Warbird Information Exchange

Just wondering if any air museums are really making much profit or are they just in it for the joy of it? With the expenses involved with maintaining a collection, insurance, etc. ... seems that all things involved with a museum are becoming so expensive that the idea of a museum for the purpose of making a profit seems unlikely. To bring new exhibits to a museum also seem to be very expensive. I read of museums acquiring new aircraft and I can't help but think how expensive these aircraft are today. I'm not a museum guy so maybe there are several things I'm just not seeing. I'm aware of private collections, but i believe these collections are not really interested in profit. They belong to individuals who just are happy to share their collections with the public.

I have first hand experience in car museums, which are probably pretty similiar. I think the answer will be "it depends." There are a lot of poorly managed museums, and a lot of well run ones. The well run ones are profitable, the not-so-well ones aren't.

I've seen the entire community turn against a certain car museum because of poor management, including questionable financial dealings, etc. This particular place nearly went under were it not for a group of enthusiasts stepping in and causing a public outcry/ revolt which led to a new regime and financial turnaround.

B

But I still don't get it, how can you possibly turn a profit when maintaining historic aircraft, considering how expensive they are just to get, let alone maintain, I'm not even talking about the aircraft that are airworthy and are flown by the museum. I would like someone to explain where the profit comes from. What ticket sales?, reunion events?, what else is there? grants? non-profit assets? ... still doesn't add up to me. Am I really missing something here? .... what is it that draws someone to take on the financial endever of this? .... I think I get the CAF's strategy as to why they do what they do. But isn't it most museums that look at the profit angle of their decision to open a museum in the first place.

As for our Museum it only survives as long as our AC-47 keeps making it to airshows which is our only means of support. One thing I have have seen at a museum close by is that when you have no Hired help you can just make it, but when a Museum starts to add staff they start selling off some of the stuff that made them a museum.

Why are you asking about the profit potential of a (typically) non-profit organization?

You can draw a salary, but there isn't really a profit such that, as an investor, you would get a return on investment. Is there? If there is, obviously I'm in the wrong business!

I think that most museums hope to pay their bills and save up enough for contingencies and facility improvements. The facility improvements are intended to attract more donors. The gate receipts to the museum itself probably don't cover squat, but I would think that a nicely done museum tends to attract donors compared to a run-down one.

Keep in mind that these are only my guesses, I have no first hand information, although I have visited a few museums in the past.

A "non-profit organization" is only a title associated with an entity that exists under a blanket. A non-profit, at least in my experiences, collects as much revenue that they can to re-invest back into itself. The more they make, the better off they are. Too many loop-holes to discuss here about non-profits, but I still would like to hear from the museum folks. Just wondering how some of these museums keep the lights on.

Beeing a non-profit doesn't mean that you can't make a profit from your operations, it just means that there are some very specific rules on what you can do with it and for that matter how you can earn the money in the first place.

I can only speak about the museum I work for but I'd say at least 75% probably more like 95% of our annual budget comes from gate receipts, gift shop sales, and facility rental fees. The rest comes from donations and the occasional government grant. Large cash donations don't happen very often and when they do it is the result of very hard work. Donations come in for special projects not for keeping the lights on.

James

most museums have a 1 time turn of visitors. they go, take in the attractions, never to return, with the been their saw that philosophy.

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

Not necessarily true - many federal and private grants require that there be at least one full-time, paid employee at a non-profit organization in order to even apply for the grant. Sometime it pays to have paid staff on hand. On the other hand, at EAA where I work and with 99.9% of all museums, the unpaid volunteers are the life's blood of the organization.

Zack

_________________
Curator - EAA Aviation Museum, Oshkosh, WI
"Let No Story Go Untold!"
http://www.timelessvoices.org

One word - AirVenture! Without AirVenture, the EAA AirVenture Museum would be closed, or very much reduced. Some people complain that AirVenture had become too commercial, too big, etc etc. The fact is, for EAA to remain a viable force in the aviation world, AirVenture has to grow to keep the organization running year round. If EAA has a few really down AirVentures in a row, the museum would be the first thing to go...

Zack

PS: The statements above are my own opinion, and in no way should they reflect the opinion or stance of the organization itself.

_________________
Curator - EAA Aviation Museum, Oshkosh, WI
"Let No Story Go Untold!"
http://www.timelessvoices.org

Very true Zack, but Airventure is such a time consuming and expensive ordeal, seems like a lot of work, but also seems worth it.

I am not sure how a museum can profit from visitors. Lets say a museum gets 8 visitors per day at a entry cost of $7.00. Thats not a lot of money to live on.


If you consider the cost of utilities, gas, space, ect your pretty much going in the hole.

I am no expert nore good in math but it seems the odds are against the museums.

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

I guess it ultimately depends on how you define "profitable". Seems to me that most museums are started by folks that believe that there is profit in the preservation, recording, and or presentation of historical facts. To them, they are filling a void, or a need, and are willing to make the initial investment to make it happen. They consider it profitable in some form or fashion simply by it's existence.
Past that point, there's the problem of keeping the thing alive. Seems to me that if the void is real, and there's enough people interested in the subject, then the museum should be able to stay solvent. The only problem there, is that as society shifts focus, emphasis, and moral values, the museum may have an increasingly hard time convincing people of it's relevance.

Ryan

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.

I think there is a posibility that a museum in the right place can break even or maybe make a liitle over expenses. But I bet 95% of them operate at huge losses which are made up by one benefactor.

From insiders over the years I have been told some of the actual numbers, either for the monthly expenses or for the cost of restoration. The dollars spent to keep some museums runnunig are staggering. The losses that are made up by the donor after all income is expended.

Also don't forget this is real generosity, as for any donated dollar you only get back a maximum of 39.6%. And if your income is high enough you loose this deduction entirely. So it is really a 100% gift in most cases.

I have a lot of respect for the big collectors who have museums open to the public, people like Weeks, Pond, Nichols, Cavanaugh, Waltrip,etc. who have saved and or restored a lot of planes at severe cost to their personel fortunes.

I believe that most if not all enjoy the aircraft but donate to the museums out of a deep respect for our servicemen who flew them. And in some way to give back for the success they have here in this country kept available to them by the military.