| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| Is Circus World the tip of the iceberg? https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7752 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Bob Yarger [ Sat Dec 13, 2003 10:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Is Circus World the tip of the iceberg? |
Flimsies piece on bankruptcy of Circus World Museum in Wisconsin. As states, cities and the federal government are now all broke, I personally think this is the tip of the iceberg for cultural and historical attractions. Any comments? http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/dec03/191720.asp ryarger@rypn.org |
|
| Author: | Claude Wiatrowski [ Sat Dec 13, 2003 11:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Is Circus World the tip of the iceberg? |
Another example is the lack of support from the state of Colorado for the C&TS. Fortunately, New Mexico, the US government and private donors provide increasing funding. It is certainly true, in Colorado, that many believe that the operation of government should be increasingly limited to public safety, highways and should not include support for many of the areas in which government has expanded including historic preservation. You may or may not agree with this but it seems to be the mood here. Colorado's historical preservation does benefit from gambling money. There is a difference between a for-profit business (even if it is a preserved railway) and a museum (even if it also is a preserved railway). They have different goals and the idea that museums could, or even should, become self-supporting like a business is not realistic. The D&S is a remarkable for-profit historic railroad that has invested a lot in improvements but much un-needed historic rolling stock is rotting. The D&S has to be concerned with return on the massive investments made by its owners. At the C&TS, even unused rolling stock is restored by the Friends. The return on investment is made in intangibles such as preserving history and indirect benefits such as economic development. I am not saying one model is better than the other...just that they are different. Years ago, I read that no musuem had an operating ratio that made it profitable. The closest was the Country Music Hall of Fame which took in $0.99 from operations for every $1.00 it spent on operations. I was encouraged to see that the article on Circus World included mention of its economic impact on the community. Look at the merchants of Chama and Antonito over the last couple years if you want to see what happens when a major historical attraction is seriously wounded. Though, economic development will not and should not be the only reason that history should be preserved. cwiatrowski@earthlink.net |
|
| Author: | Erik Ledbetter [ Sat Dec 13, 2003 12:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Is Circus World the tip of the iceberg? |
> Years ago, I read that no musuem had an > operating ratio that made it profitable. The > closest was the Country Music Hall of Fame > which took in $0.99 from operations for > every $1.00 it spent on operations. There are now some organization which operate as for-profit museums--the best example I can think of is the new International Spy Museum in Washington DC. It is a provately-funded for profit venture and seems to be doing well financially. Now, whether any for-porfit institution can completely fill the role we assign when we use the term "museum" is another question entirely. Leaving that aside, I think it might be an oxymoron to talk of a profitable operating ratio at a non-profit museum. At AAM, we analyze museum budgets in terms of a triad of revenue sources: public support (federal, state, and local), development (private grants and donations, capital campaigns, etc) and operating income (gate and gift shop). Most museums craft their budgets so that all three legs of this triad contribute to meeting operating expenses. It would be hard to have an operating ratio of 1.00 or higher if by that, one means balancing 100% of operating expenses against only one of the three streams of income--income from operation. Most museum budgets just aren't set up that way. However, many museums operate most years with a balanced budget--one in which all three streams of income together meet or exceed operating expenses. eledbetter@rypn.org |
|
| Author: | Ted Miles [ Sat Dec 13, 2003 11:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Is Circus World the tip of the iceberg? |
Erik, I would have to add endowment income to what you said. More and more museums in the railroad and technology areas are adding to their income streams with endowment money. Remember that it is the gift that keeps on giving. Many organizations have their year end appeals out now. I split my gift between the Projects and the Endowment. Ted Miles ted_miles@nps.gov |
|
| Author: | Claude Wiatrowski [ Sun Dec 14, 2003 12:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Agreed |
I certainly agree with you but not everyone does. I spent a total of ten years in two different periods on the BOD of a small local historical society. It never received any government funding and had only one substantial private donor who was eventually alienated. They went through three different museums, all quite above par for a small local historical society but they all failed because there was an expectation that the museums could not only fund their operations but also the historical society's overhead. I was young and innocent and did not know that this was incredibly optimistic. I haven't been on the board for a while but they eventually received a little local government help, scaled back their museum a lot on the fourth try and benefited from a demographic shift in the community that generated more interest in history and the work of the society. They finally seem to be on the way to success. It is anyone's guess if the rotten economy will cause them problems in the future, however. cwiatrowski@earthlink.net |
|
| Author: | Rob Davis [ Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Starving the Beast and Hibernating... and NJ |
> Flimsies piece on bankruptcy of Circus World > Museum in Wisconsin. As states, cities and > the federal government are now all broke, I > personally think this is the tip of the > iceberg for cultural and historical > attractions. Any comments? Well, I agree with you on everything *except* this being the tip of the iceberg. The tip was passed a long time ago, we're into the hull-tearing part of the iceberg, but the band is playing so loud, we're only noticing the tip above deck! To use the current lexicon, cultural entities are soft targets. Most operate on the brink in good times, and in times of economic turmoil, they show weaknesses earlier than other sectors. It's not a political argument, so no flames please, it is an economic fact of life right now that we are living in a heavily leveraged society. From your credit card up to the latest Federal legislation, we are a society living on extensions. Who else has the iceberg ripped into? I bet more groups are taking on water than they care to admit... especially those counting on ISTEA-type grants. As more states fail, the burden for basic services will deplete funds for anything deemed outside the realm of life-sustaining needs. I've read forcasts that this will be a cycle of 10 years or so. Will it rival the Great Depression? I doubt it, unless a health or natural disaster like the Dust Bowl again coincides with the cycle. If you follow economic theory, you have probably heard about the philosophy of "starving the beast." There are many economists who believe this is what is going on now. The idea is to leverage government by adding huge debt via large bills, and then forcing balancing cuts that end up removing most pro-social, pro-cultural programs. If this is true, it seems like it is a good time for museums to make plans to "weather the storm" and not let operating budgets continue on the basis of expected grants and government support. In other words, if we aren't doing it already, it is time to think as a business and build a sustainable revenue stream. Without it, some sort of hibernation might be required to weather the storm. I offer the idea of pursuing arrested decay rather than restoration for outfits that are susceptible to the whims of public funding. Buy some tarps, build your sheds, and get ready to buckle down. It's a no-lose proposition. If the worst-case develops, then the artifacts are secure. If the situation brightens, then you are still in good shape. Back to our discussiuon about the languishing NJ transportation museum, I think projects like that will be immediate victims. It will be political suicide for any official to promote a $XX million dollar train museum, when the state is broke and property taxes are going up at 10 times the rate of inflation. NJ is not alone. Will collections like the NJ stash survive? Unlikely unless hibernation begins now. It is sad, but we have to consider what is really worth saving and what is not. Capitalism does not shine favorably upon assets that do not create income. Ironically, the back yard caboose may have a better future that the publicly-funded caboose! It's conjecture, for sure, but I think we've passed the tipping point. Anyone have a dose of sunshine? Rob rdavis@rypn.org |
|
| Author: | G. W. Laepple [ Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Starving the Beast and Hibernating... and NJ |
> Well, I agree with you on everything > *except* this being the tip of the iceberg. > The tip was passed a long time ago, we're > into the hull-tearing part of the iceberg, > but the band is playing so loud, we're only > noticing the tip above deck! > To use the current lexicon, cultural > entities are soft targets. Most operate on > the brink in good times, and in times of > economic turmoil, they show weaknesses > earlier than other sectors. > It's not a political argument, so no flames > please, it is an economic fact of life right > now that we are living in a heavily > leveraged society. From your credit card up > to the latest Federal legislation, we are a > society living on extensions. > Who else has the iceberg ripped into? I bet > more groups are taking on water than they > care to admit... especially those counting > on ISTEA-type grants. > As more states fail, the burden for basic > services will deplete funds for anything > deemed outside the realm of life-sustaining > needs. > I've read forcasts that this will be a cycle > of 10 years or so. Will it rival the Great > Depression? I doubt it, unless a health or > natural disaster like the Dust Bowl again > coincides with the cycle. > If you follow economic theory, you have > probably heard about the philosophy of > "starving the beast." There are > many economists who believe this is what is > going on now. The idea is to leverage > government by adding huge debt via large > bills, and then forcing balancing cuts that > end up removing most pro-social, > pro-cultural programs. > If this is true, it seems like it is a good > time for museums to make plans to > "weather the storm" and not let > operating budgets continue on the basis of > expected grants and government support. > In other words, if we aren't doing it > already, it is time to think as a business > and build a sustainable revenue stream. > Without it, some sort of hibernation might > be required to weather the storm. > I offer the idea of pursuing arrested decay > rather than restoration for outfits that are > susceptible to the whims of public funding. > Buy some tarps, build your sheds, and get > ready to buckle down. > It's a no-lose proposition. If the > worst-case develops, then the artifacts are > secure. If the situation brightens, then you > are still in good shape. > Back to our discussiuon about the > languishing NJ transportation museum, I > think projects like that will be immediate > victims. It will be political suicide for > any official to promote a $XX million dollar > train museum, when the state is broke and > property taxes are going up at 10 times the > rate of inflation. NJ is not alone. > Will collections like the NJ stash survive? > Unlikely unless hibernation begins now. > It is sad, but we have to consider what is > really worth saving and what is not. > Capitalism does not shine favorably upon > assets that do not create income. > Ironically, the back yard caboose may have a > better future that the publicly-funded > caboose! > It's conjecture, for sure, but I think we've > passed the tipping point. Anyone have a dose > of sunshine? > Rob Cases in point: here in Pennsylvania, public libraries are bracing for a 50-percent cut in state funding. Some are cutting staff, some are seeking help from foundations and grants, but the bottom line is that every library in the state is facing the same problem. Many will have to reduce hours, staff, acquisitions and services if they want to remain open. On another front, the state Historical and Museum Commission has already shuttered one state historic site, and others may face reduced hours and staffing. And, I am told that additional state funding for the restoration of the Altoona K4s at Scranton has not been released, affecting the pace of the work there. K4s1361@hotmail.com |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|