Promoters percentages?

[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:Me]

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:Me]

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.