bye

bianchimoon

I think with this particular type of charity event is in essence fraudulent, in that, whatever you contribute a massive proportion is going to the person doing the ride in the form of meals/accommodation/transport and Rugby tickets etc. Then the commercial third parties take their cut (rightly so), ferry companies, hotels, stadiums etc.

These marketing led initiatives where you 'bribe' people to take part with promises of a great jolly, food and tickets will do more damage charities in the long run than they can ever imagine.

briantrumpet

bianchimoon wrote:

I think with this particular type of charity event is in essence fraudulent, in that, whatever you contribute a massive proportion is going to the person doing the ride in the form of meals/accommodation/transport and Rugby tickets etc. Then the commercial third parties take their cut (rightly so), ferry companies, hotels, stadiums etc.

These marketing led initiatives where you 'bribe' people to take part with promises of a great jolly, food and tickets will do more damage charities in the long run than they can ever imagine.

I think these are the top of my list too for 'charity' things I don't like. I can't say I'm a great fan of ones where people don't shave, or drink, for a month - in the first case, because it requires no effort whatsoever (would they sponsor me not to wash for a month?), and in the second, if they haven't got a drink problem, then it's no hardship, and if they have got a drink problem, they should be stopping drinking anyway.

Just tell me the charity means a lot to you, and ask me for money. And donate your time to charity too, if it means so much to you.

I suppose, in some ways, I can't blame the charities for trying every trick in the book, to get us to part with cash, but playing the long game, they should be doing things that don't leave a sour taste in the mouth.

mrfpb

How about parachute jumps for charity:

From the last series of QI:

The real cost of parachute jumping is on the NHS. A 1999 Perth Royal Infirmary Study examined five years of charity parachute jumps and found they resulted in the injuries to 174 people, which costs the NHS over £600,000. The average amount of money raised per person was £30. Every pound of money raised cost the NHS roughly £13.75. To make things worse, around 70% of the charity jumps are to raise money for NHS-related causes. One problem is that first-time jumpers often panic and forget what to do as the ground rushes towards them; therefore you need longer training to prepare your mind for the jump as well as the correct way to land and roll. During World War II, Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

ted-on-tour

Holdey wrote:

bye

On yer bike son... ...sorry.

dinyull

During World War II, Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

Sh*t, no wonder it costs the NHS so much. What kind of charidee would organise parachuting with 70 year old equipment whilst being shot at?

mrfpb

Dinyull wrote:

During World War II, Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

Sh*t, no wonder it costs the NHS so much. What kind of charidee would organise parachuting with 70 year old equipment whilst being shot at?

Poor taste alert:


Participant completes event, raises £500

Particapnt dies during event , rasies £1,000,00 due to social media hysteria

Check your parachute carefully!

markhewitt1978

mrfpb wrote:

Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

I'm sure jumping into enemy territory at night while being shot at was a factor there.

flanners1

bianchimoon wrote:

I think with this particular type of charity event is in essence fraudulent, in that, whatever you contribute a massive proportion is going to the person doing the ride in the form of meals/accommodation/transport and Rugby tickets etc. Then the commercial third parties take their cut (rightly so), ferry companies, hotels, stadiums etc.

These marketing led initiatives where you 'bribe' people to take part with promises of a great jolly, food and tickets will do more damage charities in the long run than they can ever imagine.

yes indeed...I think the workings/earnings of charities need to be more transparent, I also think charitable status needs to be re-examined by Parliament etc. The earning of some Chief Execs in said charities is a joke.

chris_bass

markhewitt1978 wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

I'm sure jumping into enemy territory at night while being shot at was a factor there.

The lack of underwear can't have helped matters either.

StillGoing

mrfpb wrote:

How about parachute jumps for charity:

From the last series of QI:

The real cost of parachute jumping is on the NHS. A 1999 Perth Royal Infirmary Study examined five years of charity parachute jumps and found they resulted in the injuries to 174 people, which costs the NHS over £600,000. The average amount of money raised per person was £30. Every pound of money raised cost the NHS roughly £13.75. To make things worse, around 70% of the charity jumps are to raise money for NHS-related causes. One problem is that first-time jumpers often panic and forget what to do as the ground rushes towards them; therefore you need longer training to prepare your mind for the jump as well as the correct way to land and roll. During World War II, Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

Charity jumps tend to be tandem jumps with an experienced jump instructor controlling the landing. I can't see any jump centre permitting a complete novice to do a static line jump with the risk of injury and lack of experience to deal with canopy failures. Besides, QI does come out with bollox frequently.

Tashman

philthy3 wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

How about parachute jumps for charity:

From the last series of QI:

The real cost of parachute jumping is on the NHS. A 1999 Perth Royal Infirmary Study examined five years of charity parachute jumps and found they resulted in the injuries to 174 people, which costs the NHS over £600,000. The average amount of money raised per person was £30. Every pound of money raised cost the NHS roughly £13.75. To make things worse, around 70% of the charity jumps are to raise money for NHS-related causes. One problem is that first-time jumpers often panic and forget what to do as the ground rushes towards them; therefore you need longer training to prepare your mind for the jump as well as the correct way to land and roll. During World War II, Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

Charity jumps tend to be tandem jumps with an experienced jump instructor controlling the landing. I can't see any jump centre permitting a complete novice to do a static line jump with the risk of injury and lack of experience to deal with canopy failures. Besides, QI does come out with bollox frequently.

I dunno, i did a static line jump after 3 hours tuition of jumping from a height of 4ft at the RAF parachute school 20 years ago! Look, Locate, Peel, Punch, Pull. Still remember it now

dinyull

Tashman wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

How about parachute jumps for charity:

From the last series of QI:

The real cost of parachute jumping is on the NHS. A 1999 Perth Royal Infirmary Study examined five years of charity parachute jumps and found they resulted in the injuries to 174 people, which costs the NHS over £600,000. The average amount of money raised per person was £30. Every pound of money raised cost the NHS roughly £13.75. To make things worse, around 70% of the charity jumps are to raise money for NHS-related causes. One problem is that first-time jumpers often panic and forget what to do as the ground rushes towards them; therefore you need longer training to prepare your mind for the jump as well as the correct way to land and roll. During World War II, Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

Charity jumps tend to be tandem jumps with an experienced jump instructor controlling the landing. I can't see any jump centre permitting a complete novice to do a static line jump with the risk of injury and lack of experience to deal with canopy failures. Besides, QI does come out with bollox frequently.

I dunno, i did a static line jump after 3 hours tuition of jumping from a height of 4ft at the RAF parachute school 20 years ago! Look, Locate, Peel, Punch, Pull. Still remember it now

That's not the origin of you knee problems, is it haha?!

Tashman

Dinyull wrote:

Tashman wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

How about parachute jumps for charity:

From the last series of QI:

The real cost of parachute jumping is on the NHS. A 1999 Perth Royal Infirmary Study examined five years of charity parachute jumps and found they resulted in the injuries to 174 people, which costs the NHS over £600,000. The average amount of money raised per person was £30. Every pound of money raised cost the NHS roughly £13.75. To make things worse, around 70% of the charity jumps are to raise money for NHS-related causes. One problem is that first-time jumpers often panic and forget what to do as the ground rushes towards them; therefore you need longer training to prepare your mind for the jump as well as the correct way to land and roll. During World War II, Commando parachutists were unlikely to survive more than three jumps.

Charity jumps tend to be tandem jumps with an experienced jump instructor controlling the landing. I can't see any jump centre permitting a complete novice to do a static line jump with the risk of injury and lack of experience to deal with canopy failures. Besides, QI does come out with bollox frequently.

I dunno, i did a static line jump after 3 hours tuition of jumping from a height of 4ft at the RAF parachute school 20 years ago! Look, Locate, Peel, Punch, Pull. Still remember it now

That's not the origin of you knee problems, is it haha?!

haha, no definitely not. many years of happy sporting incompitence since then. Back then I was a young enthusiac Air Cadet, now I'm a cynical old accountant