Wikipedia begging for money again - what other companies dont need donations?

IvaBigWun

Now on most Wiki pages today

DEAR WIKIPEDIA READERS: To protect our independence, we'll never run ads. We take no government funds. We survive on donations averaging about €10. Now is the time we ask. If everyone reading this right now gave €3, our fundraiser would be done within an hour. We’re a small non-profit with costs of a top 5 website: servers, staff and programs. Wikipedia is something special. It is like a library or a public park where we can all go to think and learn. If Wikipedia is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online and ad-free another year. Thank you

Hasnt it been proven (I dont have the link to hand) that Wiki are millions of dollars in profit the black and these begging ads are ridiculous?

What other companies dont need the donations they ask for?

Cuddlesworth

IvaBigWun wrote: »

Hasnt it been proven (I dont have the link to hand) that Wiki are millions of dollars in profit the black and these begging ads are ridiculous?

It would make sense to me that when running a ongoing effort like Wikipedia, its a better option to ask for money before you run out rather than after.

Donkey Oaty

It is like a library or a public park where we can all go to think and learn

Is that what they are for? You learn something every day.

Wiki is the guy with the beer on the park bench, explaining the world to you.

The Backwards Man

How dare they hold a gun to people's heads and demand that they peruse their website and give them monies?:mad:

IvaBigWun

Today the foundation is a very different beast. It's cash-rich and raised almost $35m in the last donations appeal.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/20/cash_rich_wikipedia_chugging/

Wiki do not need your money.

everdead.ie

How much does it cost to run a website like that though?

I don't see the problem with them asking for donations, it's fair enough
It IS a brilliant resource

Dr Turk Turkelton

That Rehab crowd don't seem to need donations judging by the wages they pay Angela Kerins!

Artful_Badger

I dont donate as a rule so they wont get penny one from me. You'd think one of the most used sites on the web though could cover their costs with some advertising rather than beg for money ?

Artful_Badger

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I dont donate as a rule so they wont get penny one from me. You'd think one of the most used sites on the web though could cover their costs with some advertising rather than beg for money ?

To protect our independence, we'll never run ads. We take no government funds.

Also reasonable imo

lertsnim

No Jimmy Wales begging, no money from me.

IvaBigWun

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't see the problem with them asking for donations, it's fair enough

You're missing the point.

They dont need the cash.

IvaBigWun

IvaBigWun wrote: »

You're missing the point.

They dont need the cash.

Maybe they don't need it NOW and would like to ensure smooth cashflows?

jamo2oo9

Well to be honest, they must have around 100,000 individual web pages to host at the same and plus handle the amount of traffic on it at anytime. $35m would probably cover the cost of upgrading their servers and hosts and possibly have a redesign of their layout coming up which could cost money.


I'd say the biggest hole in their pockets is from hosting.

IvaBigWun

bluewolf wrote: »

Maybe they don't need it NOW and would like to ensure smooth cashflows?

Hmmm. I dunno.

Seems fishy.

Artful_Badger

bluewolf wrote: »

Also reasonable imo

Dont get me wrong I'm not saying there is anything wrong with what they are doing. Its reasonable if they want to go that way I and its their business. But it is probably one of the few sites as popular as it is that isnt generating income on ads. I'd just have thought they would have embraced it by now and used it to expand the site is all.

Operating Leases
The Foundation has a seven-year noncancelable operating lease for its San Francisco location. The lease
expires on September 30, 2017.
Minimum rent payments under operating leases are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the
lease including any periods of free rent. Rental expense for operating leases for the years ended June 30,
2013 and 2012 was $1,005,896 and $683,640, respectively.

Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases as of June 30, 2013 are as follows:
Lease
payments
Year ending June 30:
2014 $ 1,205,715
2015 1,239,472
2016 1,273,229
2017 1,306,986
2018 329,565
Total minimum lease
payments $ 5,354,967

Expenses:
Salaries and wages 15,983,542 11,749,500
Awards and grants 2,791,378 2,106,752
Internet hosting 2,549,992 2,486,903
In-kind service expenses 260,909 296,599
Other operating expenses 10,017,121 9,198,892
Travel and conferences 1,395,013 1,533,150
Depreciation 2,706,841 1,888,856
Total expenses 35,704,796 29,260,652


That's a lot in fairness

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/6e/FINAL_12_13From_KPMG.pdf

They're also "cash rich" because they keep the money securely in cash and don't appear to invest it - it's for expenses

jaysus, 3 million allowed for as depreciation

IvaBigWun

bluewolf wrote: »

Operating Leases
The Foundation has a seven-year noncancelable operating lease for its San Francisco location. The lease
expires on September 30, 2017.
Minimum rent payments under operating leases are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the
lease including any periods of free rent. Rental expense for operating leases for the years ended June 30,
2013 and 2012 was $1,005,896 and $683,640, respectively.

Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases as of June 30, 2013 are as follows:
Lease
payments
Year ending June 30:
2014 $ 1,205,715
2015 1,239,472
2016 1,273,229
2017 1,306,986
2018 329,565
Total minimum lease
payments $ 5,354,967

Expenses:
Salaries and wages 15,983,542 11,749,500
Awards and grants 2,791,378 2,106,752
Internet hosting 2,549,992 2,486,903
In-kind service expenses 260,909 296,599
Other operating expenses 10,017,121 9,198,892
Travel and conferences 1,395,013 1,533,150
Depreciation 2,706,841 1,888,856
Total expenses 35,704,796 29,260,652


That's a lot in fairness

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/6e/FINAL_12_13From_KPMG.pdf

They're also "cash rich" because they keep the money securely in cash and don't appear to invest it - it's for expenses

jaysus, 3 million allowed for as depreciation

Thats a reasonable breakdown to be fair

anncoates

Have given them a few quid before. It's a noble idea and a good resource.

hfallada

It keeps wikipedia independent of advertising. They cant be entirely free to have whatever they want on their site, if wants to keep companies happy to ensure that they advertise

IvaBigWun

hfallada wrote: »

It keeps wikipedia independent of advertising.

I dont know why thats such a deal breaker for them though. If I can tolerate ads on Boards it would be ok on Wiki too

Artful_Badger

IvaBigWun wrote: »

I dont know why thats such a deal breaker for them though. If I can tolerate ads on Boards it would be ok on Wiki too

It would mean they would no longer be a non profit though I think. So I guess in that sense with a bottom line and expected revenue it may lead them in an entirely different direction as a company.

Maybe it would be bad, maybe it would be good, maybe it'll happen at some stage anyway. Who knows.

ringadingding

Just gave a tenner, and don't begrudge them it one bit, I use it several times a week.

If they asked more often, I would probably give more often.

And I'm a tight fûck when it comes to paying for stuff!

It changed the way we used facts and information, in a fairly noble way

mikom

Jimmy Wales better get busy with a no-makeup selfie.

Legs.Eleven

I've given a few fivers on a few occasions as I use it daily and want it to be around for a long time.

Diabhal Beag

I've used it for nearly everything so I've given a hard-earned fiver before.

Riesen_Meal

Diabhal Beag wrote: »

I've used it for nearly everything so I've given a hard-earned fiver before.

I have donated myself in the past, I think Wikipedia can be fantastic for some stuff (minus the trolling) and I don't want the internet without it....

flintash

i never donate my money to anyone!!! exception wikipedia.will do it once again, even havent visited it for weeks.

MayoSalmon

Are ya seriously giving out about Wikipedia asking for money?!

What fantastic resource and deserve all they can get!

Prawo_Jazdy

i've donated before, tbh I really don't give a feck if it doesn't need it or not, as long as I can read about random ****e like the history of cornflakes without a stupid ass amazon ad trying to sell me them i'm happy.

dirkmeister

Prawo_Jazdy wrote: »

i've donated before, tbh I really don't give a feck if it doesn't need it or not, as long as I can read about random ****e like the history of cornflakes without a stupid ass amazon ad trying to sell me them i'm happy.

I was eating a bowl of Rice Crispies while reading your post so I wandered over to Wikipedia to read about them...Snap, Crackle and Pop are around since the 1920's believe it or not!:D

flintash

sorry. double post

DamagedTrax

IvaBigWun wrote: »

I dont know why thats such a deal breaker for them though. If I can tolerate ads on Boards it would be ok on Wiki too

Its a deal breaker because currently they dont answer to anyone. As soon as advertisers are onboard they can be pushy about content that might show them in a bad light.

Kinda like how government and 'campaign donators' work.. look how well that's turned out.

MyPeopleDrankTheSoup

DamagedTrax wrote: »

Its a deal breaker because currently they dont answer to anyone. As soon as advertisers are onboard they can be pushy about content that might show them in a bad light.

Kinda like how government and 'campaign donators' work.. look how well that's turned out.

no they wouldn't! especially not google adsense. one google adsense banner would pay for all this.

in b4 people who've never advertisied or taken advertising online telling me how it works.

DamagedTrax

georgiecasey wrote: »

no they wouldn't! especially not google adsense. one google adsense banner would pay for all this.

how does that work and how would it keep wiki independent from advertiser scrutiny?

Cian92

Donated my €3 yesterday. Well worth it, if you have such a problem don't use it (I hazard a guess that that would be difficult for you).

It's an amazing resource, one of the best websites out there, they can have my few quid.

EyeSight

georgiecasey wrote: »

no they wouldn't! especially not google adsense. one google adsense banner would pay for all this.

in b4 people who've never advertisied or taken advertising online telling me how it works.

For a website of their size and stature, using adsense would be silly. They could host ads themselves and make way more in profit.
There are instances on gaming websites that do good (and wrong) reviews of their advertisers games. Gamespot fired a guy who wrote a bad review on Kane and Lynch

Besides it's nice to see one of the biggest websites in the world not having ads up. One of the few places online where you can escape that. Does asking for donations for such a great service really annoy you? They are not even obtrusive

MadYaker

I donate every time they ask.

FutureGuy

They deserve every single fcuking penny.

Alpha Dog 1

I got through a business degree largely thanks to Wikipedia so I donate everytime. Plus when you donate you get an email saying how awesome you are

biZrb

I've given money to them before and will do so in the future. Its an incredible resource, if I want to find out about anything, its the first place I look. I rarely have to look elsewhere as the information is so comprehensive and detailed.

I love how so many people continue to donate. It because of this that they don't have to rely on ads to raise finance.

Just because they could raise money by running ads on their site doesn't mean they should.

Oink

I need to show more gratitude ($) to anyone who keeps ads away from my computer/TV screen. The amount of insults I have hurled at my TV for example is disgraceful.

So I'm going to donate. With any luck that'll stop them plastering your man's face all over my internets.

(Did you see that picture of him in a fetching red chinese shirt thingy? *shudder*)

keithclancy

Archive.org is another one that uses A LOT of storage, over 10 petabytes

https://archive.org/

For an idea of Wikipedias usage have a look here:
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Backup_procedures

Akrasia

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I dont donate as a rule so they wont get penny one from me. You'd think one of the most used sites on the web though could cover their costs with some advertising rather than beg for money ?

How principled of you

Akrasia

dirkmeister wrote: »

I was eating a bowl of Rice Crispies while reading your post so I wandered over to Wikipedia to read about them...Snap, Crackle and Pop are around since the 1920's believe it or not!:D

And originally, Snap and Crackle were white, but Pop was their black servant. He then he became the sole mascot for coco-pops until a re-branding in the 70s when due to public outcry about racial segregation through tasty breakfast cereals, pop was re-united with Snap and Crackle, but his skin colour was changed to white and his profession was changed to a seafaring chef.

whataname

"Wikipedia begging for money again - what other companies dont need donations? "

most charaties if you ask me. The charities I know all pay their top staff way too much.

Artful_Badger

Akrasia wrote: »

How principled of you

Why thank you. But I left out the word general there, I have donated the odd time just generally avoid giving money to people and groups who ask for money. Gotta draw the line somewhere or you'd be broke.