On 1 December 2015 at 23:09, Mardetanha <mardetanha.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > do we have any definite number that if reach then we would not any > fundraiser again in the future (I really would like to to see WMF in the > position in which, it would not need yearly fundraiser to stand up and keep > running ) , like 100 M mentioned in the meta page ?
That $100m number sounds oddly familiar, so a quick historical footnote: The endowment idea was first suggested seriously in 2006 (at least, I can't see it being discussed before) and a figure of $100m was being generally quoted as what would be needed by 2008. There had been some discussions about a hypothetical "$100m donation" before that, in 2006-7, and it might be that this helped shape the discussion of how big an endowment might need to be. In 2008, the number was examined a bit and it was seen as plausibly solid - our annual operating costs were a little under $5m at that point and getting a 5% return on endowment was a reasonable expectation. As Anne points out, though, we do a lot more now than we did then! Andrew. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>