From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2EE5138334 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2019 11:23:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9EFC3E0872; Wed, 3 Jul 2019 11:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf1-f177.google.com (mail-pf1-f177.google.com [209.85.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67D02E086C for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2019 11:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f177.google.com with SMTP id r1so1102990pfq.12 for ; Wed, 03 Jul 2019 04:23:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=RlWIKeCmGjui1uDSQy0OslhcOvth3AR84zaWoAD+Nh4=; b=ZM9cV1Vh7WY/YO1+VLd5+Ng1KQSMzVRlrATqYPlPfLmCwyjZurovYGgvKbr32jZAX6 cPWLmjXfjnkhK+BN+WnoRP9QH/FYIcg8zKjBxsE9jRhqG+ThS/ixg1wYbVYp87g0V6dS r7eCeInltmJai606OhuEyCVTYt+/DgppBmNWWXlvUkBJ64yd49vT2aTca31j+OWe9QMu iHRwtsYfJHnJYzRcKGWf1I/pH14tNdk0MJKdMYlP+F0nj7X8h99900yIthzR+JzqKCBZ 7/2MH86PB8hVR+m7wDJNoWKmmOctcKzA7qf//bmNjyp2TI+0EdVtGNQvySMZQkquybSe CiwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXf9Tofx/Sca6LWlb92hZn2fhFO3F4/8RC/vKRtyo/c56dHWuyp DMWv30//eHd5NkjPjwNkC54B4J4sq1IjyDmNWwk4exNp X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxXLlYIzKtL29+T/IJATwY5HN8DJJccp588Sckjb1bUgk2TmkCMFHBNdD46fov83hIPErztJdEtiM2ZXJ3AMKI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:3724:: with SMTP id u33mr12013554pjb.19.1562152985000; Wed, 03 Jul 2019 04:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <86784617.NvtdGxuBOO@pinacolada> In-Reply-To: From: Rich Freeman Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 07:22:54 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Questions for Gentoo Council nominees: Gentoo Foundation - Treasurer Response! To: gentoo-project Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: e3e6d783-26fd-460e-8bd8-eaa1d18d1ffa X-Archives-Hash: cd0f26f3a7e8fed98e288e31e7ae2029 On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 7:05 AM Michael Everitt wrote: > > On 03/07/19 11:47, Rich Freeman wrote: > > You also need to consider services that we would receive that we > > currently lack. After all, Gentoo hasn't spent a dime on CPAs for a > > long time, but that was hardly a true savings. > > > What makes you suggest we need the extra services that would be included by > an umbrella org? What services are you thinking of? Well, I'm not the one going on endlessly about how Gentoo doesn't consult lawyers often enough and that only lawyers can understand the law... :) > What would be the cost > if the Gentoo Foundation Inc procured these services separately? How does > this provide a cost saving? I suspect that the tax savings alone would pay for moving to an umbrella org. Savings on a CPA would be on top of that. At that point any additional services are basically "free." However, I suspect that due to economies of scale it will still cost less to get these other services through an umbrella than to buy them ourselves. As you say, though, you could certainly compare the costs, and I'm not suggesting that this can't be done. > Can you prove this is therefore "better value > for money" if despite having less "expenses" as Robin points out, but > larger net income, and hence larger net fees? Having more net income might mean more fees, but since fees are a percentage of income, it is a net benefit all the same. Sure, if we have $5000 more to work with, we might end up spending an extra $500 in fees, but that still leaves us off $4500 better than we are today. Certainly it would be beneficial to look at actual numbers, but I'm dubious that these sorts of percentage-based solutions are going to cost more than what we're spending already. They also have the benefit that anytime our income is reduced our overhead is automatically reduced in kind, as opposed to with doing it ourselves where the CPA probably costs the same whether we lose half our income or not. -- Rich