In society

5 rules of crowdfunding

April 28, 2011 Anton Nosik

The editor -in -chief of the Daily Journal, Alexander Ryklin, turned to readers with a proposal to quit the continuation of his publication .
On the one hand, any such event indicates that Crowdfunding finally lets the sprouts in Russia for a long time in the entire civilized world. As a person who has been partisan crowdfunding for 9 years and transferred to a legal position 6 years ago, I can only welcome this tendency.
But something in this call was pretty warmed. And not the intonation of the “hedgehog” request, like Vanya Davydov , but something much more essential and important, but I didn’t even understand at first what the problem is: the publication is pretty, the difficulties with collecting advertising are predictable, the request sounds logical, and I myself, of course, have my 500 rubles for Yandex.Takes ( 41001945611674 ) already He threw it, without hesitation. But some kind of sense of incorrectness of this action still remains. For some time, having thought over him, I realized that this action was not so.
The collection of money for the publication "Hedgehog" is a classic example of an action that ahead of the thought. This is perhaps the main trouble of spontaneous charity events in Russia: in the noticeable majority of cases they are committed absolutely rash. The organizers decided that it was necessary to throw a cry, the benefit of a printing machine is at their hand - and now thousands of people read their call. Although they themselves did not even really figure out what and whom they call. The program "Give me money and go to yourself, dear man, then" is suitable for an old woman at the church fence, but meaningful crowdfunding on the Internet of the 2011 model should be built on completely different grounds. I'll try to outline them the thesis.
Principle No. 1 : The collection of money should have the stated goal
The consequence of this principle is the public calculation of those expenses that are proposed to be covered with the help of donations. Otherwise, it is not at all clear whether this action has a practical meaning, or its task is a purely symbolic nature (for example, to show the founder that the publication managed to collect a loyal audience around him).
The declared goal implies that there is a certain price of the issue. It must be voiced. Let's say this: in 2011, $ 20,000 per month is required for the edition of the Hedgehog in 2011, a total of $ 140,000 for the period from May to December. The thesis that money is not superfluous is categorically not suitable, because in the general case the donors on the Russian Internet are people who can direct the same means to other charitable needs. If the publishers of the Hedgehog do not announce the size of the necessary funding, then this, de facto, a statement of readiness to master any amount. In world practice, crowdfunding of successful examples of a campaign without a target does not exist.
Principle No. 2 : The collection progress should be transparent to the public
The text of Ryklin says:
At your written request, the recipient of funds undertakes to provide a report on the use of targeted receipts (target funding) within 30 days from the date of receipt of such a request.
This is some kind of prohibitive absurdity, a meaningless attempt to sit between two chairs. Either information about the use of targeted revenues is classified, and then you do not need to fool people with the requirements of it specially requested and wait a month to wait for an answer. Or it is open - and then it just needs to be made once public once. Not only for those people who have already sent their five hundred, but also for those who make such a decision on the basis of previous experience in spending funds. If bureaucratic red tape with access to reporting, borrowed from the practice of Soviet institutions, is directed against some alleged enemies, then you need to understand that the 500-ruble payment will not stop them. Neither from obtaining the right to claim, nor from publicizing the report, nor from accurately editing the numbers before the publication. The only protection against such abuse is publicity and transparency.
Principle No. 3 : Before publishing details, they need to be tested
Upon trying to transfer money to Yandex.Koshelk 41001945611674, the system issues a message that the recipient for Yandex Anonimen . This not only makes his use for public charitable fees a risky enterprise, but also leads the donor to the idea that the translation would be good to make with patronage. And no address to the recipient of the patronage code could be informed in the details of the “Ezhovaya” request is not contained.
Principle No. 4 : Help occurs not only cash
If we are talking about the fact that the “daily magazine” needs to help the help and support of its readers to continue the activities, then it is quite strange to limit yourself to a request for money. Among the people who sympathize with this project, both potential advertisers and managers of advertising agencies can turn out to be included in their media planes and owners of the visits that could help with attracting the audience can be. And the first people who should turn to non -monetary help is the Yandex.Money leadership that could tell how to use this tool for collecting donations.
Principle No. 5 : Matching
Many Western charitable structures present grants to applicants with one and the same condition: show us Matching Funds - the money that other sponsors invest in your project. For our case, not the letter is valid, but the meaning and essence of this requirement. The presence of third -party partners who believe in this project and are ready to invest in it serves as the key to his reality and viability. In the case of “hedgehog”, it is not the money that its publisher or sponsor is ready to allocate to the project, but the efforts of the magazine team itself, aimed at increasing the efficiency of money sacrificed by readers.
For example, it is quite obvious that the expenses of such a project in the amount close to 100% of the budget consist of the wage fund of the authors writing there. As Leonid Burshid proved to all doubts on the example of Slon.ru, to lay out on the site any number of copyright columns (and even news tapes) does not require any editorial rooms, furniture, office equipment, aimaks with macbooks, fast Internet and NTV+plates. If the Hedgehog still had similar expenses, then I want to read that they are reduced to zero in the light of new circumstances. I would also like to find out that many authors of the publication (not poor people, on whose financial situation the fees for articles in the “hedgehog” are not at all reflected) were invited to switch to the lack of money of cooperation, and that they accepted this proposal. I would like to read that the commercial service of the publication is looking for new ways to monetize the resource. Not at all because I personally want to hear all this. I just care about it. But, from the point of view of the prospects of the project (and, therefore, the advisability of participating in it by labor reader’s ruble) such a story seems extremely appropriate. Because we are talking about a commercial project, in the founders of which - LLC, that is, a business, and not a charity fund. It is one thing - to support this business in difficult times so that it is able to survive. Another thing is to support the ruble of a certain ineffective and non-viable business model, which, in fact, brought the project with an audience of 360,000 readers to the degree of despair when the editor-in-chief is forced to go to the public with a hat and quote Simonov’s verse about fascist atrocities .
Please understand me correctly. I am far from the idea of ​​teaching Alexander Ryklin or investors of his project to the methods of maintaining an effective Internet business-at least for the simple reason that they never asked me about this. I fully admit that the initiative to collect money from readers seems to be a continuation of the well -known experiments of the Rupert Marydok to transfer content to paid rails. As you know, the format of Marydok experiments does not provide for the disclosure of financial information or the voluntary of the donations. Just readers are chopped off from the server, until they pay. And any business has a complete moral right to such experiments - exactly insofar as it risks his own income, like a mayor's holding.
But if we are still talking about crowdfunding, then it would not be harmful to understand the rules of the game and observe them. At least in order for others to learn on your achievements, and not on your mistakes.

P. S. If the editors of the “weekly magazine” will consider it appropriate to publish this post on its own server, then I want to warn in advance that I do not pretend to the fee. :)

The editors of the "Daily Journal" thanks the famous and authoritative expert in the field of the Internet Anton Nosik for such a detailed analysis of an important project for us. Some of the comments and recommendations expressed by Mr. will undoubtedly be taken into account in our further work.

Photo by RIA Novosti