Pete,
I was going by a portion of a this from Scott on the list. Hope he doesn't mind me repeating it here:

"... As far as your last sentence, the NSRCA currently pays for 500 copies and in order to get the "pre-sort" postage from USPS, we must order 500. Typically and depending on the month, we actually mail out 250-450 copies since I've been doing this based on the box that I receive as extras. So, whether we continue to mail out Kfactors for 1 month or 3 months, the cost does not change due to the fact we have to pay for 500. Actually, at the current way of doing the Kfactor, the more we mail out, the more we save as the extras have to be shipped to the Secretary. So it actually does make sense as the cost does not change aside from the box of extras that are shipped."

In another post he added this:

" Regardless of 250 mailing or 500 mailing, the postage is the same due to the pre-sort fee. In order to qualify for that, we have to get 500. The additional cost comes from the Publisher sending me the extras. The bigger the box, the higher the weight, the higher the cost. We are currently looking at ways to cut costs of the Kfactor, not because we are struggling or can't afford it but because it's an avenue to save money. We are looking at potentially bringing the publishing of the Kfactor in-house. This could potentially allow us to cut costs but there is a long way to go before making that decision."

I was talking about incremental postage costs being negligible. Sorry if I wan't clear. If a substantial portion of NSRCA members still want a printed K-Factor, it isn't clear from the info provided at what point print cost savings by not printing as many copies is a win situation for NSRCA. My guess is that print cost setup and the fact we use color is the major cost of printing, and that incremental costs of printing more or less copies is smaller factor in total print cost. If we go totally digital on the K-Factor, we save all of the postage and printing costs. But I'm not sure that is in the cards at this point. The board would have to make a decision that if members don't have web access, they wouldn't have any way of finding out what is going on in NSRCA.

I'm glad to see you mention that the board still intends to present a case on the K-Factor to the members. I got nervous after I saw that the board recinded the vote of the board at the 2011 Nats that required a vote by the members. The one that was rescinded was this one:

"Tony Frackowiak makes the motion: “The decision whether the Kfactor should be printed or solely sent
out by electronic delivery needs to be made by the general membership and not the board.” Gary
Courtney Seconds. No discussion. Vote is taken and passes."

This one is still on the books. I don't remember if the poll was ever taken.

"Motion made by Archie Stafford – “To distribute the poll to the membership to decide on whether to
keep paper K‐factor or go to an online only version of the K‐Factor in the October issue of the K‐Factor
and online in the Members only section of our website http://nsrca.us with a deadline to vote of
November 30, 2011.” Dave Johnstone Seconds. No discussion. Vote is taken and passes with 1 vote of
nay."

I guess I don't agree that cost of the K-Factor ought to be break even with advertising. There were many years when the K-Factor did not break even. The members are paying dues, and the K-Factor should be a tangible benefit that they get from their dues, just like a newsletter from any other organization. How much comes from dues vs. advertisers is a whole different discussion.

Thanks for your comments.