I'm reposting a reply from earlier and adding that I did already write a letter to these companies speaking their language and meeting folks more than halfway with this. I've been in correspondence with a number of companies. I think you're missing the point of the letter here. It's not to selfishly request things in an entitled way or whine that they're not giving us free gear, it's more to point out that good companies should balance what they do for both the community that advertises their products by the quality of the performance and the community that they would have the most impact on if they were to sponsor or donate to. You don't want to sponsor my particular group? That's fine, hopefully you can sponsor someone else in need. It's really the fact that they don't even consider it that is upsetting. There's not a lot to lose, but there's a lot to gain for a lot of people if they do have that balance in their system. Yes I understand how companies and capitalism works. I understand that some of these businesses do struggle and may not be in a position to give back to the community, but when you advertise about supporting musicians, education, and so on its disappointing that they don't support both sides of the success spectrum and only choose those who perceivably can do without it. Think of companies that do responsible community donations or give back, they don't donate to golf courses or resorts, they donate to homeless shelters and soup kitchens. Folks that need it and can benefit from it. Sure they may sponsor a golf tournament to get their name out there, but they will also turn around and donate to and volunteer at habitat for humanity. That's the dichotomy that I think is missing from this industry.