This time the case is more to do with sustained giving/regular giving. But two are linked (or should be). So just in case you needed more convincing after Mondays post from Damian, Jonathon from Pareto posted something very similar on his blog last week. Combined the two make a compelling case.
I hope they are useful to you as you make your case…you are making a case for doing DM and regular giving arent you???
…. let’s face it, when it comes to generating new charitable direct response donors, cash really doesn’t stack up anymore.
Consider this: when we look at the balance of cash versus monthly givers recruited through the benchmarking we undertake at Pareto Fundraising invariably we find the balance stacked heavily towards more cash donors recruited.
Often up to five times as many cash donors are recruited in a period than ongoing, monthly donors.
Yet when you compare the retention rates, even those channels delivering the lowest retention rates (typically street/door recruited donors, followed by DRTV) still retain around 75%-80% of monthly donors per year.
Contrast this with cash recruitment. When we recently looked at this the average 2nd gift rate (I.e. those donors who gave a cash gift and then gave a subsequent cash gift) it was as low as 30%. In other words, around 70% never gave again.
Of course the obvious rebuttal is that monthly donors are much harder to recruit and the cost per acquisition is higher, but the pay off long term is a no brainer.
In other words, you might pay more for a monthly donor upfront, and it may be bloody hard work finding them, but when you do, it’s difficult to find a case for recruiting onetime cash donors through your direct response program.
So cash might be king when balancing the books, but it ain’t when finding your next group of donors.
P.S. I hope Jonathon dosent mind me re-posting, I tried to comment on his blog asking if its ok, but couldnt submit the comment…sorry!