As a member of a non-profit organization, I would have to agree with you one
this. We are allowed some reserve but there are tricky rules as to what you
consider the funds. I am not an expert, but our group brought in a Tax
Accountant to discuss this issue with the board as we had a surplus and were
warned about how it was posted in the books. In our case the surplus is used
to purchase properties that we develop after training students to build
homes and then the homes are sold as low income housing which is subsidized
by the local cities where the homes exist.
Very tricky stuff!!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Maxwell [mailto:smaxwell(--nospam--at)engin.umich.edu]
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 4:38 PM
> To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
> Subject: RE: AISC Latest Move
> Definition of "profit" (at least according to dictionary.com):
> "The return received on a business undertaking after all operating
> expenses have been met."
> To my knowledge AISC, ACI, ASCE, and many of the other organizations that
> you listed are non-profit organizations. This means that their revenues
> from all sources (member dues, publications, seminars, certification
> programs, etc) essentially balance their expenense (staff salaries, rent,
> utilities, printing costs, etc). I say essentially because I believe that
> non-profit organizations CAN set asside reserve funds for potential "down"
> years, but this is restricted by law. The reserve fund is still NOT a
> Thus, you might wise to exercise a little caution in your wording. The
> implication from your message is that AISC is actually making a profit,
> when they are not (at least to my knowledge).
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Scott, William N. wrote:
> > Charlie,
> > I thank AISC for getting advisories of changed design
> information out in a
> > timely manner. I was unaware that the rolling mills had modified the k
> > dimensions.
> > From time-to-time mills need to make changes to provide a
> better product and
> > compete. The design community has no other way of knowing when
> changes are
> > made, unless AISC releases information.
> > Years ago, the mills would provide the information (including
> > manuals)directly to the design community. This practice stopped when
> > Competition from off-shore producers became intense and
> domestic mills cut
> > cost to compete. AISC allows all the mills to share the design
> > expense.
> > I do not know the cost of producing the AISC Manual and do not
> have any idea
> > what AISC's profit is. But, the cost seems reasonable considering the
> > content. It seems that each professional organization (ACI,
> AISC, ASCE, AWS,
> > CRSI, ICC, ICBO, BOCA, PCA, and others) make a profit from the sale of
> > publications. Code wise, it was not a big problem when the
> material codes
> > were published in the Building Code. Now structural engineers
> must fund a
> > continuing annual expense to keep our design publications up to date.
> > I think some engineers are finally getting angry. Lets hope
> that the anger
> > will not be demonstrated by pugnacious and demeaning behavior.
> > Bill Scott, P.E., S.E.
> > Principal Engineer
> > VECO Alaska, Inc.
> > 949 E. 36th Street
> > Anchorage, AK 99508
> > Phone 907-762-1655, FAX 907-762-1734
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Charlie Carter [mailto:carter(--nospam--at)aiscmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 4:50 AM
> > To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
> > Subject: RE: AISC Latest Move
> > >they change
> > >the "k" dimensions so we, plus every detailer in the country,
> have to buy
> > >new books...
> > Entirely false.
> > We became aware that mills had changed their rolling practices and that
> > engineers, fabricators, detailers and others were being affected by the
> > fit-up (or lack thereof) for details with sensitivity to the
> sizes of the
> > fillets. We initially attempted to reverse this change in mill
> > When that avenue was not possible, we did the advisory so you
> would;t get
> > caught with your pants down on a misfit.
> > Besides, even if I wanted to sell you a book with the new T, k and k1
> > dimensions right now I couldn't. Now if we had held the
> advisory until a new
> > publication were available, I could see why you'd suspect what
> you said, but
> > really. Come on!
> > Charlie
> > *
> > * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> > * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> > * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> > *
> > * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> > *
> > * Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> > * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> > * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> > * site at: http://www.seaint.org
> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> * Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
* Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org