Comment by jongjong

22 days ago

I'm using the term 'owners' loosely here, but this is a much more reasonable interpretation than the interpretation that the donors are the owners.

6 comments

jongjong

Reply
marcus_holmes  22 days ago

I don't think you understand how non-profits work. Essentially they are exactly the same as for-profits, except they can't issue dividends. Ownership works exactly the same as for-profit companies.

A cynical take is that non-profits are for-salary; they still pay their owners, just using other means.

edit: no, my bad, apparently I misunderstood how non-profits work in the USA. Thanks for the correction :)

  • granzymes  22 days ago

    This is not correct. jongjong is correct that a nonprofit does not have owners in the sense that a for-profit has owners. Nonprofits are dedicated to their mission, and are run by a board of directors.

    You cannot have a % ownership in a nonprofit because its resources must be used exclusively to carry out its mission. You could have a % control in its decision making process.

    • philipallstar  22 days ago

      Well, its resources can be used to pay giant salaries. That's somehow not against its mission.

      And businesses with owners can be dedicated to their mission.

      And public businesses are run by a board of directors.

      The main difference isn't what you're saying, which is somewhat subject to interpretation. It's just that people can't invest money with expectation of a return, other than via employment, speaking fees, etc etc.