Why aren't rescue dogs free?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Totally agree about the need for a rescue fee, but some have gotten pretty outrageous. I paid more than $400 to Lucky Dog, which according to their 990 (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/or...212659349300106/full) has $6.6 million carryover in the bank. That includes $400k that they added last year, when they took in $2.4 million and spent $2.0 million. They don't need a $6 million+ cushion. Time to reduce fees and spend down to a more reasonable $2 million carryover.

Oops, mistated the numbers but the point stands.

Last year in the 990, Lucky Dog raised $3.9 million. Spent $1.9 million. Added $2 million to the bank where they have $6.7 million total in assets.

So 3.9 million revenue at 400 per dog equals selling 812 dogs per month for one year. Is this rescue really moving that many dogs or are they doing massive fundraising and not dispensing the money under the purposes of the non profit guidelines?

If they really did take in 9750 dogs last year then they were spending an average of $194 per dog and charging $400.

It’s just another money making business. If they lower the fees, a lot more dogs will find homes.

[Anonymous]

because they have figured out how to make it a money making business.

let's get dogs and have people feel that they are doing something good, they will throw all sorts of money at us and we can make some good money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Totally agree about the need for a rescue fee, but some have gotten pretty outrageous. I paid more than $400 to Lucky Dog, which according to their 990 (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/or...212659349300106/full) has $6.6 million carryover in the bank. That includes $400k that they added last year, when they took in $2.4 million and spent $2.0 million. They don't need a $6 million+ cushion. Time to reduce fees and spend down to a more reasonable $2 million carryover.

Oops, mistated the numbers but the point stands.

Last year in the 990, Lucky Dog raised $3.9 million. Spent $1.9 million. Added $2 million to the bank where they have $6.7 million total in assets.

So 3.9 million revenue at 400 per dog equals selling 812 dogs per month for one year. Is this rescue really moving that many dogs or are they doing massive fundraising and not dispensing the money under the purposes of the non profit guidelines?

If they really did take in 9750 dogs last year then they were spending an average of $194 per dog and charging $400.

NP: Lucky dog is an incredibly high volume rescue. They bring dogs up from the south 30 or 40 at a time, put them in foster homes or a boarding kennel for a week or two, and then adopt them out at petco/petsmart adoptions. I am sure they do many thousands of adoptions per year. Their home page states 25,000 in the last 14 years, and one would assume it grows exponentially.

I don't particularly love their model of quantity of homes over quality, but they do move a lot of dogs.

25,000 over 14 years is around 1785 dogs per year. 9700 is way higher. They may be smart in getting the southern shelters to bear the costs of spay/neutering and initial vaccines. If they are moving dogs quickly and utilizing fosters then their operating costs spent on the actual dogs are even lower.

Their financials still seem incredibly fishy for a non profit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are reselling the dogs.

This. You can get your purebred at a slight discount. If you want a real rescue, just go to the pound. Pound dogs are cheap and sometimes free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Totally agree about the need for a rescue fee, but some have gotten pretty outrageous. I paid more than $400 to Lucky Dog, which according to their 990 (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/or...212659349300106/full) has $6.6 million carryover in the bank. That includes $400k that they added last year, when they took in $2.4 million and spent $2.0 million. They don't need a $6 million+ cushion. Time to reduce fees and spend down to a more reasonable $2 million carryover.

Oops, mistated the numbers but the point stands.

Last year in the 990, Lucky Dog raised $3.9 million. Spent $1.9 million. Added $2 million to the bank where they have $6.7 million total in assets.

So 3.9 million revenue at 400 per dog equals selling 812 dogs per month for one year. Is this rescue really moving that many dogs or are they doing massive fundraising and not dispensing the money under the purposes of the non profit guidelines?

If they really did take in 9750 dogs last year then they were spending an average of $194 per dog and charging $400.

NP: Lucky dog is an incredibly high volume rescue. They bring dogs up from the south 30 or 40 at a time, put them in foster homes or a boarding kennel for a week or two, and then adopt them out at petco/petsmart adoptions. I am sure they do many thousands of adoptions per year. Their home page states 25,000 in the last 14 years, and one would assume it grows exponentially.

I don't particularly love their model of quantity of homes over quality, but they do move a lot of dogs.

25,000 over 14 years is around 1785 dogs per year. 9700 is way higher. They may be smart in getting the southern shelters to bear the costs of spay/neutering and initial vaccines. If they are moving dogs quickly and utilizing fosters then their operating costs spent on the actual dogs are even lower.

Their financials still seem incredibly fishy for a non profit.

Is there a nonprofit you think in really well run? Maybe that would clarify your objection to Lucky Dog. You seem to think that a charity that doesn't spend most of what it takes in is shady somehow, but looking at other nonprofits (such as Pro Publica), that doesn't seem to be the case. What you describe as "money in the bank" is very likely money going towards an endowment that will take the pressure off annual fundraising. But not that long ago, Lucky Dog wasn't paying anyone a salary, and now it's paying a few people a reasonable salary.

Lucky Dog was willing to let me adopt a dog the last time I was looking, although in the end we agreed that the dogs they had weren't the right ones for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of money in animal rescue. You can look up the financial records of a lot of non-profits that are in the NOVA area and see how much money....

It is a business don't forget.

Are you saying the people who run rescues are making a nice living from it? (I just need to know how divorced from reality you are)

Just gonna leave this right here: https://www.lostdogrescue.org/about/finance/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Totally agree about the need for a rescue fee, but some have gotten pretty outrageous. I paid more than $400 to Lucky Dog, which according to their 990 (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/or...212659349300106/full) has $6.6 million carryover in the bank. That includes $400k that they added last year, when they took in $2.4 million and spent $2.0 million. They don't need a $6 million+ cushion. Time to reduce fees and spend down to a more reasonable $2 million carryover.

Oops, mistated the numbers but the point stands.

Last year in the 990, Lucky Dog raised $3.9 million. Spent $1.9 million. Added $2 million to the bank where they have $6.7 million total in assets.

That's big business!!! Lot's of money in rescues. Most only have a few employees and tons of volunteers. It's mostly all profit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Totally agree about the need for a rescue fee, but some have gotten pretty outrageous. I paid more than $400 to Lucky Dog, which according to their 990 (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/or...212659349300106/full) has $6.6 million carryover in the bank. That includes $400k that they added last year, when they took in $2.4 million and spent $2.0 million. They don't need a $6 million+ cushion. Time to reduce fees and spend down to a more reasonable $2 million carryover.

Oops, mistated the numbers but the point stands.

Last year in the 990, Lucky Dog raised $3.9 million. Spent $1.9 million. Added $2 million to the bank where they have $6.7 million total in assets.

So 3.9 million revenue at 400 per dog equals selling 812 dogs per month for one year. Is this rescue really moving that many dogs or are they doing massive fundraising and not dispensing the money under the purposes of the non profit guidelines?

If they really did take in 9750 dogs last year then they were spending an average of $194 per dog and charging $400.

NP: Lucky dog is an incredibly high volume rescue. They bring dogs up from the south 30 or 40 at a time, put them in foster homes or a boarding kennel for a week or two, and then adopt them out at petco/petsmart adoptions. I am sure they do many thousands of adoptions per year. Their home page states 25,000 in the last 14 years, and one would assume it grows exponentially.

I don't particularly love their model of quantity of homes over quality, but they do move a lot of dogs.

25,000 over 14 years is around 1785 dogs per year. 9700 is way higher. They may be smart in getting the southern shelters to bear the costs of spay/neutering and initial vaccines. If they are moving dogs quickly and utilizing fosters then their operating costs spent on the actual dogs are even lower.

Their financials still seem incredibly fishy for a non profit.

They all do. The good thing is you can look it all up to verify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Totally agree about the need for a rescue fee, but some have gotten pretty outrageous. I paid more than $400 to Lucky Dog, which according to their 990 (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/or...212659349300106/full) has $6.6 million carryover in the bank. That includes $400k that they added last year, when they took in $2.4 million and spent $2.0 million. They don't need a $6 million+ cushion. Time to reduce fees and spend down to a more reasonable $2 million carryover.

Oops, mistated the numbers but the point stands.

Last year in the 990, Lucky Dog raised $3.9 million. Spent $1.9 million. Added $2 million to the bank where they have $6.7 million total in assets.

That's big business!!! Lot's of money in rescues. Most only have a few employees and tons of volunteers. It's mostly all profit.

So even though the IRS, which looks at organizations' financials, deems an organization a nonprofit, you know better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The vet industry is out of control and the extravagant fees are basically killing more animals than they are helping. There is an an explosion of puppies and kittens now because people are shocked when their vet tells them it will be $800-1200 to spay their pet. This same vet charged $200-$400 5-10 years ago before the original vet owner retired/sold his practice to a private equity owned company. The old vet used to discount services for senior citizens and rescue. New ownership would laugh at that practice! There are many more accidental litters now.

Low cost spay and neuter is overwhelmed so people who could and would afford reasonable vet fees are opting to not get the pet fixed or euthanizing them.

Adopting a $400 dog that is already spayed or neutered would be a better option for these people. Owning a dog means vet bills, sometimes unexpected ones, and vets deserve to be paid for their skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The vet industry is out of control and the extravagant fees are basically killing more animals than they are helping. There is an an explosion of puppies and kittens now because people are shocked when their vet tells them it will be $800-1200 to spay their pet. This same vet charged $200-$400 5-10 years ago before the original vet owner retired/sold his practice to a private equity owned company. The old vet used to discount services for senior citizens and rescue. New ownership would laugh at that practice! There are many more accidental litters now.

Low cost spay and neuter is overwhelmed so people who could and would afford reasonable vet fees are opting to not get the pet fixed or euthanizing them.

Adopting a $400 dog that is already spayed or neutered would be a better option for these people. Owning a dog means vet bills, sometimes unexpected ones, and vets deserve to be paid for their skills.

You mean private equity investors deserve to make $$$ off your pets and sick animals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of money in animal rescue. You can look up the financial records of a lot of non-profits that are in the NOVA area and see how much money....

It is a business don't forget.

Are you saying the people who run rescues are making a nice living from it? (I just need to know how divorced from reality you are)

Just gonna leave this right here: https://www.lostdogrescue.org/about/finance/

This shows that the amount they "made" on adoptions was about the same as the amount they spent on direct animal care (a little more in '22, less in '21) not counting other expenses like insurance.

That is, they did not make a profit on adoption fees.

Is there something in the financial statement that you find objectionable? Just the fact they have assets (from donations) they are not using to make dogs free to adopt?

[Anonymous]

I was denied many rescue dogs because I had a full-time job and lived in an apartment. Nevermind that I have a second home with a fenced in yard, love hiking on the weekends etc. Ended up paying for a pure bred dog at the end since the shelters made it so darn difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of money in animal rescue. You can look up the financial records of a lot of non-profits that are in the NOVA area and see how much money....

It is a business don't forget.

Are you saying the people who run rescues are making a nice living from it? (I just need to know how divorced from reality you are)

Just gonna leave this right here: https://www.lostdogrescue.org/about/finance/

This shows that the amount they "made" on adoptions was about the same as the amount they spent on direct animal care (a little more in '22, less in '21) not counting other expenses like insurance.

That is, they did not make a profit on adoption fees.

Is there something in the financial statement that you find objectionable? Just the fact they have assets (from donations) they are not using to make dogs free to adopt?

DP The above link is a different rescue. The fishy one is the one that takes in 2 million more than they spend on expenses.

There are tons of fishy financial things in non profits. Not an animal rescue or a group in this thread, but at a different non profit we looked at, the owner was leasing the space for the non profit operation from herself at way above market rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of money in animal rescue. You can look up the financial records of a lot of non-profits that are in the NOVA area and see how much money....

It is a business don't forget.

Are you saying the people who run rescues are making a nice living from it? (I just need to know how divorced from reality you are)

Just gonna leave this right here: https://www.lostdogrescue.org/about/finance/

This shows that the amount they "made" on adoptions was about the same as the amount they spent on direct animal care (a little more in '22, less in '21) not counting other expenses like insurance.

That is, they did not make a profit on adoption fees.

Is there something in the financial statement that you find objectionable? Just the fact they have assets (from donations) they are not using to make dogs free to adopt?

They pay their head $88K. I run a non-profit and don't get paid.