Projects can have multiple goals defined at the same time. The next bigger goal is the current goal that is used to calculate funded%.
This has 2 advantages:
- additional higher goals work as stretch goals. a patron sees the vision of the project
- previoulsy reached goals work as save points. when the projects funding is stagnating and loosing patrons, funded% don’t drop down to 0
So a project is encouraged to have many goals. That makes the funding transparent to the patrons.
A project has these goals defined:
- 100$ cover running expenses
- 700$ (+600$) hire one maintainer half-time
- 1300$ (+600$) hire two maintainers half time
- 1900$ (+600$) hire one full-time maintainer, hire one half-time maintainer
- 2500$ (+600$) hire two full-time maintainers
- 3100$ (+600$) hire an additional half-time developer
- 3700$ (+600$) hire an additional half-time developer
- 4300$ (+600$) hire an additional half-time developer
- 5500$ (+1200$) hire an additional full-time developer
The patrons pledge to contribute 2491$ max together (number from https://random.org/).
So 2500$ is the next goal.
Applying what we have aligned on in Options for next step for new approach to crowdmatching
each month’s donations will be proportional to the percentage of the goal the crowd has reached
2491 of 2500 is 99,64%, so the project gets 99,64% of 2491, which is 2482$
Now see what happens in the positive case that more patrons contribute (or existing contribute more). 100$ more, so 2591$. The next goal is 3100$.
2591 of 3100 is 83,58%, so the project gets 83,58% of 2591, which is 2165$
This means, the project get’s less than before they reached the goal! That’s not good.
The project loses patrons and the remaining pledge is just 2000$ (slightly over the previous goal).
2000 of 2500 is 80%, so the project get’s 80% of 2000, which is 1600$
When the project drops below the previous goal, so pledge is 1800:
1800 of 1900 is 94,74%, so the project get’s 94,74% of 1800, which is 1705$
That is more than before! Also not good.
So a good time to activate a higher goal (or change the goal in the case of having just one) might be when the project would actually get more money. That seems never to be the case, because 100% of the pledge is the best you can get. So a projects stays on the lowest goal, but have eliminated the crowdmatching effect. Visitors have not more incentive as on patreon.
source: can’t upload .gnumeric file, only microsoft office files
So in the end, the project invests in more patrons by giving up on %. It seems really a bet as in the stock market.
The question is, how much % gives you the most new patrons. And them you would want to stay on that. Adjust the goal every time a new patron joins.
In the end, this idea topic is again about the dynamics of changing the goal.
This is a similar idea to Funding milestones