1. Cost of the knife is always contentious. If we're willing to add to what's expected, adding a sum for charity is not a bad idea. But note that there's a lot of push to stay under $100, and eve with fairly basic designs that's not been possible in the past 3 years.
2. The number of knives has been around 250 the past couple years, and that's been hard to sell. Is it possible we'll be able to line up a manufacturer for a smaller number?
3. Unless you add @ $10 per knife you're not talking a large sum of money in total. That would be a 8% increase in the retail cost (assuming the manufacturing cost does not increase).
4. At what point does the charitable donation get paid? This year Spark had to have pre-paid orders; does he collect the funds then and at that time pay the charity? If the donation is paid by him does he get the write off?
I think this would be best done if the limit to the totl number of knives was low enough to be more exclusive. If there were only 100 made (just an example) there would be more incentive to ignore the price point and making the purchase would be more competitive, so the cost would be less of an issue. But doing that means increasing the percent of the total cost donated, or sharply curtailing the expected amount raised.
Having watched this process several years now I think we need to recognize that:
1. Under $100 is not viable.
2. Over 250 total production is unlikely if anyone has to front the funds, or if prepayment is required.
3. The above will most likely raise the cost.
4. It is difficult to find a competitive bid based on the low overall value of this SFO (based on above points).
5. It is hard to get the members of this board to pay for the knives chosen.
In addition I feel the major reason it's difficult to get the funds (either before or after) is that four to five times as many participate in the "design/voting" part of the process as are actually willing to purchase the final result.
So, let me propose an alternate course of action: If there's to be another forum knife, every vote must have value. At $1 per vote we'd raise more (based on the last couple years total votes) than if we added a surcharge to each knife. If there are 10 polls then (at one vote per poll) an individual interested in making a donation to the process would lso donate $10 to the approved charity.
Yes, someone could "buy" enough votes to insure his prefered choice would win to polling, but with custom knife costs what they are that individual would be better off commisioning his own piece directly. Plus, this would limit the number of individuals who vote with little (or no) intention of actually buying the end result.
An even more up front COA would be to limit any voting to individuals who donate up front. Basically, you don't make a donation; you cannot vote on the design. This would allow the cost of the knife itself to be free of the burden of increased cost, limit those willing to take part in the process to one vote each, and would not force anyone to donate to a charity in order to purchase the knife. Plus the amount raised could be donated free and clear prior to tax time.
Just my $0.02.
