是否有人没理解pro-bono的意思？

jyuan_us wrote:

PS：不要被“非营利”“不牟利”这一类的名号所迷惑。我认为这个词的翻译具有严重误导性。非营利并不是说他们不挣钱，而是说他们挣钱的方式不同。其实最能反应这类机构的本质的解释是, 除了不能卖实质性的商品，这类机构什么钱都敢收，而且美国的非盈利机构的一般职员的工资与公务员是看齐的，比在美华人的平均工资高多了。管理性职位的工资就更高。我就知道某非盈利机构的几个XXO的年薪都在15-20万美元，部门经理也都在10万以上。也有一些大的非盈利机构的CEO的年薪超过100万美元。

同袍们，擦亮我们的小眼睛吧！

[Edited at 2011-01-19 07:05 GMT]

[Edited at 2011-01-19 07:06 GMT]

redred wrote:



看见美国的公司性质分为：public company（上市公司，大企业）, privately held（普通的私营企业）, non-profit organization，最后那种可能就是这类型。

[Edited at 2011-01-19 07:59 GMT]

redred wrote:

既然ITDP是非营利机构，没营利就没收入来源，背后哪个财团能令它投入超过$1 mil 无条件支持其他国家某市的城市建设？不得其解。

Ambrose Li wrote:

非盈利不是说没有收入来源。在这里，比较有规模的非盈利机构都讲 funding model, 就是如何找收入来源的计划。普通的公司可以找VC, 非盈利机构也可以找人捐钱 (捐钱的大财团怎么没有，微软已经是其中一个了)，也可以提供收费服务找钱，只要没有违反 cost recovery 的原则，我看不出有什么问题。

[Edited at 2011-01-27 06:57 GMT]

jyuan_us wrote:

VC是什么意思？

Arnav Guleria (Quantitative Derivatives Trader/Market Maker/Structurer)

Investing is, by definition, "to commit (money) in order to earn a financial return" (Merriam-Webster). Thus, the only reason an investor would invest in any non-profit, charity or not, is for the tax benefits or strategic reasons. Short answer: mostly no.

Except for a few very unique, complex, and risky situations, e.g. foreign cash that would be taxed if repatriated but whose tax benefits to the offshore subsidiary of a US charity could be counted for a tax deduction locally (similar to the § 367(b) exclusion on re-patriated earnings, i.e. "Killer B"), there are cheaper options available for the tax benefit.

As for strategic interests, let's illustrate with an example. Non-profit A owns technology that would be useful to Portfolio Company B. A VC may make a donation to Non-profit A contingent upon them giving a license to Portfolio Company B for said technology. Alternatively, Company C and Non-profit N could form a joint venture JV that develops technology that fulfills N's philanthropic objectives and which C can license perpetually and on a royalty-free basis. A VC backing C would be incentivised to seed N with cash so that N can go around on its own and collect money from other donors, which would eventually flow to JV, thus indirectly subsidising C's R&D costs.

So again, yes, technically there are theoretical reasons why an investor, VC or otherwise, would invest in a non-profit, but generally no, it does not fulfill their mandates as investors. That is from the VC fund. The firm that manages the fund may donate (not invest) to charities as a part of their corporate activities.


David S. Rose (Managing Partner, Rose Tech Ventures; CEO, Angelsoft Venture Capital)

No. Absolutely not. By definition, one cannot "invest" [financially] in a charity, because investing is purchasing an ownership interest, and charities have no owners!


Estrella Rosenberg (Founder, Big Love Little Hearts. Host, 501 Mission Place)

David is right...and no matter how complex the examples drawn out by Arnav and Lauren are, by definition a 501 c 3 non-profit organization is not "owned" and may not benefit an individual or corporation with its profits...unless of course they're individuals or corporations that are beneficiaries of the nonprofits services, but that's not what we're talking about here.

redred wrote:

既然ITDP是非营利机构，没营利就没收入来源，背后哪个财团能令它投入超过$1 mil 无条件支持其他国家某市的城市建设？不得其解。

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_organization

Ownership is the quantitative difference between for- and not-for-profit organizations. For-profit organizations can be privately owned and may re-distribute taxable wealth to employees and shareholders. By contrast, not-for-profit organizations do not have private owners. They have controlling members or boards, but these people cannot sell their shares to others or personally benefit in any taxable way.

While they are able to earn a profit, more accurately called a surplus, such earnings must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion and future plans. Earnings may not benefit individuals or stake-holders.[3] While some nonprofit organizations put substantial funds into hiring and rewarding their internal corporate leadership, middle-management personnel and workers, others employ unpaid volunteers and even executives may work for no compensation. However, since the late 1980s there has been a growing consensus that nonprofits can achieve their corporate targets more effectively by using some of the same methods developed in for-profit enterprises. These include effective internal management, ensuring accountability for results, and monitoring the performance of different divisions or projects in order to better benefit from their capital and workers. Those require satisfied management and that, in turn, begins with the organization's mission.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wealthiest_charitable_foundations

1 Stichting INGKA Foundation .......... $36 billion
2 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation ..... $35.1 billion
3 Wellcome Trust ......................... $22.90 billion £14.5 billion (GBP)
4 Howard Hughes Medical Institute ... $18.6 billion
5 Ford Foundation ......................... $13.8 billion

Ambrose Li wrote:

普通的公司可以找VC, 非盈利机构也可以找人捐钱 (捐钱的大财团怎么没有，微软已经是其中一个了)，也可以提供收费服务找钱，只要没有违反 cost recovery 的原则，我看不出有什么问题