I was excited to give, and did so at a time when I thought my gift would be maximized, and it wasn’t. Everyone can say November 17 was a huge success – but in 2010 if others like me have less to give because of this campaign – you may not be so excited about one “give to the max” day in 2009.

Personally the quesiton I would ask is does marketing like this have along term negative impact on charties and peoples willingness to contrinute. The answer will be determined if they run the program again and what the results are.

I mean, is that mysterious donor really going to withhold their donation if the target amount isn’t met? I struggle to believe that.

Big Donor: “We’d like to donate 50k this year. Is there any special way you’d like to handle it?”
Non Profit: “Let’s make your donation a match. Is that OK if we hold off on disclosing your donation right away?”
Big Donor: “No prob. The check should reach you tomorrow. Good luck!”

I like inflicting urgency, no doubt. It’s false senses of urgency that bother me.

If anyone has insights as to how matches typically work, I’d love to hear.

No processing fees? Now that I applaud. That’s good stuff.

Interesting post, and good questions about something NP marketers need to analyze more (I’m not one). Donator’s remorse has got to be one of the most annoying types of remorse to have.

For us, it was a win. I had the pleasure of getting the email notifications as each donation was made and it was a real rush as the day went on and the donations added up. Tuesday was a very good day for us and for many non-profits. Courage Center raised more than $70,000 in 24 hours, with more coming as the shared funds are divided. Plus, no processing fees adds up. I’m a board member of VSA arts of MN, a much smaller non-profit, and with limited advance notice, they cleared more than $1,300. For a small non-profit, that’s a real gift.

I’m glad GiveMN.org paid attention to what happened in other places, learned, and could change in midstream which resulted in a great boon to Minnesota non-profits.

I had a great conversation with Jennifer Reedy from the Saint Paul Foundation yesterday (one of the grant providers covering the $500,000 match). She tracked me down after seeing my post and offered to walk me through the plans and their process of the campaign. She mentioned that they had a “SWAT team” in place to monitor any incorrect messages. If you are anticipating mixed messages and confusion – could it be that you knew the use of the word “matching” might not have been the most transparent term to use?

Overall GiveMN is a great success. It raised more in one day and through a completely new medium then I ever recall happening in the past. The best piece of the site is that it made me aware of other organizations and causes I wasn’t familar with prior to visiting the site. I ended up making contributions to organizations I never would have known about or considered in the past and ultimatly ended up giving more than I planned going into the day. This is exactly what the site was constructed to facilitate! A great congratulations to the GiveMN team and I look forward to next year’s Give to the Max day!

On the other hand, the e-mails that I received from individual charities often quoted either a $1/$1 match or a $0.50/$1 match without any disclaimers. These e-mails were factually inaccurate, but the GiveMN.org seemed clear to me.

I’m not sure if GiveMN.org gave correct info to the non-profits or if the people at the non-profits just didn’t understand the details.

I ended up with mixed feelings because I was hoping that my donations would be matched more, but I’m happy that Twin Cities non-profits raised $14,000,000 in one day. (Honestly, I don’t know how that compares to a typical day for all Twin Cities non-profits, though. It may not be anything special.)