Raising membership cost?

An example of why I think costs don’t scale linearly with membership count, and thus even more members means each member needs to pay more. Especially in the current model of all members funds go together into one bucket to support everything we do.

When starting out DMS had to start with basic tools, like saws and 3d printers, but once we had the basics, it’s not like members are satisfied at maintaining what we had, we want the next biggest / larger / more specific tool, such as purchasing a 3d scanner, bigger laser cutter, or more modern mill,or a 5x10 cnc router, etc.

Not only do we want to get bigger and better tools in the areas we are currently in, we want to expand into more areas, so instead of member’s dues just supporting 4 main areas as in the past, now each member is supporting 20+ committees all with different interests and each with capital needs.

I’m going to agree with Walter: a thorough review of spending is in order before a rate raise is considered. If we are hitting a wall on things like the ventilation for plasma, perhaps we should consider doing away with that for the time being. Do more with less and pick our battles, that sort of thing.

3 Likes

What may I ask are these new full time or nearly full time employees going to be doing? I think we should be saving that money for properly ventilating the welding shop so members can actually use the equipment we already have that is useless without it and a waste of space and money otherwise!

2 Likes

I’m one of those inactive members who rarely come by. I believe I have been a member for about 6 months and visited 3 or 4 times. In that time, I paid the $50 a month to maintain a membership, read the postings here and look for a reason to leave my home lab and get involved in something that makes me want to drive 25 miles to visit the Makerspace. Fifty bucks was about my limit and was about all I was willing to spend to be an idle member. At $65, I’m pretty sure I would have left much sooner than this. Also, a new Makerspace is being organized in the Allen/Plano/Richardson area, so the competition for membership is going to get more intense.

2 Likes

Many subscription-based businesses slowly ease their prices upward to avoid attrition. It’s not about the price or even the benefits but the “perceived value”. If the jump is small, like moving from $50 to $55, it’s more likely people will shrug it off and stay. But moving to $65 all at once risks losing more members than the higher rate would offset. Worse, once your price climbs, it’s all but impossible to go back.

Control costs first and then adjust subscriptions in small increments… if at all. $55 is a 10% increase. Shouldn’t that be enough?

1 Like

If everyone got a 10% increase that would be good, but because we are unable to alter the rates for existing recurring members, only new members will get the increase, which is why I suggested 30% instead of 10%. Will take a long time(years?) for the majority of members to be paying 65 instead of 50.

Mark,

I’d be very interested in more info on new M/S you mentioned. Can you PM me any details you may have, please?

https://thelab.ms/ isn’t really competition for us. They are starting out with very limited tools and are primarily a collaborative workspace.

I am one of those casual members mentioned above. I may go months without visiting the space, then spend a few days there doing a lot of work. It all depends on the projects I’m working on. I do everything that I can at my house, then visit MakerSpace to handle the things that require equipment I don’t have at home (the laser cutter, in particular).

I don’t mind paying $50 a month to retain the ability to go in when I need/want to. I wouldn’t quit over a slight increase in dues, but I suspect that many casual users would, and that many potential members would balk at it. That’s definitely something to consider.

I agree with those folks who said that a very thorough financial overview, austerity plan, and long-term financial and purchasing plans should be completed before considering any sort of membership price increase. That’s Business 101 (or Non-Profit Business 101).

As far as purchasing goes, I would prefer to see money spent on getting all the existing equipment functional (or out of the space) and classes set up to train people in their use before considering purchasing more things.

4 Likes

agreed, and the evaluation of spending to include proposed spending is in order, especially when you are considering hiring new employees over getting the existing equipment functional is a priority. I see a few of high cost expenses that were required this past summer to be one time and due to lack of maintenance but they are not something that will be continuous or recurring such as the leaking A/C.

I didn’t realize that there was a competition going on between Makerspaces. Everyone has to start somewhere. Did Dallas Makerspace just suddenly spring into existence from the Ether without a growth plan?

1 Like

I’m curious as to what all this dis-functional equipment is people keep referring to?

Is there a possibility for a 3rd kind of membership, may be a “member lite” or something for people who occasionally visit DMS.

One argument against it will be the classic phone/power company argument: That for all customers (members in this case) the company needs to be always ready and have certain capacity. I don’t think that is completely applicable for DMS. I am sure the Netflix argument will also come to peoples mind. Again not quite in line with this case.

In last few months, the membership count changed dramatically and I am not certain if anyone felt a pressing need for a proportionate facility improvement. Do we really have to wait in line to use a tool? or get a chair to sit? I dont know this since I am not regular here. The kind of cost structure given above doesn’t seem to have a linear relationship with increase of number of members.

On the other hand, I think we are somewhat ignoring the fact that the members are the most important asset of DMS. User/member acquisition and retaining should be given a priority by all mean. This is quite a general trend at the moment I believe. And when I see that there is a possibility that some of the members might leave due to any reason, it scares me a little.

its possible to keep a record how often an user visits DMS and have a classification based on that. If I were a heavy user I wouldn’t mind paying 65, heck a 100 for it. But just to keep a connection with DMS( which I am happy that I have) and an occasional visit of once or twice a month, (given that I spent 10 dollar of gas every time I visit there)6, it would probably hurt me to spend that much of money.

I’ve been wrong before…but thought I would put it here.

The Plasma cutter needs ventilation in order to be used safely, that is all I am aware of aside from the new 3d scanner which requires someone to learn to use it prior to using it and showing others.

Neither of these items are being delayed due to fiscal constraint.

Is the ventilation “cost no object”?
I was under the impression that cost was partially to blame for the delays…

1 Like

If an increase is needed, then it’s needed. I would also hope that something of this nature would require a membership vote.

It sounds like people are wondering how money is being spent and allocated. If we have 1000 members, that’s $600,000 a year in revenue. I’d like to see the P&L compared against the budget, and see a detail of all the spending. If we’re over spending from the budget, then we should address those issues first.

Are we insuring that we are also receiving the consumable revenues? In the few times I get to hangout in the space, I can’t say that I see people pulling out their phone to send money for the laser cutter, 3D spools, snacks, wide format printer etc.

As an occasional visitor who doesn’t get to use most of the cool big tools due to scheduling conflicts with training classes, I would have not continued to have sustained my membership if was over $50 a month + $10 for my wife (who doesn’t use the space at all). As of now, I consider my membership fee of $720 / year mainly a donation to the space. I dont know that I can talk others into joining if it’s more than that.

We shouldn’t compare ourselves to makerspaces in New York or LA; and if we do, then the expenses of those areas (lease, insurance, utilities, wages, etc.) should be adjusted to economic area comparables. I would be surprised if the rent in Carrollton/Farmer’s Branch is the same as the other areas.

In our demographic area, my opinion is that if you can afford more than $600 a year, I think you’re more likely to buy nicer tools for the convenience of your own home. It won’t be a CNC or a Laser cutter, but you can begin outfitting yourself with nice table tools at home then save yourself the hour to two hour roundtrip to the space. I live close in Plano, but when you consider 1 hour round trip drive time, tolls and gas into consideration for each trip, it’s more of a luxury for me to attend.

At the higher price point, I would pay the $65 to use something for the month, then not pay it again until I needed it. I definitely would not pay when unable or no need to use the space. Even then, regardless that we are an all-volunteer organization, I would have less tolerance for not having classes and tool availability at my personal convenience, meaning I would likely have negative word of mouth.

One more thought - before we hire employees, we should consider outsourcing the job responsibilities by contract if at all possible. Last thing we need is to have to pay legal fees to ward off disgruntled employees, workers comp/risk management, employer-paid payroll taxes, etc.

But, like I said, if it’s needed, it’s needed.

2 Likes

FYI, we just had our first class on this tool today with more to come. Currently we have 6 people trained, and more with expressed interest.

3 Likes

6 down 994 to go…

Unless someone in this thread is volunteering to generate a detailed financial report and forecast, that isn’t going to happen.

1 Like