Donors Who Don’t Get It & That You Can Afford to Lose

Image by Felix Lichtenfeld from Pixabay

Don’t Let the Fear of Losing a Few Donors Cause You to Lose Many

There’s a lot of fear in fundraising.

If we send out too many emails, people will unsubscribe.

If we ask for money too often, people will get angry.

If our donor appeals look too good, people will think we’re wasting money.

The fear of losing donors is best expressed through real people. Here’s a revealing comment from a real donor on an article from the Content Marketing Institute:

Can you feel the shivers go up your spine at this? Is this how your donors feel when they receive thank you letters and fundraising follow-ups after they’ve given? Do donors want to never hear from you? Do they want you to let them decide when they’ll give?

Before I answer, a caveat:

Donor attrition is a major issue and you should be very attentive to it. You don’t want to lose donors. You want to retain them.

That said, there are some donors that it’s okay to let go. Some donors really don’t get it. All the data reveals that sending thank you letters and other donor retention strategies helps keep more donors giving for longer, and thus fulfilling the mission this donor says he wants his money to support.

So let’s take this guy’s points one by one, and counter them with some reality. (By the way, you as a nonprofit should never do this. But I can do it since ProActive Content is a business. Let me counter this type of thinking so you can be encouraged that you’re doing the right thing and stay focused on your mission).

“I gave… mainly so I can deduct it from my taxes”

Right off the bat, this donor has revealed his true intentions in donating. He’s not giving because he cares about the cause. He’s giving for the tax benefits (which by the way have decreased since the Trump Tax Cuts took effect. See what your nonprofit can do to keep your donors giving, and use this letter template to help)

There are actually 15 reasons why people give to charity. The tax benefits are just one of them, and rarely the main one. So this guy is a rare bird if the tax benefits are in fact his main reason for giving.

Now, is this person ‘bad’ for giving only for the tax benefits? No. People can give for whatever reason they want to. I point out his motive for two reasons though:

1) He pointed it out first. In fact, he led with it.

2) It provides context for all his other comments and reveals the heart behind his giving

You need not fear losing donors like this. He does not represent the majority, but catering to his demands will reduce your majority.

“That’s not why I gave you the money”

This donor appears to be very angry that Feeding America sent him a follow-up thank you package that included a membership-type plastic card.

He doesn’t want his money used for administration and marketing. He wants it to feed the hungry.

Let’s consider the implications behind this belief, and then let’s apply them to every other form of business (and yes, nonprofits are businesses, not passion projects).

Mission-Related Costs

Image by Walti Göhner from Pixabay

If every donor’s money went 100% to feed the hungry, who is going to give that food to the people in need? Who will set up the tables and shelves? Who will arrange the food so it’s not just dumped in a big pile on the side of the road?

Speaking of which, where will people come to get the food? Who will pay for that building? Who will deliver the food to that location?

Feeding people who are hungry requires people, and people have to be paid. This requires transportation, logistics, and coordination with food donors.

But some might wonder, why can’t you just use volunteers? Someone has to coordinate those volunteers. Volunteers don’t just magically “show up” to hand out food. Someone has to coordinate it. If you don’t believe me … TRY IT. And not just one time.

See 9 Ways to Retain More Volunteers

Let’s keep going…

How will they know when or where to show up? Who will direct them when they get there? Who’s in charge?

That ‘someone’ must be paid, because very few people will volunteer for that task after doing it a couple times. It’s too hard. All these processes require time. Many of them require money. Is this donor angry that his money is paying for these people and processes instead of buying the actual food?

This IS buying the food. No one would get fed without all these logistics functioning behind the scenes. Why do people insist on nonprofits doing what is impossible for any regular business to do? Stuff costs money.

Does he realize that when he buys a new car, some of his money is paying for sodas and donuts in the breakroom at some corporate office, and that some of those same donuts will get stale and be thrown out? Why doesn’t he demand the car price be reduced by $0.12? His money is for the car, not stale donuts.

Absurd, of course. But no less absurd than telling a nonprofit which admin costs are valid or invalid.

Donor Acquisition Costs – Nonprofit Marketing

This donor seems angry that his money is being used to acquire and retain new donors.

Here’s what Mighty Cause has to say about that:

“When nonprofits fail to spend money on ‘overhead’ that matters, they lose donors and stunt their own growth. The 2018 Fundraising Effectiveness Report recommends that nonprofits make ‘significant, incremental increases to their budget, by category of fundraising effort’”.

As a fundraiser, you already know this. And that’s why you can afford to lose donors like this guy. If I were speaking with this donor, I would ask this:

How do you even know about Feeding American and the Boys and Girls Club? How do you even know they exist?

The answer to that is plain and obvious. He knows about them because they have spent money on marketing, donor acquisition, and donor retention. It’s that simple. The reason those nonprofits are so well-known is because they spend money on the very thing this donor is angry about. He would not have known to give to them – it would not have even occurred to him – had they not spent responsible and consistent portions of their budgets on marketing and donor acquisition.

The simple truth is, if you don’t spend money acquiring donors, you won’t have any donors.

Image by Robert-Owen-Wahl from Pixabay

The same Mighty Cause article gives some sobering statistics about donor attrition. You lose donors every year. That means, if you don’t gain new ones to replace them, eventually you’ll have none.

Spending money on donor acquisition is identical to companies spending money marketing new products. How will I know to go try the new limited-edition burger at Burger King if they don’t tell me about it? Do businesses just put up a store front with no signage and no windows, and assume customers will show up?

This angry donor’s comment about content marketing falls in line with that too. Content marketing is part of new donor acquisition.

If a person cares about feeding the hungry and goes online to search for charities that work in this sector, what would come up on search engines if none of the charities fighting hunger spent any money on content marketing?

A website is content marketing. Even a terrible website. Someone spent money putting it up. Someone wrote the content. Someone is paying for the domain name and the hosting service.

Spend nothing on content marketing, and you’ll get fewer new donors. People have to know you exist and what you stand for before they can give.

“They sent me an email saying thanks”

Does this donor realize that someone at the Boys and Girls Club was paid to write that thank you email? Does he realize that the email platform they’re using to send it charges a monthly fee? That someone with the relevant expertise had to take the time to set up the automation that sent this email immediately after he gave?

What about the tax deduction statement he’ll be expecting at the end of the year so he can claim it on his taxes? That’s an admin cost too – and one he made it clear from the start that he very much does care about.

There is no way to separate donor communication in any form from administrative and marketing costs.

“I’ll be giving next year’s Feeding America money to them”

This donor finishes by declaring that he’s only giving to the Boys and Girls Club next year. Well, what will he do if the Boys and Girls Club decides to call him to thank him for giving? Will he ask if that person is paid or just a volunteer? What if they send him a thank you package for being a recurring donor, and the package is too ‘rich’ for him?

Is he then going to go back online to search for another nonprofit that spends no money on content marketing but somehow still has a website and enough SEO to show up in his search results?

The nonprofits carrying out these missions are able to fulfill them because of the people working hard to acquire new donors. Without a constant stream of new donors, they would be unable to accomplish the mission this donor says he wants his money to go toward.

The truth is, all his money is going toward that mission.

Because of that mailing he received and others like it, more new donors will give, more recurring donors will keep giving, and therefore, more hungry people will be fed.

You can afford to lose donors like this. You can afford to let them go. This is donor attrition you don’t need to worry about. You can’t afford to worry about it. Literally – because worrying about this sort of thinking, and doing what he’s suggesting, would cost you far more money than his $50.

Don’t be afraid of spending money to acquire and retain donors. And don’t worry about the ones who complain. They don’t get it. And that’s okay.

Want more content? Get weekly nonprofit fundraising and copywriting tips, strategies, and motivations in the ProActive Insights newsletter.