Re[2]: [amsat-bb] in-kind services

["Lowell White" <whiteld@xxxxxxx>]

Step softly, there, friend. 

Replies within.

73 de Lowell
K9LDW


*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 3/23/2005 at 2:52 PM Luc Leblanc VE2DWE wrote:

>On 23 Mar 2005 at 7:48, Lowell White wrote:
>
>> Hi and THANK YOU to those who have, in fact, donated "in-kind" services
>to AMSAT whether or not they have been officially catalogued or recognized.
>> 
>> It is a pleasure to be affiliated with a group that, quibbles or 
>not, has a common interest in advancing the state of the art of 
>Amateur Radio; promoting the hobby; and giving us something more 
>interesting and intellectually challenging than many other hobbies 
>afford.
>> 
>> Having "donated" efforts to help others start various companies and 
>having provided "free consulting" (e.g. portions of Corporate IT 
>Strategy, Data Center security plans, etc. - using experiences from 
>paying Fortune 500 clients), I certainly believe that donating 
>efforts does not diminish their value.  Just because one does not 
>receive tangible payment for their professional (or educated 
>hobby)services they opted to provide at no cost does not reduce it's 
>value.
>> 
>> Kind regards & 73,
>> 
>> Lowell
>> K9LDW
>> 
>> 
>Exactly there is nothing about the value of all "in kind services" 
>its great and this should be continued that's the base of any non 
>profit organization.
>
>Again i'm not questioning the fact that we put a money value for 
>theses donated free of charge services but the fact it is added as a 
>money revenue where in fact there was no money exchange at all.


I agree that such donations cannot be counted as revenue.
I also see that there is an intrinsic value, which can be stated, though not for true financial accounting purposes.  It does not hurt anything to underscore the sentiment / recognize the "value"  of donated labor.

>If someone can give any reason why the BOD wants us to believed in 
>artificially increased revenue or artificially reducing losses 
>instead of stating his own background experience.  I think we can 
>from here hope to get real answers instead of futile discussions.
>
>There is some questions ask and with someone who is "using 
>experiences from paying Fortune 500 clients)" he should be aware that 
>Martha Stewart is also under the fortune 500 and with this background 
>he can surely answer on the real issues... 
>
>Does he don't understand the question? i think it is quite impossible 
>with this impressive background!

See above, please.


Make YOUR stock market success easier!
We average more than 6% per month returns at www.easytradesignals.com
----
Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org