Chris and Jeff Scott have good points here (and obviously I agree with 'wider and deeper' if this effort is to be continued). Bob Smith has summed it well too.
No doubt the existing board members are 'paying', I am morally certain of that as well - and I didn't see that questioned, morally or otherwise. Point is there are others who also contribute, if on a smaller scale - granted, but who also have some brainpower and ideas that are worth the hearing.
Four sea searches have been made and now we're discussing this as we are because of the results thus far; Ted Campbell has made a good-sense contribution on these pages and by all I can tell is also probably a fairly substantial donor (he made the down-under photo chase happen in a big way, for one) - certainly on a greater scale than I am able to be. In sum the answer seems to be is 'don't bother unless you want to send more money' and 'we had the bigger boat' - but that isn't the point at all:
It is 'wider and deeper' project management talent that we're talking about - and Ted nailed it. Jeff Scott underscored it well, and Chris makes the excellent point: if TIGHAR would crowd source, then how about letting crowd-sourced ideas sink in a bit deeper? The board that we can be 'morally certain' of has gotten us to this place of discussion - that is observable, with all due respect (and I do respect the great generosities of that board that have been manifest a number of times).
This isn't about raw criticism, it is about wanting something better for the order. It is about taking full advantage of 'crowd sourcing' - including ideas, and looking closely at how those who have succeeded at such ventures have done it - and moving toward a form of project management along those lines. True, Nauticos-Waitt didn't 'find' the Electra - but they DID succeed technically in searching a large and fairly complex area of sea floor. Woods Hole certainly has great experience and successes - and there are others. But it will take an expansively thinking and perhaps fresh board effort to have hope of gaining more suppport and going there, it seems.
Again, with all due respect, the current board got us to this point. What will change to improve our direction, and who will do it? TIGHAR seems to need the moral certainty of an improved direction on such efforts or there's likely to be little future for this search: the dry land and near shore efforts appear to have been reasonably exhausted now, and it is apparent that the perusal of what we have has limited value to many observers.
'Send more money' is a common plea for most organizations - but how does one break the status quo, create more confidence and make people want to do that? My thought is to listen more carefully to the small voices that have big and good ideas, and Ted, Chris and Jeff Scott all contributed a nice start, IMO.
Morally, I'm fairly certain that isn't likely here - not to be negative, it's just a harkening to human nature and the way of organizations: the die appears cast when we see ideas like this floated but get the answers that we're seeing here. Of course I could be surprised - and would be delighted, if so. I am open to being delighted if that can be; I am not interested in sending more money to support the existing arrangement.