I was interested to read your article on the relaunch of wood for good.
One statistic quoted by Stuart Goodall deserves comment. He said: “It reached the point where 40% of [wood for good’s] income was going on overheads, which was unsustainable.” If he is alluding to 2008, the figure for overheads was nearer 25% than 40% of income. If he is alluding to 2009, 40% is a guesstimate. It is true that UK shareholders, including Mr Goodall’s ConFor, had reduced their contribution to the campaign but the overall income for 2009 was an unknown, since the company was wound up before any funds from subscribers (other than UK shareholders) had been sought.
I am delighted that wood for good is to be relaunched and wish the new venture every success. I encourage all past subscribers to support it. However, the question of executive (rather than non-executive) management is an important one. Campaigns do not run themselves and therefore overheads may be necessary if ‘front line marketing work’ is to be done effectively by management and staff who really understand and are committed to the aims and success of an organisation.
Charles Trevor
Former managing director, wood for good ltd
