AA has been much more successful than the Oxford Group. In its heyday, Oxford reached more than 60 countries. AA is active in more than 114. To understand this phenomenal growth one must understand the nature and purpose of “not AA” organizations.

To keep AA purely spiritual, the membership has what appears to be severe restrictions on efforts to “carry the message.” They can't solicit or accept money from outisde sources. They can't ally themselves, as a group, with other organizations. They must, as AA members, remain anonymous in the media. As AA members, they can't take a public stand on any political or social issue. However, there are no restrictions on AA members founding outside organizations allied with AA or moving existing organizations into alliance with AA. As members of outside organizations they are able to solicit funds and take stands on social and political issues. They can also “educate the public.” In fact a “not AA” corporation can do whatever it sees fit to “carry the message” except use the AA name and identify itself with the public as AA. In a legal, corporate sense, AA doctrine has been spread more by “not AA” organizations and “not AA” people than by AA.

The most innocuous of these “not AA” organizations are the corporations operating AA clubhouses. Major cities have many locations operated, staffed and used exclusively by AA members* for meetings and socializing. These culbhouses are “not AA.” In keeping with The Traditions, mixing “property and prestige” with the “spiritual” is not allowed. AA would never ask for or accept money from outside sources by AA members can