because they can't afford it. FIRST is trying things to make this cheaper, but the events are shorter or they are "less grand", you have to find ways to ship your own robot, etc. Overall perhaps a savings to the teams which is a step in the right direction, but not with the same product.
I've been in FIRST since 1996, I know that it USED to be cheaper, so I know their overhead is going up. Im sure that improvements in the kits can account for some of that. I'm sure there are other reasons, but I dont know them. I've read the annual reports, and I just don't see/understand them as an "average" person. They don't present the "why's" or the "where we can be more efficient".
Again, these are the issues that are important to ME and me alone. If they want my vote, that's where I want to see the money spent. OR I want to see a VERY good reason why they aren't spending it on that.
I am very particular about money. I went to Clarkson, I loved my Clarkson education. But after I graduated, Clarkson was spending money on fancy new academic buildings when they didn't have enough space to house all the students they were bringing in. They would use the alumni funds to support campus improvements instead of funding things like FIRST that were direct recruiting tools. So I chose to give money directly to the groups that I thought deserved/needed the funding. Its my money, I have that right.
Just like I have the right to choose who to VOTE for.
I am not arguing that the overhead is unjustified. I want to know what they plan to spend the $200K on and why. That's all.