Charity Blackmail?

skyd0g

A full page ad in the July issue of Cycling Plus caught my eye for a sponsored charity ride from London to Copenhagen on behalf of Christian Aid. "Fair enough", I thought... ...then I read the "terms and conditions"...
£99 registration fee... ...okay.
Raise a MINIMUM of £1900!!!! ... :shock:
or pay £875 tour cost yourself!!!! :shock:

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm all for doing things for, or giving money to charity, but these figures seem a little excessive and possibly even bordering on blackmail.

This puts undue pressure on the entrant to "badger" their friends / family / workmates to sponser them for much larger amounts than they would normally consider appropriate, or alternately means that the entrant has to pay nearly £1000 to take part if they fail to raise the necessary amount!

I can understand that it will cost the charity "host" a certain amount to organise, support and arrange an event, so there has to be a certain minimum "charge" per entrant. I just feel that these figures seem a little too high? Especially so, when you consider the entrant will be taking their own time out to take part in the event, time and effort to raise some sponsorship, not to mention their effort and own equipment to complete the ride.

I just wonder who is being taken for a ride here? Or am I being totally Scrooge like? :?
I can't help feeling that the charity are being just a little too greedy? :?:

nickwill

The £875 is the cost of the 'holiday'. When you raise £1900 for a 'good cause', £875 of that is paying for your trip. It amazes me that people have the nerve to do these trips, having blagged a free cycling holiday from well meaning charity donors.

nolf

I think it's a cheek as well. If i was to do one id damn well make sure that i paid the cost of myself!

skyd0g

I can see that some people may see this kind of thing as a free holiday, and some may even take part on that very basis. However, in this case, it's a three day trip, so £875 seems pretty steep for three days budget accomodation / "holiday"!

...but lets say a genuinely philanthropic entrant, wanting to raise money for "a good cause" manages to raise "only" £1500 in sponsorship. This then leave them in a dilemma.

1. Don't take part in the event. (In which case the charity gets £1500 sponsorship + £99 entrance fee, for doing essentially nothing).
2. Sponser themselves for the difference. (In which case the charity gets £1500 sponsorship + £400 self-sponsorship + £99 entrance fee).
3. Pay the £875 cost to enter on top of their entrance fee, plus the sponsorship money they have raised. (In which case the charity gets £1500 sponsorship + £875 "tour cost" + £99 entrance fee.

I just feel if the charity had structured it along the lines of "take part in this event for X amount to cover the cost of your accomodation etc. and raise as much money as you can" I'd feel a whole lot more comfortable with the situation.

bobtbuilder

The £875 is the cost of the 'holiday'. When you raise £1900 for a 'good cause', £875 of that is paying for your trip. It amazes me that people have the nerve to do these trips, having blagged a free cycling holiday from well meaning charity donors.

I think that's shite. It's all very well to say "I'd pay the £875 myself" What about students / unemployed / low earners?

People in the above catagories may not have the £875 to pay themselves, but have the time and inclination to do something that benefits a charity. OK, so they may enjoy themselves, but based on the figures quoted the charity still nets £1,000+

skyd0g

People in the above catagories may not have the £875 to pay themselves, but have the time and inclination to do something that benefits a charity.

Exactly!
...seems a bit of a scam in the name of charity from so many aspects.

...*sigh* maybe I'm just having a grumpy day. :roll:

davelakers

I did the L2P last year for the Stroke Association. I had to raise a minimum of £1300. Out of that the cost of the event was £650. If I raised the minimum the charity got £650. £650 is better than me thinking it was a rip off and not doing the ride on principal!!

In the end I raised £2300 and had an amazing time "paid for" by sponsors, but these sponsors knew from the outset that that was the deal. I didnt enter the ride and sign up until I was sure that I could raise the required money, so I suggest others think about it first!!

At the end of the day the charity has to cover its costs and the event has to managed and organised by professionals and that costs money. The charity always benefits and thats what matters.

Stone Glider

Welcome to the wonderful world of the charity?industry. There are large amounts being made from well-meaning people, some of which goes to charitable causes, where interestingly large amounts go to salaries and commissions for "fund raisers". Of course these people are proof against critcism as it is "all for a good cause" and you are bad spirited to suggest otherwise.

davelakers

How else do you suggest it is done? You cant employ people on minimum wage who have the skills required in managing an event like this. You cant rely on volunteers to do the job either. Nor can you ask ferry companies, eurostar, hotel owners, food, drink and vehicle providers to give their services for next to nothing. Events like this require medical support, more often in the form of Doctors who dont come cheap. It would be great if all the cash went to the charity but in the real world it cant happen!!

At the end of the day if you dont like the terms and conditions just dont enter, people have a choice.

Stone Glider

I entirely agree, especially with your last point.

BeaconRuth

davelakers wrote:

At the end of the day if you dont like the terms and conditions just dont enter, people have a choice.

Agreed. I'm not sure why the word "blackmail" is in the thread title? Who is supposed to be blackmailing who? I'd never take part in such an event for the same reason as the OP has raised the subject, but if everyone taking part and the sponsors are willing participants then surely there is no 'blackmail' involved at any level?

Ruth

skyd0g

The word "blackmail" may be a little extreme, granted.

However, the terms of how the event is structured does put an undue amount of pressure on the entrant to raise a very substantial amount of cash. The entrant in turn will then feel obliged to put a large amount of pressure on his or her potential sponsors (friends, family, workmates etc.) to generate that amount of money.

Maybe "extortion" is a better word to use?

Q. Do you think the sponsors would donate the same amount if there was no target figure to achieve?

Pokerface

The costs to the charity seem pretty high, but when you factor in all the things that have to be paid for, especially things you haven't thought of, it's not that much.

I did L2P last year and we weren't exactly staying in 1 star hotels. Not 5 star either, but everything costs money.

Food (several times a day), transpo, hotels, logistics, support staff and vehicles, insurance - all these things come with a price tag.

chuckcork

When I've met people and said in conversation that I enjoyed riding say a good 60 miles the previous Sunday (marvellous weather) I get asked "was it for charity", and not just the once either.

An insidious flipside, the assumption that if you do such a distance or longer it isn't for exercise, or fun, it must be for a good cause, otherwise you must be bonkers.

But then again having lived in Ireland for 18 months, where charity collecting seems to be a national sport I guess its a fair assumption to make?

sicrow

I'm doing L2P in a couple of weeks, as other have said it probably costs £600 to cover your individual costs but I'll raise in total between 2-3K so the charity benefits. Most things have a cost, do you think charity shops on the high street get the premises rent free ?

Tom Butcher

Is anyone willing to chip in towards the costs of me doing the club run every week?

60p buys a can of coke from a shop for one ride. £50 is enough to supply me with flapjack every Sunday for a year. A grand buys me a new bike to do the rides on. Any extra will be given to Oxfam.

crankycrank

Tom Butcher wrote:

Is anyone willing to chip in towards the costs of me doing the club run every week?

60p buys a can of coke from a shop for one ride. £50 is enough to supply me with flapjack every Sunday for a year. A grand buys me a new bike to do the rides on. Any extra will be given to Oxfam.

Best idea I've seen yet. More money for the charity, costs less to enter, don't have to bother with road closures or 1000's of cyclists driving their cars to the event.

bobtbuilder

Is anyone willing to chip in towards the costs of me doing the club run every week?

60p buys a can of coke from a shop for one ride. £50 is enough to supply me with flapjack every Sunday for a year. A grand buys me a new bike to do the rides on. Any extra will be given to Oxfam.

How is this comparable? The OPs charity event is structured so the charity receives a MINIMUM of £875 and somehow you make this out to be a bad thing?

skyd0g

Tom Butcher wrote:

Is anyone willing to chip in towards the costs of me doing the club run every week?

60p buys a can of coke from a shop for one ride. £50 is enough to supply me with flapjack every Sunday for a year. A grand buys me a new bike to do the rides on. Any extra will be given to Oxfam.

...just so long as you itemise all of your out-of-pocket expenses... ...y'know, Mars bars, bananas, tyres, sink plugs, plasma tv's, moats, duck houses, secretarial staff etc.

chuckcork

If the government approached cycling the same way vis taxation, e.g. make sure more cycling happens and offset against the saving to the NHS, we could all be with rather a lot more cash every year

dilemna

skyd0g wrote:

The word "blackmail" may be a little extreme, granted.

Indeed it is. No one is being blackmailed. As already posted people have a choice whether to agree to the terms, enter and raise the money for the charity or decide it is not for them.

If you are a higher rate tax payer why not just make a donation and gift aid it. The charity then recoups tax at the higher rate 40 or 50%. Save yourself the hassle of doing the event and do a few more club rides instead. At least you can feel satisfied your are not filling the coffers of commercial organisations who have jumped at the chance to make a few lucrative pounds with these enterprises taking a thick slice of the monies that really should be going to charities.

skyd0g

At least you can feel satisfied your are not filling the coffers of commercial organisations who have jumped at the chance to make a few lucrative pounds with these enterprises taking a thick slice of the monies that really should be going to charities.

The "commercial organisation" IS the charity. See first post.

nickwill

A number of these trips are organised by 'Sports Tours International'. They are the commercial organisation to whom a large chunk of the donors money will be going.

eh

Maybe blackmail s too strong a word but how many of us have been put under a lot of pressure by a colleague or relative to fund either their or a close relatives grand holiday? Not nice and when 50% of the cost is going to commercial organistions its a bit iffy IMO.

But then a lot of charities take the p*ss IMO, and get involved in hard sell marketing that the likes of McDonalds et al. would be proud.

hammerite

I looked into one of these, the cost for the organising, accommodation, extra travel etc.... (which I was going tp pay out of my own pocket) was £900 which I thought was excessive for a 3 day trip to France.

But the one thing that put me off was a specific term and condition which was along the lines of:

"any money raised is done so on the basis of a donation, not a sponsorship or pledge. Should the event not go ahead any monies raised would still be donated".

I thought this was a bit unfair to those I'd collect money from, if they want to donate they could do so to someone rattling a tin, not for someone who had an event cancelled and the charity got the money by default.

dilemna

skyd0g wrote:

The "commercial organisation" IS the charity. See first post.

.....I don't think so...... skyd0g. A charity does not have share holders to pay dividends or private owners to reap the profits as does a commercial organsiation such as Sports Tours International. Under the terms of legislation regulating charities they are only allowed to become or maintain charitable status if they adhere to strict terms. If not they do not qualify or lose their charitable status. The Charity Commission over sees charities.

How would you suggest charities approach the issue of funding?

The bad guys here are not charities but the commercial organisations that see an opportunity to make a few pounds on the back of them.

You still haven't answered whether you are a higher rate tax payer? A gift aided donation is very attractive. Donate £100 and the charity can claim £40 back on the tax you paid on this £100 so netting £140 or £150 if you are a 50% tax payer or seriously rich cyclist.

skyd0g

You still haven't answered whether you are a higher rate tax payer? A gift aided donation is very attractive. Donate £100 and the charity can claim £40 back on the tax you paid on this £100 so netting £140 or £150 if you are a 50% tax payer or seriously rich cyclist.

Yeah, I wish.

I do however have more free time available than I care for right now, and as it happens am a bit strapped for spondoolicks to fund the old summer jollies.

I do have an idea though...
...there's a few chaps that are heading-out to Copenhagen shortly, and if you could bung me £1900 sponsorship my dear dilemna, then they say I could join them.
Not that I enjoy that sort of thing, y'know. You know how that foreign food disagrees with me. And I believe I'll be expected to drink that gassy bottled German lager in the evenings, with scarcely a drop of Chablis anywhere.
The transport is a bit sketchy too. Apparently, I may have to cycle a fair bit of the way so I'm told. But it does sound like a jolly good wheeze!
What? No, it's nothing like that Nigerian investment scheme that I introduced you to.

pneumatic

I'm going to Copenhagen in August with three mates. We will cycle around Denmark and Southern Sweden for ten days, presumably putting in a significant mileage (after all, we won't be able to afford to sit around in the pub!).

I wouldn't have the nerve to ask anyone to sponsor me, let alone to chip in for the cost of the trip. You might as well sponsor me to go to the beach for a fortnight!

When a charity organises a challenge ride, I think it is reasonable for them to invest a little money drawing attention to themselves and making the event successful, in the hope of raising more than it cost them to bring it in. Where that extends to arranging free holidays for the impoverished adventurer, maybe they need to be honest about that, instead of pretending otherwise. For example:

SLOB-AID, getting underachievers off the couch.
THE GUT SOCIETY, giving a new life to Pie-Eaters
ACTION CASH, wholesome adventures for the mildly skint