NYT: "... at a time when museums are facing their most severe financial downturn in decades..."

Me: "... at a time when museum trustees in the .01% have failed to support the charities on whose boards they sit in the midst of an acute recession..." https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/arts/design/museum-leader-salaries-pay-disparity.html

Robin Pogrebin'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'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's $274M in expenditures, $213M came through charitable contributions. (I'm short-cutting here, I know, but I think the roughness of my numbers are close enough to be valuable.)

That's 78% of MoMA's expenditures.

Note that 11% of MoMA'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's way down over the course of Glenn Lowry's tenure. MoMA did that by raising endowment funds, etc.

(Lowry & I had sometimes public, sometimes not... intense conversations about this back in the '00s.

Even as he was defending his institution, he was raising money that shifted MoMA'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%.)