Popcorn - Is it finally too expensive?

[Bob White]

As a non profit corporation the BSA shares some characteristics of a for profit business but not all.

 

Does your company have a profit sharing plan. Don't all employess get the same percentage or is it dependent on how much profit each person puts in the group till? Law requires that it be an equal share for everyone.

 

Do you buy your children what they need based on productivity or do you treat them equally?

 

Do you treat your friends differently based on what they each give to you?

 

The role of the BSA and the local council is to service all scouts and scouters regardless of what they put in the till, in hopes that their character will cause them to do the right thing and help others as they are helped by others.

 

If parents have a problem with that...fine, the program is not there for the parents it is their for their children.

 

Just as not every part of a business is a profit center, neither is every part of scouting. But those products and services are needed none the less in order to serve and support the units and the program.

 

As far as not being able to objectively prove that we would lose scouts on a pay as you play program, You need only to look at the low income neighborhoods where scouting programs exist.

 

Plus think about what BSA scouting overseas would cost, if they had to pay the actual cost of support services and resources.

 

 

As Red Green would say "We're all in this together".

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[scoutldr]

We recently had to apply for a zoning variance to build a room on the back of our house. Even though I have been a resident of this city all my life, and have paid property taxes and sales taxes for the privilege of living here, I still had to pay a $200 non-refundable application fee just to request the variance. They never asked my income...everyone pays the same fee if they want the service.

 

If you want to go to college, you have to pay an application fee for someone to process the application, even if you're accepted and pay $20,000 a year for tuition. If you want a parking sticker, that's another hundred bucks, and another $35 for a "student health fee". If you want to graduate, that's another fee. I just put two boys through college, and it seems like I was always writing checks for some "fee" or another in addition to tuition.

 

If you want headphones on an airplane, it's another $4 even if you paid $1200 for a ticket. Fees are all around us and people are used to paying them.

 

Bob, probably no one has to pay for room rental for roundtables. But we could use the Council "Service Center" (oxymoron) if every conference room, corridor and broom closet weren't stacked to the ceiling with popcorn.

 

FOS and Corporate donations would continue. If units do not want to pass on the user fees to the parents, they can have their own fund raisers as they see fit. Just no more Council pressure to sell popcorn.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

[Bob White]

I would like to know why units who do not do well with popcorn want EVERYONE to have to give it up? (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

[packsaddle]

Playing the advocate for that guy with the pointed tail...Hey, does that make me a capitalist?

 

Anyway, I agree with Red Green, I'm not sure that everyone else does, though.

And I agree that BSA doesn't share all the characteristics of a for-profit business, but that is my point isn't it? If marketplace mechanisms, forces, and discipline were applied throughout BSA, I think that it not only would help resolve some things but it would also present a great example for the boys.

 

"Don't all employess get the same percentage..." Well, yeah, but the AMOUNT of the share is calculated, roughly, as the percentage that you mention times the salary, which is not equal. Therefore the actual share is different, dependent on the salary of each individual. And as I was told a long, long time ago while I was working in industry, "In this society, you are paid according to what you contribute." I wonder if that makes anyone out there just a wee bit nervous?

 

And I doubt that any of us treat our children exactly equally. I have a boy and a girl and that's just the beginning of the differences. For the most part, we DO provide for their NEEDS which are usually different. Their 'productivity' does figure into this if, by 'productivity' you mean such things as school work, braces, medical needs, extracurricular activities, etc.

And although I try to treat all people with equal honesty, etc., I try to give my friends personalized treatment both according to my perception of their needs and interests, as well as to let them know that I notice their unique qualities. Doesn't everyone?

 

"The role of the BSA and the local council is to service all scouts and scouters regardless of what they put in the till, in hopes that their character will cause them to do the right thing and help others as they are helped by others."

And I agree. This also is easily translated into "giving to those according to their needs and taking from those according to their abilities." or something along those lines. And although these particular parents may see red when they read those words, they know this unit has a lot to offer their boys as they grow. Or do I inform them of their hypocrisy and invite them to find another program? H'mmm?

 

"...You need only to look at the low income neighborhoods where scouting programs exist."

That's nice, but it wouldn't constitute objective evidence that "You would lose a large percentage of scouts and units in a pay as you go plan..." unless a "large percentage" of scouts ARE in those low income neighborhoods. I think not, at least not around here.

 

Scouting overseas...I don't know much about it so I can't address it, sorry. But if we subordinated our business practices here to foreign interests, well, anyone for 'freedom fries'? I could be wrong, I admit.

[Bob White]

Packsaddle you are incorrect, profit sharing is not based on salary it is based on how much of your salary you reinvest into the plan.

 

The same in true in scouting the more you put into it the more you will get out of it.

 

"This also is easily translated into "giving to those according to their needs and taking from those according to their abilities."

 

You have that backwards, it is "give according to your abilities, recieve according to your needs", that is a basic concept of any non-profit agency.

 

"Or do I inform them of their hypocrisy and invite them to find another program?"

 

Unless your job is to develop character in the parents (and it is not) then you ignore them, and do your job as a Scout leader and member of the scouting community.

 

"unless a "large percentage" of scouts ARE in those low income neighborhoods. I think not, at least not around here."

 

Certainly you do not suggest that scouting be structured financially based on what scoutig is like only in your area?

What does it matter if there are 5 faily or 5,000 families that would be chased from scouting because of a pay as you play plan? Wht should any boy not have an opportunity to be a scout based on his family's financial ability?

 

"If marketplace mechanisms, forces, and discipline were applied throughout BSA, I think that it not only would help resolve some things but it would also present a great example for the boys."

 

"Are there no prisons... and the Union workhouses, are they still in operation?" Generosity is not some problem looking for a cure, it is the right think to do, it does not need to be "fixed" to teach a lesson in business.

 

 

BW

 

 

 

 

 

[ljnrsu]

 it is based on how much of your salary you reinvest into the plan.

Sorry, Bob it is you who is incorrect. What you are describing is either a 401(k) or a 414(h) plan not profit sharing.

 Packsaddle is correct.

 Profit sharing is a certain percentage of the companies net profit that is distributed among the plans participants. It is usually done as a percentage of salary.

 BTW Bob I am a CPA and CFP. I deal with all kinds of retirement plans on an almost daily basis.

[Bob White]

ljnrsu is it not true that each person gets the same percentage of profit regardless of how much money they earn from the company or make for the company?

 

 

 

 

 

[scoutldr]

It really is amusing watching guys argue about things they know nothing about.

 

A profit sharing plan is not the same as a 401K. They are different. A 401K is a retirement plan into which the employee contributes and the employer may or may not match some percentage.

 

A profit sharing plan is entirely at the discretion of the company. If the company has a good year, some defined percentage of the profits are distributed back to the employees (hence the term "profit sharing"). When I worked in industry, we ALL got 8 shares of stock one year. As profits changed, the amount changed.

 

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming...

[Prairie_Scouter]

There are a number of ways that profit sharing can be implemented. At the discretion of the company, when some metric reaches a certain level each year, a "share" can be returned back to the employees, usually defined as a percentage of salary. So, while the percentage may be the same for everyone, the actualy dollar amount, of course, varies with salary. The percentage may also vary with the amount of growth in certain metrics. In many companies, executives are placed into what is sometimes called a "discretionary bonus pool", which can be manipulated more subjectively to reward certain individuals more than others.

 

Different than a 401K.

 

If a comparison is being made to the popcorn sale, the best comparison would be to a profit sharing plan, not really a 401K. In this case it's a profit sharing plan where there is no threshold for sharing to begin, ie, every sales returns a share of profit, and there is no threshhold to be reached before profit sharing begins.(This message has been edited by Prairie_Scouter)

[packsaddle]

scoutldr, I agree that it is the company's discretion. The one I worked for, however, must have done it differently. We received an amount of stock that was based on our salary.

 

Edited part: Thanks, Prairie Scouter, for expanding on that.

 

Bob White, You commented, "Certainly you do not suggest that scouting be structured financially based on what scoutig is like only in your area?" No, I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that conservative economic principles (market forces and competition) could be applied to BSA with positive results.

 

Regarding the "large percentage" response; I was responding to your claim that "You would lose a large percentage of scouts and units in a pay as you go plan..."

You claim that a "large percentage" of scouts and units would be lost. However, your response regarding as few as five families can hardly be evidence of a "large percentage". In order for your original claim to be correct, a "large percentage" of the scouts in BSA would have to be from families that had financial means sufficiently limited that they could not continue as members. I believe that is not so. But even for such families, the units and COs would be free to pursue their own fundraisers for the purpose of funding those, perhaps all, of the member families. But THOSE fundraisers would be local option with local impact.

 

I do agree that all boys should have access. Those with limited means could still be members through another option. BSA (or the council) could merely figure the burden of that charity support into the final costs paid by the rest of us for whatever services we decide to purchase. As an example, I recently paid a visit to a hospital. Looking over the bills, I found items priced at what could pass for '$500 hammers'. When I asked about this, I was told that those who can pay, cover the costs for those who can't. It would work the same way with BSA, only the costs would be recovered through the user fees.

 

If this worked the way it ought to, competition would either cause the council to adjust their other expenses (salaries and personnel, perhaps) to keep the final costs and user fees competitive, or else the customers would be free to go elsewhere for a more competitive product. It's the unseen hand and the magic of the free market. It could make BSA a lean, mean, competitive machine. Why would anyone object to such a conservative approach?

(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[Prairie_Scouter]

packsaddle,

Hmmm. You know, I'm not sure that I agree with an approach that treats BSA like any other business. But I'm not really sure why.

 

Maybe the thought of turning BSA into a "lean, mean, competitive machine" makes me cringe a bit. But I'm not really sure why.

 

Comparing BSA to Socialism makes me cringe a bit as well. But I'm not really sure why.

 

I guess I like the idea of a BSA where the volunteers run a pretty laid back organization. That's not BSA today, unfortunately. BSA is an organization with millions in assets, and unfortunately a LOT of baggage comes with that. Power struggles, liability concerns, etc. Makes it sound like any other big organization. And BSA is a very large organization; some aspects of business operation have to be applied to it to have it function at all, let alone efficiently.

 

I've looked at the backoffice operations of a typical Council a bit, and it's really a mess. Not that the staffs aren't well meaning, but I would expect the National Office to provide some sort of intergrated operational procedures, and while it appears that they have, they also appear to be antiquated. ScoutNet is a relatively new system, but looks and acts like a system from the mid-1970s. Paper records are piled up in storerooms. (what happens if there's a fire? Where's the backup?) Workflow is, of course, built around the processing of paper forms. I am sure that the local offices do everything they can to make things work, but there would seem to be quite a lot that could be done to streamline the workflows and make Scouting easier for everyone from the Council offices to the local unit leaders. I'm a systems guy, so I have a bias towards looking at things that way, but what I see at the Council offices are very good people who are hampered by not having the proper tools.

 

Even a small number of Councils having problems with accurate membership figures points to problems with tracking systems and auditing.

 

Taking care of these things decreases expenses and mitigates liability. That, in turn, would allow BSA to lower the fees, which to be honest, aren't that high anyway, which would allow more people to use the programs.

 

I guess we got tired of talking about popcorn

[scoutldr]

We're still talking about popcorn. We are discussing alternatives to sending little boys and their parents out to beg for money in exchange for an overpriced product that few people really want. We are discussing alternatives to selling off scout camps to meet payrolls. We are talking about ways to reduce administrative overhead (how many staff hours and other resources are devoted to Popcorn sales?). I think the discussion is valuable. I only hope there's some lurkers out there taking notes who are in a position to effect change.

[cjlaird]

YES - it's TOO EXPENSIVE. Once the prices went up - about 5 or 6 years ago - I had to say no to everyone who was selling anything. I got so darned sick and tired of having these poor kids come to the door soliciting sales that I just quit buying altogether. Even from my own kids. I'll donate my time, I'll give a little cash occasionally to the unit, I'll donate things for the food bank or the homeless shelter, I'll drive a carload of kids to camp, and I'll even buy a scout shirt for a youth who hasn't the funds to buy his own. I'll help the troop sell candy bars (if they give good value for the money), and I'll help supply items for a supper (spaghetti or potato bar) and help man the serving line & help cook the items - but I won't BUY popcorn or anything else unless it's an item I need.

 

Sorry guys - I'm just tired of watching everyone tiptoe around this sticky subject. And... It's been a bad day, so I'm in just the right mood for a rant. I'm telling you this in advance - so please forgive me if I get a little heated.

 

I have 2 children who are now 19 & 24 (boy & girl). Both were in scouts (son made Eagle), both went thru public schools (one spent 3 years in parochial school), one's in college now. Between scouts and the schools, I got hit with everything... Red Wheel pie & pizza products, Aunt Fatty's Cookie Dough, candy bars of every variety, magazines, popcorn, cookies, candles, potpourri, widgets, wreaths, trees, and whatever else - you name it - (worthless crap, most of it, at least in my opinion) - just about anything that can be peddled door to door by those rosy-cheeked innocents who are young enough to tug on the old heartstrings and too gullible to understand what they're doing.

ALL that frilly-fluffy decorator or sweet-tooth frou-frou gets peddled, regardless of quality, regardless of value for the money - and talk about the GUILT TRIP people try to put on you because you had the brass to say NO. And we wonder why kids today don't know their boundaries, don't know the meaning of the word "no" - and it's the parents and teachers who are the ones driving the guilt trip. They should all be slapped.

 

My opinion is - if some little fresh-faced kids want to spiff themselves up and put on their scout or school uniforms and come to my door and ask for a donation to his or her troop or classroom (for the purpose of helping raise money for the entire group to go on a trip), I have NO PROBLEM with giving $15 or $20. It's deductible. But I won't buy anything anymore of the stuff they're selling because it's not deductible and it's generally not all that useful, and if it's a magazine, then it opens the door to all kinds of junk mail.

 

With regard to Boy Scout Popcorn - I can buy Pop Weavers' at K-Mart for $2.50 to $3.00 (compared to $15 for the same amount of Trails End) and have popcorn that's just as good - except I can't eat it because of my dental work, so why buy it.

 

With regard to Girl Scout Cookies - what's the point of bothering? You pay $3.00 for a box that would cost $1.00 to $1.50 anywhere else, and some of those boxes only have 18 cookies in them. Shoot, I can make ten dozen cookies of almost any variety for less than it would cost to buy 4 boxes. I'd rather make my own cookies and just GIVE a little money to the girl scout troop than buy their stuff.

 

Our Boy Scout troop did 4 fundraisers a year when I joined with my son in 1998 - Trails End, Kathryn Beich, a baked potato bar, and a car wash. We did those things for several years until some self-absorbed dunderheaded doofus joined the troop and convinced the parents in the troop to drop the potato bar and car wash, and insisted we go to Sam's Club and buy Mars candy products to sell instead of the really good $1.00 bars of chocolate. We have NEVER YET regained the customers we lost, and it's been over 4 years now since this idiot's "great idea" got put into action. (Please note that this idiot also nearly single-handedly caused 7 boys to transfer to other troops and about 15 boys to quit scouting altogether because of his nonsense and overbearing ill-informed attitudes).

 

Advice: FIND a fundraiser your members can live with, work out the details well in advance and KNOW who's going to be in charge. Figure out some hook that's going to make YOUR fundraiser more special than whatever that other troop's effort is, and stick with the same thing from year to year so everyone in the charter organization and the neighborhood knows what to expect. Believe me - the ones who care will put it on their calendars months in advance and you'll have a lot of repeat customers.

 

Don't let anyone in the unit try to change what the community expects you to do once you set up a regular event. If you want to sell popcorn, fine. Sell it. But don't complain if the customers say it's too high-priced and you don't sell enough to fund whatever it is you're trying to raise money to support (camp equipment, camping & activity fees, a uniform closet for trading smaller for larger items, assistance to low-income youth, etc.).

It's also OK to let the local Boy Scout Council or Girl Scout Council know that their pet project isn't popular and you aren't going to do that anymore. So what if they take away your Big 5 patch or decide you don't qualify for Quality Unit or something - we shouldn't be in Scouting for the preservation of the Council Exeutive's pocketbook. We should be in it to provide a quality program for the youth.

 

[Bob White]

BOBWHITE'S BSA POPCORN SALES TIP #7

 

When a potential customer says "It's to darn expensive" the scout should SMILE and say "how few then did you want to order?" usually the potential customer will laugh and order the least expensive item. If the customer says none, the scout should say, "Thank you have a nice day!" and go meet the next potential customer.

 

BOBWHITE'S BSA POPCORN SALES TIP #4

Sales is a matter of opportunity. The more people you ask the more people you will sell to, in life (as in popcorn) you make your own opportunity. Some say opportunity knocks once. Good salespeople understand that it is not opportunities job to come find you, it is your job to go looking for opportunity. The secret to popcorn sales is simply the number of doors you knock on and nothing more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[cjlaird]

Re: from Scoutldr / Old Dominion

"A modest proposal...can the popcorn. Make up the difference by charging user fees for Council services. $10 to process a Tour Permit. $15 to record an advancement form. $50 for an Eagle Application. 25% surcharge on all Scout Shop sales. $100 to rent a meeting room for training. You get the idea. It works for banks!"

 

I love seeing things from this guy - he's usually pretty level-headed & knowledgable. But --- (there's always one of those, isn't there?)

The proposals Scoutldr/Old Dominion makes sounds good on the surface - BUT consider the possibility for abusing these ideas in the Council if the system is instituted.

 

I have serious reservations about paying to process forms that are required BY the council, for submission TO the council, as part of their reporting policies. If they demand the forms, THEY should be willing to swallow the cost of processing them. If not, what are the advancement and other office personnel there for? - and how much air space do we allow useless office people to take up at the Council offices if they weren't hired to serve the units?

I particularly DON'T agree with a fee to process troop/pack advancement reports. That should be a service the council provides to each and every scout (via the troop/pack) and it should be guaranteed as part of the youth's membership in BSA.

 

On hiking prices in the Council Scout Shops: People will begin circumventing the Scout Shop and order items direct from the catalog if prices are raised in the Council shops at a percentage that is noticably higher than the catalog price, or substituting generic items of the same color and general style. The uniform items and other merchandise is already ridiculously overpriced through the catalog because they're charging for the BSA name. You might as well call it Scouts, Inc. and consider it a for-profit company right now - and watch it bankrupt itself with increases at Scout Shops in the Council offices.

 

On Tour Permits: Earlier this year, our local scout council started requiring a tour permit be filed for every single activity that occurs outside of the regular meeting place (and argues it's even if it's a planned hike around the block a few times for the purpose of meeting fitness requirements for rank or badge). If a troop is very active, and it costs $10 for every tour permit (on top of other outing costs), and a tour permit is required for every single activity that gets planned, it's going to discourage a lot of units from being quite so active, which in turn is a disservice to the youth. Some troops already have kids who can't afford the basic $10 fee to cover food costs on a set of menus for a weekend campout - and these are the same kids who have trouble finding money to buy used uniforms from Goodwill. The families who are financially pinched complain bitterly if a camping activity has activity fees of over $8-$10 to go to a camporee or museum or $20 to go to a merit badge conference (on top of the basic food costs), plus transportation expenses.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, a troop in our community routinely charges membership fees of $2,000-$2,500 a year per boy - in advance - for a year's membership and for "activity fees and troop dues" because the kids in this unit do so much and they go on such expensive camping excursions (spending $200-$250 per camper or higher for summer camp at Camp Alexander or Ben Delatour). This is the same troop that's considered the Country Club Troop (full of doctor's and lawyer's and banker's kids) and is frowned on and ridiculed locally among other troops because it is known as an "Eagle Factory."

 

On fees for processing ranks: Last year our troop graduated 6 Eagles (an unusually high number for us, given the small size of the troop, but they were boys who promised the previous scoutmaster they would earn it and have been very dedicated so as not to disappoint him). There have been another 1 or 2 out of the previous scoutmasters group already this year, with 2 or 3 more expected later in the year or early in 2006 from the younger ones who have observed the older boys' example. Two of last years' crop were brothers, two were kids from lower income households, one's dad was a Better-Than-Thou type with loads of income, and the last one was my kid. The troop was almost broke last year, and could barely afford the $23 Eagle Presentation Box we got for each one. The families elected to buy their own sons' Eagle Neckerchiefs and I made braided turk's head slides for each boy in red-white-blue gimp.

Question: Who's going to pay the $50 Eagle processing fee if it's a rank for a kid from a low income family and neither the family nor the troop can afford it? Do we deprive the young man of his rightful rank? NO, I think not. It isn't ethical to expect a young man to work his fanny off for 3 to 6 years to earn the Eagle rank and then make him, his family, or his troop pay for filing the report.

 

On fundraisers: How does one make up for poor sales if the troop is dealing with an over-priced item and everyone says "that costs too much" or "we don't want any" or "we can't afford to help this year?" We had kids who were "super salesmen" in our troop - sold lots every year, but it was never enough to bring in sufficient funds to significantly raise the troop's treasury. We had to be careful how much was spent on advancements and other necessities.

 

On selling the camps: The problem about selling the camps doesn't exist if the parties who acquire land for (or donate the land to) the Scout Council have the foresight to have the deeds or the donation set up on the acquisition in such a way so that Council has free use of the land so long as they care for it, maintain any buildings constructed, and pay the taxes and insurance, but if the Council attempts to sell the land, the Council not only gets no money for it, the land also reverts back to the party or family who owned it before the Council had the use of it as a camp. That happened here, and when the Council discovered the land couldn't be offered for sale without losing both the money AND the use of the land, they found other ways to operate the camp and the council - and it hasn't appreciably cut into the cost of operations for the Council, so far as they've been willing to reveal.

In another case, a council camp actually was sold within the last 5 years, and it turned out that someone on the Council Committee had personal ties to the real estate sales office wanting to acquire the land. This committee member was offered a large sum of money under the table as a bribe for helping to liberate the property for sale to developers, and the price the council got wasn't even considered competitive fair-market value for the land where it was located. The council got ripped off, the committee member personally benefitted, and the members/boys got screwed.