Promoters percentages?

[Mom]

Well it seems this latest Telethon for Kids Can Do Anything Trust (or whatever they call them selves officially) has fallen foul of the trusty expenses before donation scam.

Forgive the inaccurate quoting of figures here but..

Of the nearly two million dollars rasied, less than $400K will go to the charity!

Yes folks, for those of you that donated that is the reality.

Apparently it is acceptable to "factor in a value" for the voluntary hours given and deduct your percentage out of that inflated value. Now fair enough if you actually had to pay talent to appear, but to put a value on the voluntary hours given in good faith for the cause is disgraceful!

Bet "Kids Can" are kicking themselves for not reading the fine print in the contract, and SHAME on the promoter.

"Thank you very much for your kind donation. But how much of it will actually reach the children? Only 28% according to Kidscan's financial records"

http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/tonight-2908843

[Genestho]

That's disgusting.:nono:

[James Deuce]

It's normal, they ALL do it.

Then the Kids Can "charity" will subsume 80-90% of the remaining takings into "administration" and about $20k will actually be used to buy stuff for kids whose parents smoke and drink and gamble rather than look after their kids.

I keep saying it, but it isn't going in. People suck.

[Mom]

It's normal, they ALL do it.

Then the Kids Can "charity" will subsume 80-90% of the remaining takings into "administration" and about $20k will actually be used to buy stuff for kids whose parents smoke and drink and gamble rather than look after their kids.

I keep saying it, but it isn't going in. People suck.

Sadly, I agree. What a crock!

[justsomeguy]

Back in school I used to work in door to door sales. Selling books, pens and other odds and ends with some cancer society logos on it - part of the proceeds would go to charity.

Out of a $2 pen about 5c would go to charity - the rest went towards paying company overheads, my commission and my boss's cut.

It's just business.

"Proceeds to charity" here is the equivalent of the sexy girl you see in most ads promoting whatever they're promoting. It's just window dressing designed to get you to buy/donate/enter the shop.

Yeah - James - People Suck....

[Genestho]

This situation might be a crock, if the facts are correct, but I'm sure that's not always the case of all Charities.
My charity runs on the sniff of an oily rag literally LOL. But I'm very lucky many contribute their skills.
Promoting is a very very costly business.

Many Charities/Trusts do run at a loss, and manage to contribute back 100%

[justsomeguy]

This situation might be a crock, if the facts are correct, but I'm sure that's not always the case of all Charities.
My charity runs on the sniff of an oily rag literally LOL. But I'm very lucky many contribute their skills.
Promoting is a very very costly business.

Many Charities/Trusts do run at a loss, and manage to contribute back 100%

Hey, I'm thankful some one is doing at least something...

[Hitcher]

It's not just Kids Can. Many other charities absorb the bulk of people's donations to spend on staff salaries, advertising and PR consultants, etc.

People don't want to know the truth, they just want to feel good about giving.

"Give a man a fish and it will feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and it will feed him for a lifetime."

Most "aid" is about giving people stuff. Unless they can learn to do things for themselves all that will ever do is make them dependent on aid. Where's the happy ending from that scenario?

[Mom]

"Proceeds to charity" here is the equivalent of the sexy girl you see in most ads promoting whatever they're promoting. It's just window dressing designed to get you to buy/donate/enter the shop.

Yeah - James - People Suck....

See, this is where I seriously get pissed off! I dont mean just a little bit either, I mean seriously.

There are a few of us on here, that are planning, nay, well on the way to getting shit sorted, to do something to raise an enormous (hopefully) amount of money for a very worthy cause. We are restricted by their policy from using their logo unless we are giving 100% of the money raised, after expenses of course, to them. We are honest, and wont massage any cost to include our TIME or anything else. This will simply be pay the man, and give the rest.

This sort of publicity is not good for those of us that genuinely want to raise money (even if it costs us a bit in the process) for charities that are really worthy.

[doc]

It sucks to us plebs, but those on the bean counting side dont see it this way.

I blame Rodger Douglas he took away our compassion, when he introduced us to "User pays"

:rolleyes:

[justsomeguy]

See, this is where I seriously get pissed off! I dont mean just a little bit either, I mean seriously.

There are a few of us on here, that are planning, nay, well on the way to getting shit sorted, to do something to raise an enormous (hopefully) amount of money for a very worthy cause. We are restricted by their policy from using their logo unless we are giving 100% of the money raised, after expenses of course, to them. We are honest, and wont massage any cost to include our TIME or anything else. This will simply be pay the man, and give the rest.

This sort of publicity is not good for those of us that genuinely want to raise money (even if it costs us a bit in the process) for charities that are really worthy.

I was referring specifically to the company I worked for where "proceeds to charity" was one of the "feel good" things we used to make people part with their money.

The company operated as a business created for the purposes of making a profit - not a "non-profit". It donated only a small part of the proceeds to charity.

What you are doing seems a lot nobler.

[Mom]

"Give a man a fish and it will feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and it will feed him for a lifetime."


I totally support and agree with what you just said.

How do we then convince people that are smart and thinking to support a charity when the people attempting to raise some money are an unknown quantity? Seems there are a huge number of gullible folk out there, who may or may not be educated as a result of this news, they should still be sweet as for a tap eh?

What would convince you to fork out some money, say $20 to support a worthy cause? Would a statement saying $x of this will go towards the charity we are supporting help?

[Laava]

Remember Corso? They had a nearly100% expenses rate! They were exposed IIRC and shut shop. It appears that these charities are set up as a business for making money and the charity is there only to generate their income. There is nothing noble in this, in my opinion. Listen to any high flying wealthy businessman like Mad Butcher, Michael Hill or Suzanne Paul and they will tell you that to be successful you should give 10% of your income to charity regardless, as it will come back to you in other ways.

[justsomeguy]

Would a statement saying $x of this will go towards the charity we are supporting help?

Yes. Complete transparency. But most reasonable people realise everyone has to eat too.

[Laava]

Seems there are a huge number of gullible folk out there, ?

I agree.
However, it is interesting to note that gullible is not in fact a proper word and does not appear in the dictionary!

[sunhuntin]

laava, mum mentioned corso today but couldnt remember what they "supported". can you enlighten?

wonder if new zealand can do the promoters of telethon for false advertising? i lost count the number of times it was reported that 100% of the funds would go to kidscan. im glad i didnt "donate". would rather buy a jacket and some shoes for the kid. better than giving the parents more money for booze.

[Laava]

I think from memory that the funds were to go to third world poverty causes, but can't be specific. I will google later

[ynot slow]

Listen to any high flying wealthy businessman like Mad Butcher, Michael Hill or Suzanne Paul and they will tell you that to be successful you should give 10% of your income to charity regardless, as it will come back to you in other ways.

Maybe Hill and Leitch,but Suzanne Paul ffs she went bankrupt owing millions in her bid to be NZ's first pommy maori,hope her 10% coming back pays her innocent creditors,some probably need her money.

Any religion or organisation demanding a tith of 10% or whatever is so shady their garden of Eden is bare,only the power mongrels benefit,ala Destiny Church and Brethren etc,this isn't the go to church on Sunday donators to plate people.

[short-circuit]

"Give a man a fish and it will feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and it will feed him for a lifetime."

Most "aid" is about giving people stuff. Unless they can learn to do things for themselves all that will ever do is make them dependent on aid. Where's the happy ending from that scenario?

True - this is the difference between "enabling" and "rescuing"

[The Stranger]

I know a guy who operates a call centre. They ring around of an evening collecting for this charity or that charity. They have collectors in the area on x day and may well be collecting for any charity. They log you into a database so get to know what you are likely to support - or not.
They only take about 65% for their effort.

[Grahameeboy]

Well it seems this latest Telethon for Kids Can Do Anything Trust (or whatever they call them selves officially) has fallen foul of the trusty expenses before donation scam.

Forgive the inaccurate quoting of figures here but..

Of the nearly two million dollars rasied, less than $400K will go to the charity!

Yes folks, for those of you that donated that is the reality.

Apparently it is acceptable to "factor in a value" for the voluntary hours given and deduct your percentage out of that inflated value. Now fair enough if you actually had to pay talent to appear, but to put a value on the voluntary hours given in good faith for the cause is disgraceful!

Bet "Kids Can" are kicking themselves for not reading the fine print in the contract, and SHAME on the promoter.

"Thank you very much for your kind donation. But how much of it will actually reach the children? Only 28% according to Kidscan's financial records"

http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/tonight-2908843

Why should even talent ask to be paid...they should give freely...I do stuff for free out of my time...geeze...

[short-circuit]

Why should even talent ask to be paid...they should give freely...I do stuff for free out of my time...geeze...

No different than the church - in fact, those bastards just take the lot!

[Grahameeboy]

No different than the church - in fact, those bastards just take the lot!

I agree to a point...but most donations are used for the Church...I do stuff via Church and don't get paid

[Laava]

Maybe Hill and Leitch,but Suzanne Paul ffs she went bankrupt owing millions in her bid to be NZ's first pommy maori,hope her 10% coming back pays her innocent creditors,some probably need her money..

Suzanne Paul is a shining exception who broke her arse to pay back all her creditors. I personally have no real admiration of her other than respect for that alone.

[Badjelly]

I know a guy who operates a call centre. They ring around of an evening collecting for this charity or that charity. They have collectors in the area on x day and may well be collecting for any charity. They log you into a database so get to know what you are likely to support - or not. They only take about 65% for their effort.

"Only" 65%? That sounds like a lot to me, but I guess I'm naive.

Still put yourself in the position of a charity that's struggling to get any exposure. Do you work away bringing in $X per year at huge effort, or do you contact one of these operations, hand them the right to use your name (if they think it's good enough to bring in any business), they use their well-oiled system to collect $10X, they keep $6.5X, you get $3.5X with very little effort at all. Everyone wins. Except the people who think most of their money was going to the charity (and they're probably none the wiser). And the other charities who find the donations pool depleted.

[ynot slow]

Suzanne Paul is a shining exception who broke her arse to pay back all her creditors. I personally have no real admiration of her other than respect for that alone.

Has she repaid them?If so great stuff,but afterall she was touted as having millions from selling nature grow,but still managed to lose on that project,sure if she did pay back great,but these guys have a company go broke,but their personal wealth is not required to pay back.It's the story the company is bankrupt not me,same with Mathew (Tosser) Ridge,several companies bust and he still living it up,happens to numerous people,but these high profile types stand out.

[wysper]

im glad i didnt "donate". would rather buy a jacket and some shoes for the kid.

I agree.
I donate in two ways.
I give blood and I give to the local schools, sports teams etc who come round selling raffle tickets, sausage sizzles etc. Or donate our toys we don't use to kids hospitals, clothes and house stuff to womans refuge etc.

I have no faith in the 'big' charities. World Vision, UNICEF etc. Too much of your money goes to making them richer. Even worse, your money goes off shore when our own people need help.

[Hitcher]

I can't believe the tangle the Breast Cancer Foundation has got its tits in over accepting a donation from Steve Crow from funds raised from the Boobs on Bikes parade.

While I think that the parade is sad and tawdry, it is entirely legal and harmless.

Given that the Foundation is more than happy to benefit from funds received from alcohol and gambling (both entirely more evil than pr0n), it really doesn't have a leg to stand on by condemning Mr Crow and his ventures.

I see that Steve Crow has now withdrawn his offer and is gifting funds raised to another worthwhile cause

[The Stranger]

Everyone wins. Except the people who think most of their money was going to the charity (and they're probably none the wiser). And the other charities who find the donations pool depleted.

Exactly. Don't you think this is misleading advertising?

[ynot slow]

I see that Steve Crow has now withdrawn his offer and is gifting funds raised to another worthwhile cause

Hopefully paying creditors he has,seems he has upset the NP RSA after buying it to develop/renovate then him and his brother getting into financial shite,not many builders suppliers will give credit to them,Waitara High School renovations a classic example.

Double standards for sure re breast cancer donations,normally they'd be glad for the donation,but the PC brigade is a bit upset maybe.At least the relay for life money goes to the area holding the walk.

[sunhuntin]

I agree.
I donate in two ways.
I give blood and I give to the local schools, sports teams etc who come round selling raffle tickets, sausage sizzles etc. Or donate our toys we don't use to kids hospitals, clothes and house stuff to womans refuge etc.

I have no faith in the 'big' charities. World Vision, UNICEF etc. Too much of your money goes to making them richer. Even worse, your money goes off shore when our own people need help.

exactly. id like to give blood, but im needle phobic, lol. dads been donating for decades though. like beggers on the street. dont give them coins, cos itll be spent at the nearest pub. buy them a sandwich instead.

[mashman]

Ha, non-profit charities, all that means is that they don't have any money left after taking their cut and passing what's left on to the charity... I gave up donating (still do blood and have done some humanitarian work) once one of the main Cancer foundations in the UK was blown open and it turned out that about 11% (millions of pounds) was actually getting used for research...

To mean charity means doing something for others for free, be it giving them clothes, gifts, knowledge etc... but it should be FREE... There are plenty of rich business bastards out there that could turn their skills to running and organising charities, but how many do it?

It goes beyond disgusting and should be carry one of the most hefty punishments you can give out...

[mashman]

What would convince you to fork out some money, say $20 to support a worthy cause? Would a statement saying $x of this will go towards the charity we are supporting help?

I wouldn't be happy with a statement, more I would prefer something contractual, something along the lines of "If we don't give 90% of the donations to the Charity we support. We will forfeit our lives"... Failing that, unless i hand my donation (in whatever form it takes) over personally, I just won't give any more... As much as every little helps, someones getting rich for no reason other than they are a CEO!

[ynot slow]

Can't donate blood as chemo abuse prevents me,had donated since I was 18yrs,mostly for free time off work(our company of 100 plus at time was asked if we would have volunteers)and bickies lol.Came back to me when I needed transfusion during surgery 8 units or so urgently,needles don't worry me and the only thing about having chemo is I can't donate blood again.

I liked the LAF (Lance Armstrong Foundation)idea,he got Nike to sponsor the yellow wrist bands so the costs were nil,so when people buy/bought them the $1.00 each cost went to research,not postage,admin costs.But it pissed me off when people bought say 1000 for $1000US and sold them on trade me for upwards of $10.00 each,purely as their own cash scheme.When people would ask how much is going to cancer nz,none and replies were from piss off tosser,it's a free enterprise for my business,get a life,was much like KB at times.

[firefighter]

Hmmm, other charities with genuine admin costings I can some-what understand.

This however is disgusting bullshit.

A one off special event like this in my opinion, deserves NO money paid for time or appearances, that is absolute bullshit and a cop-out. Period.

The whole idea is that you volunteer your time for free, no matter who you are, and all proceeds go to the cause, otherwise it now takes on the stigma it now has, and next time, I won't be running all through the night, and collecting any money in my own time, which by the way was my own and not company time.

Not impressed.

:bash: :angry2:

[boomer]

I do stuff via Church and don't get paid

Sex trade is legal over here Graham :whistle:


Charitys.. you got to ask yourself why fookin bother. I never once paid a penny to any charity, other than tax, ACC and GST.

Do you think i got any charity for the 2 years i was sick, from charitys or those coonts that take my tax, GST or ACC..???!

in the great old kiwi tradition.. YEAH NAH !



as for this bunch.. they should be shot

[Grahameeboy]

Sex trade is legal over here Graham :whistle:


Charitys.. you got to ask yourself why fookin bother. I never once paid a penny to any charity, other than tax, ACC and GST.

Do you think i got any charity for the 2 years i was sick, from charitys or those coonts that take my tax, GST or ACC..???!

in the great old kiwi tradition.. YEAH NAH !



as for this bunch.. they should be shot

Why didn't anyone tell me.....You were sick Boomer...you were not a Charity case...sorry to be honest...you still got help and can now enjoy life that has been given to you.That is why I do things rather than give money...

[tri boy]

The only people who need raincoats coming into spring, are flashers.
NZ, ya got rolled by shiny promises, and feel good emotions.
The razza a ma tazz circus has left town with your pennies.
(a telethon for raincoats, and cereal. unfuckingbelievable)

[Mom]

See these attitudes really bring me down. If I or a bunch of others together decide to raise money for a charity would you not support us, even though you know that 100% of the funds raised would be given to the charity?

[boomer]

Why didn't anyone tell me.....You were sick Boomer...you were not a Charity case...sorry to be honest...you still got help and can now enjoy life that has been given to you.That is why I do things rather than give money...


'cos my names not Rangi?

And mum.. nah sorry.

[Mom]

'cos my names not Rangi?

And mum.. nah sorry.

No dont be, it is interesting to hear this sort of thing. I must really live in a bubble I think. I am very selective about what charities I support, I would no more give to World Vision than wheelie the length of the front straight at Taupo. I do however strongly support Westpac Rescue Helicopter, and Hospice. While both do have administration expenses to be met, I have, or someone close to me has had the support of these 2 organisations. They are not funded adequately and have to fundraise to survive. I have no problem supporting them.

[James Deuce]

I haven't bumped into the charity the isn't essentially self serving yet. There are two kinds of charities. Moneymaking enterprises and coffee morning groups for mental cases who have nothing wrong with them but have been forced by circumstance to care for someone who does. The coffee morning groups are usually formed because the charity that is supposed to help them is too busy making money to pay the CEO and COO and CFO bonuses at Christmas time.

Things like Rescue Helicopters, St John's Ambulance and Hospices get taken for granted. You don't think of them until you need them, and then when they get it wrong you bag them publicy. It's how the world works.

People suck.

[Madness]

I have a quite different understanding of the TVNZ-led assault on KidsCan yesterday. I can't be arsed looking for links, merely typing this is enough effort for today.

As I understand it, the ~$2.0M in Vs ~$0.4M to the actual cause was from the companies full 2008 financials, nothing to do with the Telethon money. The representative from KidsCan said on Close Up that they had pre-paid or pre-arranged almost everything required for the Telethon and expect that ~80% of that ~$2.0M to go straight to the kids.

I was pretty sceptical when the story broke myself. Then I thought about all the PR and marketing they would have had to have achieved to get where they are. I understand they're a young "charity", yet have managed to ressurect the Telethon thing in N.Z, how long did that take? (many would say not long enough). They also have the Official New Zealand Oval-Shaped Ball Sport Team(TM) onboard and have a lot of Kiwi companies doing stuff for free. This stuff doesn't happen without a lot of time and effort.

I didn't give them $1, or 10 cents for that matter. I do think though, that they deserve some recognition for the fact that they are out there providing food to at least some hungry Kiwi kids, something no other fooker seems to be doing!.

[boomer]

No dont be, it is interesting to hear this sort of thing. I must really live in a bubble I think. I am very selective about what charities I support, I would no more give to World Vision than wheelie the length of the front straight at Taupo. I do however strongly support Westpac Rescue Helicopter, and Hospice. While both do have administration expenses to be met, I have, or someone close to me has had the support of these 2 organisations. They are not funded adequately and have to fundraise to survive. I have no problem supporting them.


These organisations do provide a 'service' however they shoudl be funded through government grants and payouts from lotto etc... where charities PROVE they give back.

I/we pay enough tax's for this to be a very real/viable solution.

Asking for money is paramount to begging in my books, but im a yorkshire boy



eer all, see all, say nowt
eat all, sup all, pay nowt
and if tha does owt for nowt, do it for tha sen.

[p.dath]

Wow, I thought the people who did the show "donated" their time like those who donated their cash. That's reals bad.

Would be interesting to know how much of the loot from the prior telethon actually went to charity.

[Hitcher]

FFS. The Earth revolves around the sun. Charities cost money to operate, small ones cost proportionately more to run than do bigger ones that benefit from economies of scale. This should come as no surprise to anybody.

Charities are subject to the same laws as other business when it comes to employing staff, the compliance costs of which are burdensome.

As long as charities are transparent about their operating costs and governance structures, what's the problem? I have less concern about charities like Kids Can than I do about dishonest rorts like Greenpeace.

[mstriumph]

..................

People don't want to know the truth, they just want to feel good about giving.

..................

and therein lies the problem mebbe?



"dishonest rorts like Greenpeace" mr Hitcher sir? :mellow:?