So, if I read that correctly "donate to us so we can make things which you can buy from us".
That's not an amazing approach, tbh...
It's also not amazing that this has to be clarified in a Facebook comment thread somewhere. That's very easy for people to miss. Clarity must be present on the very face of it.
Hopefully this isn't seen as the full two barrells, but it sort of is, my thoughts on UKHAT in the wider sense:
*breathes in*
Charities are hard work. To convince people to give their hard-earned to you is extraordinarily difficult. They wont do it if they think they will be fleeced, and despite what I am sure are good intentions, asking people to pay for something which they can then pay again to buy back isn't the right way about it, IMO. Sometimes you've got to dip into your own pockets to get this ball rolling, be that already-existing funds, or a loan, or some other way, and merchandise should surely be one of the first things you fund, as that will start putting money into the coffers. People are more likely to pay money for something than to give that money away. This all should have been factored-in when UKHAT created its business plan, including how long the Trust envisages that initial funding boost being paid-back - if this has not happened, then something/somebody requesting my money that either has an inadequate business plan, or does not have one at all, will swiftly push me somewhere else. And if the business plan does exist, but no funds have been put forward by members to get the ball rolling, then what message does that put to the outside world, if the organisation is not confident of investing in the project themselves, and if funds *have* been put in, then why was merchandise (which, as I say, must surely be the first thing that starts making money for UKHAT) missed-out?
And speaking of the "Trust", has charitable status been gained yet? Their Facebook page states quite clearly that they expected a response "around" 28th November", but there's been no announcement of what the response is yet. Gaining charitable status is and should be, huge news for any burgeoning charities. If no response has been had, where is the update, and (more importantly) chase it with the Charities Commission. If you put a date out there in public, make sure you stick to it.
I'm very uneasy of the self-declaration of "Trust". It's misleading. The term "Trust" has very specific and very important legal implications, and it's in my view very inappropriate and misleading to use a specific legal title without actually being a Trust (unless I'm mistaken and trustees are appointed already).
Likewise, gaining "charitable status" is not just a name thing. It gives Charitable Trusts very specific things like huge benefits in taxation - does the Trust really want to be asking for money whilst this is all up in the air? What does the business plan say? If they're taking money for things when they don't yet have charitable status, does their business plan say "we'll be asking for money for XY & Z, before we receive the tax benefits a charitable trust has". If their business plan does not consider this, then why not? And why is this not communicated with the people donating their own money?
It's like over-use of "official" in Facebook groups that are just fan pages. "Official RIAT Nutters" always used to make me laugh - what's official about it? Has the term "RIAT Nutters been sanctioned and approved by RAFCTE, and is it sanctioned and made official in the form and body of a, some say, maligned Facebook group?
I may be dismissed as an "armchair" expert, that's fine, but this sort of stuff matters. They're asking for money. I, as am other forumites and the much wider community of enthusiasts are UKHAT's market, and this is feedback. There are hundreds of aviation-related restoration projects all vying for money from people, and it's a cut-throat market - it's very easy for me and everyone else to go somewhere else with my/their money if there's even a whiff of inadequacy, or a feeling that my money may not go where I want it to go.
None of the above is criticism, I add. I want nothing more than to see things thrive for UKHAT and all other similar charitable institutions, but blind faith and hoping problems go away or just hoping that things work out doesn't work. Hard questions need to be asked, and acted upon.
All of this takes time, it matters, and in my opinion it needs to be resolved waaaaaay before a single penny is asked of someone from outside the organisation, or if not then absolute clarity is key. Put the information out there for people to find. There are a ton more questions in this thread that haven't been answered, or have not been answered sufficiently enough.
I wish this group well, I really do, which is why I've taken a not insignificant amount of time to write an extensive post that will likely be read by no-one, but at present, any spare cash I would be minded to donate would more likely go to an organisation that has established much more confidence than this one has, and I would hope that UKHA(T?) would heed that.
(I hasten to add that the above is all IMO, and I may or may not be incorrect on a number of things - I usually am)
*breathes out*
