Everything Everywhere accused of lining pockets with charity cash
Just covering costs guv'
Everything Everywhere has been taking 10 percent of charitable text messages, excepting its selected charities, on the flimsy excuse of having to cover its processing costs.
The problem is that it seems the other network operators are more generous with their cut, passing on the entire payment, so the operator is being forced to re-examine its charging structure to avoid appearing as the villain of the piece as everyone leaps aboard the already crowded bandwagon to accuse the company of lining its own pockets on charitable donations.
Nick Hurd, the Minister for Civil Society, is behind the call while Phillip Blond, Big Society advisor, thinks it's "an absolute disgrace" and that "it should stop immediately".
In defending the indefensible, EE claims it has to cover costs, and that half a dozen "partner" charities get the full payment while the thousands who also take donations by text get 90 per cent of the money. But given the media pressure, the operator is currently holding meetings to reconsider its position.
Processing payments does cost money, and all the charitable collection mechanisms have to cover costs: JustGiving, for example, takes £15 a month plus 5 per cent of every donation, but Everything Everywhere's problem is that it was the only network operator with its hand in the till.
Mega-corporations taking money from charities is something we can all abhor with a clear conscience, and EE will, no doubt, come out with a statement in the next hour or two saying they're dropping the charges.
The operator, like the others, will then take the money off us in other ways, but everyone will then be able to claim a victory while EE stands in the corner looking repentant in the best pantomime tradition. ®
If it was one or two...
...charities, then they would have a point and perhaps there is some better way they can cover these costs (make a 10% donation themselves and write if off against tax or something) but a company cannot be expected to support every possible charity at zero cost out of the goodness of its own heart. Because is doesn't have one.
You can be sure that Virgin et a have calculated to the nearest penny how much free PR this is giving them, and they probably account for that as covering their costs.
The sheer number of charities that are going around these days is ridiculous. So I can completely see why a company may wish to covers their costs. Personally I am sick to the back teeth with all the chuggers (you know, the people paid to mug you - where's the outcry about that?), charities cold-calling (engaging in emotional blackmail) and the various collection bags shoved through my door. I just bin their crap or close the door in their face.
Might make me seem like a cold, heartless bastard (maybe I am) but the constant pleading/begging is putting me off and I am giving less because I am so tired of it all.
Let the down-voting commence.
Ferengi Rules of Acquisition
Ferengi Rules of Acquisition
Rule 144: There's nothing wrong with charity ... as long as it winds up in your pocket.
...what the original poster is trying to say is that he/she fully expected to be charged the £1 (or whatever it was - I don't remember now) for the actual donation. What they didn't expect was for T-Mobile to add another 10p to the bill. The net result is that the punter gets charged £1.10 but CR only get £1 of that.
I don't think he OP was suggesting T-Mobile should be funding CR and I can't understand why you would jump to that rather odd conclusion.
I remember wondering the other week how the mobile operators would handle the Comic Relief donations by text. Of course, they should either have waved the charge entirely or added the charge to the actual donation.