www.skydive4free.com (Was: What can we do about Skyride?)

[Mr17Hz 1]

Just because Skyride is an unscroupulous ticket broker, doesn't mean that all ticket brokers are unscroupulous.

If you run a business that says:

If you raise $500 and give it to me, I will donate $10 and spend the remaining $490 to buy hookers and coke - and then you do just that...

THAT IS HONEST BUSINESS, which makes you (albeit, not very generous or healthy) better than skyride, because you do exactly as you advertise.

I think that www.Skydive4Free.com is a wonderful idea because the exposure leads to more money being given to charity. If at any time they take more than the $45 they've declaired they're taking - then lets give them greif, but until then - Don't compare them to skyride.

Matt Christenson

mattchristenson@realskydiving.com
http://www.RealDropzone.com - A new breed of dropzone manifest software.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Another angle to steel money!

The Skyride boys are now posing as "helping" charities. My friends on the dzos.net email list tracked this info down. This site is not live yet, but look at what those sleaze bags at Skyride are doing now:
http://72.34.43.224/%7Eskydiv4/ This is their test site. The live site WILL be www.skydive4free.com We know it's Skyride because of the whois contact info and some affiliates down the line through several other websites.

They now want to lend a hand in raising money for charity. Bless their hearts. Do you suppose that they've had a change of heart, and went lagit? They could actually plan to pass 1% of the money right through to the deserving charities! What a couple of sweetheart guys!

"My Wife says I don't listen, or at least I think that's what she says. "

She's right.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[winsor 236]

Quote

Just because Skyride is an unscroupulous ticket broker, doesn't mean that all ticket brokers are unscroupulous.

If you run a business that says:

If you raise $500 and give it to me, I will donate $10 and spend the remaining $490 to buy hookers and coke - and then you do just that...

THAT IS HONEST BUSINESS, which makes you (albeit, not very generous or healthy) better than skyride, because you do exactly as you advertise.

I think that www.Skydive4Free.com is a wonderful idea because the exposure leads to more money being given to charity. If at any time they take more than the $45 they've declaired they're taking - then lets give them greif, but until then - Don't compare them to skyride.

I call bullshit.

The name of the site is "Skydive4Free.com," and there is nothing free about it. You pay a higher than retail price for the jump, give them $45 for the privilege of making an overpriced jump - at their convenience - and give them another $250 to send to a charity.

If the DZ donated the jump and these people did the work in their spare time, just so that people would make a minimum $500 donation to a worthy cause, then you could say that the skydive was free.

It is not even as though it is a deal where, if you made a $500 donation to a worthy cause, you would get even a 10% discount on the jump.

The charity part of the deal is a red herring, and Skydive4Free is no more or less legitimate than Skyride. With Skyride you do get to make a skydive, arranged by people that have nothing to do with the actual skydiving process, at a dropzone located conveniently 20 minutes away from wherever you are - and a portion of the proceeds go to the Orphan Ferrari Fund.

What's the big difference in integrity/honesty?


Blue skies,

Winsor

[Cutaway68 4]

Quote

Just because Skyride is an unscroupulous ticket broker, doesn't mean that all ticket brokers are unscroupulous.

If you run a business that says:

If you raise $500 and give it to me, I will donate $10 and spend the remaining $490 to buy hookers and coke - and then you do just that...

THAT IS HONEST BUSINESS, which makes you (albeit, not very generous or healthy) better than skyride, because you do exactly as you advertise.

I think that www.Skydive4Free.com is a wonderful idea because the exposure leads to more money being given to charity. If at any time they take more than the $45 they've declaired they're taking - then lets give them greif, but until then - Don't compare them to skyride.

I completely agree. As long as they are doing exactly what they claim then no harm, no foul.

Personally I research things like this before I give anyone my money. I remember not giving anyone any money until I was standing at the manifest window at the airport.

As long as there is a sucker born every minute there will be someone else there to take advantage.

I am not trying to side with anyone, but making sure every side is actually seen. Only time will tell if anyone is on the up and up.

Cutaway

Don't Pull Low... Unless You ARE!!!
The pessimist says, "It can't get any worse than this." The optimist says, "Sure, it can."
Be fun, have safe.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

Quote

Feel free to express your opinions on the business model, but please do NOT associate or mistake his business with SkyRide.
He has no relationship with SkyRide.

.

Jan, I'm surprised that you'd appear to accept at face value, what you're "told" when there is plenty of evidence that what is being said isn't the complete story.

Here's the situation.
Stuart called and asked about the bad-mouthing that he was getting because some people erroneously jumped to the conclusion that he was part of the SR network.
I told him that I could make a statement that he was not involved with SR.
I make no endorsements of his business, either positive or negative.
All I am saying is that he is NOT associated with SR.

All of you can say whatever you want about his business. All I wanted to correct was that he was not associated with SkyRide.
I do not have an opinion of his business, but I do know he is NOT associated with SkyRide.
That's it - the whole shebang.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[winsor 236]

***

Quote

Quote

Quote

Feel free to express your opinions on the business model, but please do NOT associate or mistake his business with SkyRide.
He has no relationship with SkyRide.

.

Jan, I'm surprised that you'd appear to accept at face value, what you're "told" when there is plenty of evidence that what is being said isn't the complete story.

Here's the situation.
Stuart called and asked about the bad-mouthing that he was getting because some people erroneously jumped to the conclusion that he was part of the SR network.
I told him that I could make a statement that he was not involved with SR.
I make no endorsements of his business, either positive or negative.
All I am saying is that he is NOT associated with SR.

All of you can say whatever you want about his business. All I wanted to correct was that he was not associated with SkyRide.
I do not have an opinion of his business, but I do know he is NOT associated with SkyRide.
That's it - the whole shebang.

.

There may be no association between the two operations, but all too many of the criticisms that apply to Skyride appear to apply to Skydive4free.com just as well.

It has a bad smell to it.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[LloydDobbler 2]

Quote

I call bullshit.

The name of the site is "Skydive4Free.com," and there is nothing free about it. You pay a higher than retail price for the jump, give them $45 for the privilege of making an overpriced jump - at their convenience - and give them another $250 to send to a charity.

If the DZ donated the jump and these people did the work in their spare time, just so that people would make a minimum $500 donation to a worthy cause, then you could say that the skydive was free.

It is not even as though it is a deal where, if you made a $500 donation to a worthy cause, you would get even a 10% discount on the jump.

The charity part of the deal is a red herring, and Skydive4Free is no more or less legitimate than Skyride. With Skyride you do get to make a skydive, arranged by people that have nothing to do with the actual skydiving process, at a dropzone located conveniently 20 minutes away from wherever you are - and a portion of the proceeds go to the Orphan Ferrari Fund.

What's the big difference in integrity/honesty?


Blue skies,

Winsor

For the record, I have my issues with Stuart's business, but just to attempt to be unbiased, I'll correct a number of things you said:

1) The name of the site is "Skydive4Free.com," and there is nothing free about it. You pay a higher than retail price for the jump, give them $45 for the privilege of making an overpriced jump - at their convenience - and give them another $250 to send to a charity.

It's free, to the person making the jump. They don't pay a dime to make their tandem. The dropzone gets its regular price of a tandem...they get to jump...and Stuart gets his "finder's fee."

I can see as how it could be interpreted as deceptive, since Stu's making money off of it...but then again, all advertising is deceptive. By saying "Skydive for free", he's distilling the whole concept to a short, marketable, zinger. If he was to say, "Skydive without paying a dime out of your own pocket; the dropzone gets paid, I get paid, and everything else goes to a charity.com", it would be a little tougher to fit on a business card.

That's advertising. That's the world we live in. Should we take issue with Budweiser commercials because every time we pop a beer, the hot girls in bikinis don't show up? Or should we take issue with the word "skydiving," because we don't necessarily always "dive" into the "sky"? You see where I'm going with this. It's semantics.


2) If the DZ donated the jump and these people did the work in their spare time, just so that people would make a minimum $500 donation to a worthy cause, then you could say that the skydive was free.

That's akin to arguing that the office staff of a non-profit theatre company shouldn't be paid. Or that the person leading the Salvation Army shouldn't take a dime. Charity is giving, yes...but there's never a free lunch. There's always costs. (But if that cost is part of the money raised, then so be it. It still seems 'free' to you.)


3) The charity part of the deal is a red herring...

I actually think the charity part of the deal is integral to it. It's an incentive. Again, see organizations like Team in Training. Sure, a lot of those orgs are volunteer-based...but the charity is the incentive for someone to go run a marathon. Everybody wins, because ultimately, money is donated to the cause (after expenses, such as flying the participant to the marathon), and the person participates in an experience they might not have already done.

Do the expenses make it less valid that money is being given to charity? I don't think so. I think in cases like this, the end justifies the means.


4) Skydive4Free is no more or less legitimate than Skyride. With Skyride you do get to make a skydive, arranged by people that have nothing to do with the actual skydiving process, at a dropzone located conveniently 20 minutes away from wherever you are - and a portion of the proceeds go to the Orphan Ferrari Fund.

- With Skyride you don't necessarily get to make a skydive. Let's not forget the "you didn't pay for weather insurance" bit, expiration dates, sending customers to DZs that aren't affiliated with Skyride (or DZs that are 400 miles away), etc, etc.

If Stu is up front about the DZs he uses the fees he charges, and all terms & conditions, then he's being infinitely more legit than Skyride.

---------------

In Stuart's case, I think as long as he's up front about what he gets out of it, more power to him. Think about it this way - do you know how tough it is to organize an event like this by yourself? How to get tax write-off letters to all the people who give through you? There was actually a Skydive Radio discussion about how someone at LSPC was trying to do 60 jumps in a day (or something similar) to raise money for charity, and several charities turned him down, because they were worried about liability stuff. He ultimately managed to deliver the check to them...but they absolutely didn't make it easy.

If Stuart finds a way to secure deals with charities & DZs and automate the process, he's doing a service. Some people would consider that worth $45. At $20/hour, you'd probably spend more time on the phone with the charities, trying to figure out which paperwork they needed from you.

Anyway, apologies for being long-winded, but busy work today leaves little time for editing.

Signatures are the new black.

[winsor 236]

Quote

Quote

I call bullshit.

The name of the site is "Skydive4Free.com," and there is nothing free about it. You pay a higher than retail price for the jump, give them $45 for the privilege of making an overpriced jump - at their convenience - and give them another $250 to send to a charity.

If the DZ donated the jump and these people did the work in their spare time, just so that people would make a minimum $500 donation to a worthy cause, then you could say that the skydive was free.

It is not even as though it is a deal where, if you made a $500 donation to a worthy cause, you would get even a 10% discount on the jump.

The charity part of the deal is a red herring, and Skydive4Free is no more or less legitimate than Skyride. With Skyride you do get to make a skydive, arranged by people that have nothing to do with the actual skydiving process, at a dropzone located conveniently 20 minutes away from wherever you are - and a portion of the proceeds go to the Orphan Ferrari Fund.

What's the big difference in integrity/honesty?


Blue skies,

Winsor

For the record, I have my issues with Stuart's business, but just to attempt to be unbiased, I'll correct a number of things you said:

Quote

Correct?! Yo' mama.

1) The name of the site is "Skydive4Free.com," and there is nothing free about it. You pay a higher than retail price for the jump, give them $45 for the privilege of making an overpriced jump - at their convenience - and give them another $250 to send to a charity.

It's free, to the person making the jump. They don't pay a dime to make their tandem. The dropzone gets its regular price of a tandem...they get to jump...and Stuart gets his "finder's fee."

I can see as how it could be interpreted as deceptive, since Stu's making money off of it...but then again, all advertising is deceptive. By saying "Skydive for free", he's distilling the whole concept to a short, marketable, zinger. If he was to say, "Skydive without paying a dime out of your own pocket; the dropzone gets paid, I get paid, and everything else goes to a charity.com", it would be a little tougher to fit on a business card.

That's advertising. That's the world we live in. Should we take issue with Budweiser commercials because every time we pop a beer, the hot girls in bikinis don't show up? Or should we take issue with the word "skydiving," because we don't necessarily always "dive" into the "sky"? You see where I'm going with this. It's semantics.

Quote

Semantics is the study of meaning. In this case you have jump at more than retail prices, with a $45 parasite fee and a mandatory "charity" surcharge tacked on.

Somehow getting someone else to pay for it all makes it "free."

Again, I call bullshit.

2) If the DZ donated the jump and these people did the work in their spare time, just so that people would make a minimum $500 donation to a worthy cause, then you could say that the skydive was free.

That's akin to arguing that the office staff of a non-profit theatre company shouldn't be paid. Or that the person leading the Salvation Army shouldn't take a dime. Charity is giving, yes...but there's never a free lunch. There's always costs. (But if that cost is part of the money raised, then so be it. It still seems 'free' to you.)

Quote

This is a straw man argument, disputing something I did not claim.

You're throwing in a jump at well over market rate and having a charity donation tacked on to it. It meets the minimum criteria for "scam."

3) The charity part of the deal is a red herring...

I actually think the charity part of the deal is integral to it. It's an incentive. Again, see organizations like Team in Training. Sure, a lot of those orgs are volunteer-based...but the charity is the incentive for someone to go run a marathon. Everybody wins, because ultimately, money is donated to the cause (after expenses, such as flying the participant to the marathon), and the person participates in an experience they might not have already done.

Do the expenses make it less valid that money is being given to charity? I don't think so. I think in cases like this, the end justifies the means.

Quote

You are wrong. The end is the means.

I have heard explanations of why United Way is such a valuable thing, and it is about as convincing as Skyride.

4) Skydive4Free is no more or less legitimate than Skyride. With Skyride you do get to make a skydive, arranged by people that have nothing to do with the actual skydiving process, at a dropzone located conveniently 20 minutes away from wherever you are - and a portion of the proceeds go to the Orphan Ferrari Fund.

- With Skyride you don't necessarily get to make a skydive. Let's not forget the "you didn't pay for weather insurance" bit, expiration dates, sending customers to DZs that aren't affiliated with Skyride (or DZs that are 400 miles away), etc, etc.

If Stu is up front about the DZs he uses the fees he charges, and all terms & conditions, then he's being infinitely more legit than Skyride.

---------------

In Stuart's case, I think as long as he's up front about what he gets out of it, more power to him. Think about it this way - do you know how tough it is to organize an event like this by yourself? How to get tax write-off letters to all the people who give through you? There was actually a Skydive Radio discussion about how someone at LSPC was trying to do 60 jumps in a day (or something similar) to raise money for charity, and several charities turned him down, because they were worried about liability stuff. He ultimately managed to deliver the check to them...but they absolutely didn't make it easy.

If Stuart finds a way to secure deals with charities & DZs and automate the process, he's doing a service. Some people would consider that worth $45. At $20/hour, you'd probably spend more time on the phone with the charities, trying to figure out which paperwork they needed from you.

Anyway, apologies for being long-winded, but busy work today leaves little time for editing.

The few charities I consider legitimate would have nothing to do with an operation like "Skydive4Free.com. Neither will I.

Blue skies,

Winsor

[DSE 5]

Where I get tripped up:

1-Skydive4free.com claims "contracts with national charities." So far, no evidence of this exists. Rather, two small charities limited to San Diego, one of which is very questionable pop up on their website and in Stuart's post.

2-Skydive4free is contacting DZs to become "partner/subscribers." This is exactly how Skyride was started. What happens if they have no partners in your area? Do they create a website or offer a map that suggests they do? Or are they open that they don't have a DZ in your area?

3-Skydive4free endorses Skyride's services while decrying Skyride's practices on the web. That one endorsement and attitude alone is alarming. Moreover, they're inserting themselves into the business process when IMO, they're not welcome. Again, I'd *much* rather see USPA offer some sort of promotion, because then it's not a business model, it's a marketing model that we essentially already pay for.

#1 is the big deal, IMO.
#2....maybe they'll become Skyride, maybe not. I'd rather not find out. YOMV
#3's meaning to you is determined by you own ethics/values/business acumen. I see it kinda like a "Skyride sucks, join our network because we suck less."

No, it's not that tough to organize charitable events. I've done several both in and out of the skydiving world. I also don't begrudge anyone for being reasonably compensated for working with a charity if the time spent warrants it and it's a "job" vs a charitable act. But I'm not sure how that topic relates to this conversation.

Hell, I'm still stuck on the "Murder, She Wrote" comment.

[LloydDobbler 2]

Quote

Where I get tripped up:

1-Skydive4free.com claims "contracts with national charities." So far, no evidence of this exists. Rather, two small charities limited to San Diego, one of which is very questionable pop up on their website and in Stuart's post.

2-Skydive4free is contacting DZs to become "partner/subscribers." This is exactly how Skyride was started. What happens if they have no partners in your area? Do they create a website or offer a map that suggests they do? Or are they open that they don't have a DZ in your area?

3-Skydive4free endorses Skyride's services while decrying Skyride's practices on the web. That one endorsement and attitude alone is alarming. Moreover, they're inserting themselves into the business process when IMO, they're not welcome. Again, I'd *much* rather see USPA offer some sort of promotion, because then it's not a business model, it's a marketing model that we essentially already pay for.

#1 is the big deal, IMO.
#2....maybe they'll become Skyride, maybe not. I'd rather not find out. YOMV
#3's meaning to you is determined by you own ethics/values/business acumen. I see it kinda like a "Skyride sucks, join our network because we suck less."

No, it's not that tough to organize charitable events. I've done several both in and out of the skydiving world. I also don't begrudge anyone for being reasonably compensated for working with a charity if the time spent warrants it and it's a "job" vs a charitable act. But I'm not sure how that topic relates to this conversation.

Hell, I'm still stuck on the "Murder, She Wrote" comment.

DSE, I was going to wait 'til I got home tonight and post my objections to Skydive4free, but you beat me to it, and (for the most part) captured my concerns to the letter.

#1 - definitely a big deal. I was glad to see you bring up 'Charity Navigator' above. I've been using them constantly over the past few months to research candidates for an ongoing national charitable project at work, and the fact that Skydive4free's so-called 'national charities' a) aren't national and b) score pretty low on the CN ratings gives me pause.

Though perhaps this guy's intentions could be good (as far as wanting to help out a charity), but just not his methods. Lots of people give to charities without running them through CN first. Nonetheless, if you're opening a business/non-profit, you should do your due-diligence. So that's a big strike for him.

#2 - I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. I don't believe in restricting people's freedom to do something good just because someone else did it bad. But if they started Skyride-esque practices like that, and offer less-than-full transparency, that seals the deal for me. But they're not Skyride until they commit the crimes that Skyride has. I prefer to render my final judgment when I've heard all the facts, and not before.

#3 - I totally agree that the fact that he said what he said in support of Skyride's business practices was a big mistake on his part. That was another big strike against him, and he pretty much lost my support right there. (He should really consider who he's talking to, here, and their prevailing opinions.)
I still disagree with one of the opinions you stated:

If he's inserting himself into business processes where he's not welcome, then I think he won't have any partners. I'm sure the DZO's will let him know that he's not welcome (it sounds like yours is taking that approach). But just because your DZ doesn't welcome the intrusion doesn't mean that all will see it that way. I only have my experience owning my company to base it on, but if someone wanted to create a promotion that would cost me nothing and help bring me more business (and brand awareness), AND help give to charitable causes, I'd have to consider it. It would be foolish not to. Free advertising is good...free sales leads are better.

If, OTOH, they engaged in business practices that made my business look bad through its affiliation with them, I'd cut them off in a heartbeat. (If they started behaving like Skyride, for instance...or if their processes weren't transparent to the customer. If they mistreat my customer, by extension, so do I. And I won't do that.)

So I respect your opinion, and understand your reasoning, and will gladly agree to disagree

In addition to the problems you mentioned, one other thing I take issue with about this company is a simple thing - if you're claiming your site's not operational yet, then why can we all see it? It's not hard to create a simple landing page for your site, and leave it at that until you're ready to open. It's called 'devspace,' people. My company is a dotcom, and before we were ready to start selling, you can bet we didn't open up our site for everyone to see. It's a simple thing - and it speaks loads that he's got a site that in no way says it's not yet operational. Very unprofessional (and more than a little suspect).

So yeah - I've got my issues. I just noticed a lot of knee-jerk reactions to this one from a number of people, and so I wanted to call some of them out in my last post.

Side note - as for it being easy to organize charitable events, you and I have had completely different experiences! I've been incredibly shocked recently at how tough it is to get some environmental charities to let you give them money! But I guess everyone's mileage varies.

Blue skies,

KC

PS - interesting thought on the USPA thing. I think that's a great idea...and all group member DZ's would be on a level playing field, because they would be entitled to it. And someone looking to skydive would know where to go to get a good deal from a reputable provider.

That way, the customer comes first...none of this "we don't have any members in your state" crap. (Well, sorry, New Hampshire. But otherwise).

Heck, I bet the press for the launch of such a service would be great...

Signatures are the new black.

[DSE 5]

Quote

In addition to the problems you mentioned, one other thing I take issue with about this company is a simple thing - if you're claiming your site's not operational yet, then why can we all see it? It's not hard to create a simple landing page for your site, and leave it at that until you're ready to open. It's called 'devspace,' people. My company is a dotcom, and before we were ready to start selling, you can bet we didn't open up our site for everyone to see. It's a simple thing - and it speaks loads that he's got a site that in no way says it's not yet operational. Very unprofessional (and more than a little suspect).

I'd brought this up earlier, along with someone else' post, but didn't think to bring it up again in my last post.
I hadn't considered the Adventurize site to be suspect, until Stuart made the post above, where he said it's not active. By all appearances it is.
Yet, Skydive4free is very actively and aggressively pursuing DZ's *now* and giving out the links that were posted earlier, yet it's "not done?" Moreover, the mere appearance of a "credibility" call to Jan makes me more suspicious, not less.

Look, I don't mean to be beating up on skydive4free, but given the number of Skyride people we have show up at our DZ (at least 3-4 couples a month) plus the incomplete and less-than-candid information in this thread deserves dubiousness and wonder. If the story is good/clean, then out with it, so we can see it.

Environmental charities are very different than children's charities, no doubt. Children's charities aren't the charity du jour, nor by comparison are they sensitive to who is giving them money. The only environmental charity I've worked on is "Save The Bay" and that was a bit of a challenge, no doubt.

[davelepka 4]

I tried to read all the posts, but gave up fairply quickly. I apoligize if this point has already been made.

If I understand correctly, a person will raise $500, and in exchange for that $500, will get a tandem jump.

The cost of the tandem, and the 'finders fee' ceom out of the $500, and the remainder goes to charity.

If this is the case, shouldn't it be called, "Pay for your skydive with the money you raised for charity, subract $45 from the remainder and then give the rest to charity"?

In reality, you're looking at about 50% of the $500 being eaten up by 'overhead' using $200 as a price for a tandem plus the $45 finders fee. So the people who make the actual donations are only having half of what they intended for charity making it to an actual charity.

Unless the fund raiser discloses this, then that person is essentially pulling a fast one on everyone they hit up for a donation. In the Skyride model, it's the actual jumper who is done a dis-service. In this model, the jumper may be getting a fair deal, as in an actual jump at an actual nearby DZ, but the contributors are now getting the shaft. It just moves the fuck-over one step away fromthe DZ, so it seems nicer on the surface, but in the end, someone does get fucked-over.

I don't see how this is any different than going door to door soliciting money for a charity, and then pocketing half of the take at the end of the day. If I'm not mistaken, that practice is a crime on several states. Maybe they call it fraud, or whatever.

If you want to broker jumps, thats fine. Work out a deal with a DZ for 10% or 15% off their going rate for bringing them a volume of business. Charge the customer the going price for the jump, and keep the difference after you subtract your discount. That's fair and honest business. You get paid for getting the booking, whatever advertising you do, and the admin. side of things. The cust. gets the product at the going market rate, and the DZO takes the hit for the agreed upon % of discount.

All this other shit all too scamy for me.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

In reality, you're looking at about 50% of the $500 being eaten up by 'overhead' using $200 as a price for a tandem plus the $45 finders fee. So the people who make the actual donations are only having half of what they intended for charity making it to an actual charity.

If the minimum discussed amount is raised (500), this is correct. If the person instead raised 2000, it would be just over 10%, which isn't as objectionable. (BTW, some of those charities use less than 50% of your contribution)

The tax angle is the part that interests me. If I myself made the donation and then used the jump, I have to subtract out of the deduction the value of the jump. If my mom donated the 500, should she be able to deduct 500 as well when only 250 made it to the charity?

[davelepka 4]

Quote

If the minimum discussed amount is raised (500), this is correct. If the person instead raised 2000, it would be just over 10%, which isn't as objectionable.

How many people would raise that much, and only take one jump? If you can come up with $2000, why not make four jumps, or take three friends with you when you jump?

Like I sadi, unless you disclose that a protion of the proceeds will go to pay for your skydive, you're not being truthful with the people making the donations.

Again, the whole thing is just a way to make money off of skydiving by being less than 100% truthful with people.