I am looking at the budget. £123k on admin, £455k on programme expenditure, of 
which £290k is going straight to the WMF anyway. Even assuming the WMF is 
completely efficient, that's over 20% of expenditure going to admin.

http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/2011_Budget

Looking at income is irrelevant since we seem to be consistently missing our 
expenditure targets and thus ending the year with money left over. (If the 
£455k target is missed as seems likely then the admin expenditure chunk will be 
higher still.)

A question for the treasurer while I'm paying some attention to this stuff: 
what interest rate are we currently earning on our half million? If they're 
less than around 4% or something how do you justify this.

And a question for whoever understands company law: would the following be 
possible in theory:

1)      I find a group of 5 people who want to stand for the board on a 
platform of giving back the entire earnings of WMUK to the membership

2)      We stand, we're voted in because everyone there wanted £500 (which is 
about our assets to members ratio at the moment).

3)      We change the constitution as necessary, getting it past an EGM again 
because people want £500.

4)      We do it.

With our current company status I'm worried this might be possible. And 
obviously the more money we have sitting in our bank account the more tempting 
this starts to look for our membership. This is yet another reason why our 
current level of income is a bad thing not a good one. I was sceptical about 
entering the first fundraiser before we were ready. Given we failed to spend 
that money we clearly weren't, so doing the second one really wasn't in 
anyone's best interest.

Tom

From: wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org 
[mailto:wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Roger Bamkin
Sent: 27 February 2011 17:12
To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] job descriptions

Tom, you are not comparing next years budget are you with last years activity? 
Staff paid for last year was one person part time I understood and income was 
around 500,000 pounds. That seems pretty efficient to me or am I missing 
something?

regards
Roger
On 27 February 2011 16:53, Tom Holden 
<tom.hol...@economics.ox.ac.uk<mailto:tom.hol...@economics.ox.ac.uk>> wrote:
Gulp. If people knew WMUK's overhead to activity ratio do you think they'd 
still be happy to donate? Or a similar question, do you think a £1 given to 
WMUK does more for the interests of UK Wikimedians than £1 direct to Wikimedia? 
I note that the bulk of your programme expenditure is going straight to the WMF 
anyway, so all that's happening is that the money's being processed by WMUK's 
(less efficient, due to lower scale) system, then going to the WMF (with 
additional overheads from them). Indeed it seems that it's only going to their 
international projects which is arguably further from the interests of UK 
Wikimedians than server/code expenditure is.

I don't know the details of what you're doing at the moment so maybe I'm 
completely wrong. But my distinct impression at the moment is that UK donations 
would be much more effective if they went straight to the WMF then groups of 
users petitioned them for money for UK specific projects. Perhaps something 
like WMUK could intermediate, but it could certainly be a much lighter 
organisation.

Admittedly charitable status if it ever arrives will change this story, 
providing the gains from gift aid outweigh the relative inefficiencies of WMUK. 
Even this isn't totally obvious at the moment, particularly as unclear whether 
the things WMUK is spending money on are more useful to the average user of 
Wikimedia projects than what the WMF project is spending money on.

I hope to hear some serious arguments about the chapter's efficiency at the 
next AGM. I also hope for the chance for some significant input from the 
membership on expenditure priorities.

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: 
wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org>
 
[mailto:wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org>]
 On Behalf Of Andrew Turvey
Sent: 27 February 2011 15:57
To: WMUK-L
Subject: [Wikimediauk-l] job descriptions

In advance of the board meeting next Tuesday, I've started drafting up some job 
descriptions on the wiki at http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Job_Descriptions for 
the new members of staff that we are recruiting.

Please add your contributions on the main and talk page to develop this.

Many thanks,

Andrew

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimediau...@wikimedia.org>
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org<http://uk.wikimedia.org/>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimediau...@wikimedia.org>
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org<http://uk.wikimedia.org/>



--
Roger Bamkin
(aka Victuallers)

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Reply via email to