Robin Pogrebin& #39;s story is good and important and valuable.

But you *cannot separate charity finances from the failure of billionaires to financially support the institutions they run.*
Let& #39;s use MoMA as an example.

According to the FY 2017-18, the year in its most recent tax filing, it spent $274M.

Contributions & grants: $135M
Endowment: $82M
Admissions fees brought in $30M.
A few other things like restaurants brought in $30M.
Exhib travel: $3M
Of MoMA& #39;s $274M in expenditures, $213M came through charitable contributions. (I& #39;m short-cutting here, I know, but I think the roughness of my numbers are close enough to be valuable.)

That& #39;s 78% of MoMA& #39;s expenditures.
Note that 11% of MoMA& #39;s expenditures in FY17-18 came from admissions. (Yes, I know there are some construction/etc. costs in there. These numbers are necessarily rough too.)

That& #39;s way down over the course of Glenn Lowry& #39;s tenure. MoMA did that by raising endowment funds, etc.
(Lowry & I had sometimes public, sometimes not... intense conversations about this back in the & #39;00s.

Even as he was defending his institution, he was raising money that shifted MoMA& #39;s costs away from admissions and toward charitable giving. He deserves a lot of credit for that.)
(For the sake of comparison, in its most recent fiscal year the Guggenheim brought in 26% of its expenditures from admissions. Whitney: 12%. New Museum: 9%.)
You can follow @TylerGreenBooks.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: