I worked with a non-profit client this year on restructuring a sponsorship package for their annual fundraiser.

(Click here to explore my consultancy, CLYMI. The page will open in a separate tab.)

We made some relatively large changes to the structure of the packages, like shifting away from brand exposure (aka logo vomit) and towards sponsoring different activations and experiences within the event.

Overhauls like these aren’t just logical endeavors. They’re emotional.

There was plenty of back and forth, but the client was much more receptive to the structural changes than I anticipated.

But there was one recommendation I made that was just a no-go for them: increasing the prices of the sponsorship opportunities.

*A wet panda | Created by Jay W. Austin & DALL•E*

I recommended that they raise their sponsorship prices by at least 20%, and add a package that was triple the amount of their highest package.

Several factors prevented this from happening that I won’t get into here.

I realize now that both parties were looking to do the same thing — raise the chances of getting funding — but were approaching this goal from two different positions.

In their mind, affordable prices put them in a better position to get “yes” from a funder.

In my mind, one unaffordable price would make other prices look more affordable, which put them in a better position to get that “yes.”

But here’s the thing…we were discussing price, but we were really making decisions about stories and signals about the brand.

Non-profits like these are responsible for many things, including stretching every single dollar to make it do good. And many price themselves as if they only deserve a few dollars to stretch.

I see this form of self-sabotage over and over again in this space.

A note here: This client is awesome and their work interrupting mass incarceration represents a beautiful understanding of what freedom can be. And I think we made a decision on this project that we can all live and do well with, especially considering the circumstances.

We were talking price, but deciding about brand.

It’s the organization’s role to be responsible for a donor’s money once they receive it, but it’s not the organization’s role to decide what is a reasonable amount for a donor to give.

Pricing strategy for a fundraising event must match the tone of the event.

In this specific case, the tone of the event is celebratory and flashy. Suits and dresses and watches and drip and bling and indoor hats. Come show out!

A luxurious event will do best if it includes opportunities for luxurious levels of contributions.

And what is a “luxurious” level of contribution? It’s relative!! $100? Sure! $10k? Yeah! $100k? Of course. $1M? Why the hell not?

The money we have is scarce, but the money we don’t have is plentiful.

The prices we choose are much more about the story we’re creating in the minds of others, stories that we hope they’ll share with others without us asking. These asks are signals of status and opportunities for belonging.

Price accordingly.

Aye, I’m Jay. You’re on my personal site where I post things I make about interrupting mass incarceration, protecting migration, environmental justice & sustainability, language, communications, storytelling, creativity, and tech.

Learn about my ventures here, check out my non-profit initiative here, or explore my consultant services here.