Another example

Considering the question of non-profits' reputation when they start cooperating with companies, I have a local example that I found quite interesting. It's nothing new, or mind-boggling, but of personal concern to me, so I figured I'd still post it here. Youth for Understanding, the organisation I spent my exchange year with, started to have a cooperation with Starbucks about 2 or 3 years ago. There were flyers laid out in the Bremen city Starbucks that had the YFU logo, the Starbucks logo, and lots of info about how Starbucks was now financially supporting YFU, because it also supported the great intercultural goals, etc on them. I was pretty shocked- members were never asked (at least not via the normal member channels that I could receive), and as much as I like my coffee from Starbucks, to me there were some clear discrepancies. Apparently, more members thought so. YFU must have gotten a terribly negative feedback, because after half a year the flyers were gone, and the cooperation was never heard of again.
My question: Wouldn't it save the non-profit money, if it checked with members/ ideological supporters first, before it took such steps? I believe that in this case, the negative light on the organisation weighs more than the additional profit. Some really anti- American-Corporation families might even not have sent their children on an exchange year with YFU, because of this whole issue, so there might even have been a money loss. This is what has already been conveyed in some of last week's texts, I just find practical examples really helpful. 'Hope this isn't too redundant.