Advertisement

loader

Talk

Advanced search

to feel uncomfortable about people bidding huge sums of money for Children In Need experiences (Chris Evans this morning)?

(140 Posts)
Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 09:32:26

It made me feel...odd. Or something. To hear people bidding thousands and thousands of pounds to play tennis at the Queens Club. I know all the money goes to charity. I know its a worthwhile cause. But it made me feel strangely uncomfortable and I don't really know why.

Fianceechickie Tue 15-Nov-16 09:36:44

It doesn't make me feel uncomfortable as such...its annoying though that the whole programme is taken up describing things most listeners can't afford to bid on and hearing about the huge sums of money some people have at their disposal. I guess in an ideal world wealthy people would just donate the money but as you say, its an amazing cause and Evans has clearly hit on something that gets the wealthy to part with lots and lots of cash.

MuseumOfCurry Tue 15-Nov-16 09:38:50

It's a win-win. I don't understand your discomfort.

alibongo5 Tue 15-Nov-16 09:39:21

I know what you mean. I always feel it's a bit, I don't know, obscene really. Like you, I have mixed feelings as the money goes to a good cause but I usually find myself switching radio stations this week.

MumOnTheRunCatchingUp Tue 15-Nov-16 09:40:34

As with most charity's, a fraction of the money goes where it says it does

DubiousCredentials Tue 15-Nov-16 09:41:28

I agree with everything Fianceechickie said and she has typed it so I don't have to grin

TheWrathFromHighAtopTheThing Tue 15-Nov-16 09:42:44

This thread appears every year.

I'm not sure what the problem is: it's a vehicle for people with loads of money, to donate loads of money to people who need it.

Would it make you feel better if 10,000 grannies donated a pound rather than one person donated £10k, so that it didn't come across as flashy or something? confused

PavlovianLunge Tue 15-Nov-16 09:43:14

I think I get where you're coming from,*OP*. It's for a great cause and will raise a huge amount of money, but it is quite excluding. I think I'd feel better about it if they made the occasional comment about appreciating all donations, not just the big money stuff.

But I do see why they're pushing it so hard, the time and effort that people are going to give is a terrific thing.

Toocleverbyhalf2 Tue 15-Nov-16 09:43:57

It makes me uncomfortable too, especially as children in need only gave £150,000 to the south west ( my area). last year. I try and boycott children in need most years as I think that charitable donations should be a personal choice.
I'm changing stations too, Chris Evans is such an irritating luvvie sometimes.

MadameCholetsDirtySecret Tue 15-Nov-16 09:46:46

I think it is wrong and always have done. It is just for the rich. A fairer way would be for a raffle where the vast majority of people could buy into it and have a chance of winning. Although, that might mean Chris Evans has to deal with an ordinary person , not a super rich friend.

I think it flies in the face of the BBC's ethos. What would Lord Reith say? wink

Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 09:47:25

yes I think you are right fianceechickie I definitely had to turn it off

TheWrath sorry - not regular enough to realise when ideas aren't completely original! But glad its not just me anyway.

BikeRunSki Tue 15-Nov-16 09:47:41

It's very elitist and excludes most of the listeners from bidding. But CIN are pretty efficient at using their donations I understand, and it raises vast amounts for them.

I grin and bear it, or listen to a different radio station for a week. I certainly can't afford to compete!

Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 09:50:09

I think its the BUYING aspect as well

A one-off donation of £30k for no reason other than giving wouldn't make me feel as uncomfortable for some unspecified reason

Its the bleating on about how amazing it is, how incredible, what a once in a lifetime opportunity, how fun, how exciting, £18k bid so far...

then you turn to R4 and listen to people who have become homeless and who are living in desperately bleak conditions

Seems really jarring.

TheWrathFromHighAtopTheThing Tue 15-Nov-16 09:50:18

No, I wasn't having a dig at you for starting the thread.

I just never understand the logic.

Oh, it's so vulgar, such obscene amounts of money! Well, it's a charity - it's raison d'etre is to raise big fat sums of money. I never get why it's offensive, unless it's an inverse snobbery thing. Or maybe jealousy for some people.

I don't listen, I find it pretty boring, and I could never take part. But as a vehice for raising truckloads of cash, it's amazingly effective.

Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 09:51:40

yes, I understand what you are saying and actually until this year I would have felt exactly the same

but this year I feel very differently about it. Can't imagine its jealousy as having to play tennis at the Queens club would be my idea of hell grin

Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 09:53:09

I don't completely trust huge charities either that's probably at the root of it.

As others have said you cannot be sure that all the money goes where people think it does.

LunaLoveg00d Tue 15-Nov-16 09:56:50

As with most charity's, a fraction of the money goes where it says it does

This argument really pisses me off. I volunteer for a large charity in one of their shops and there are running costs. Just because we're a charity doesn't mean we get free electricity, or rent, or water rates, or insurance, or anything else. Someone has to pay for the manager's salary - the sole member of paid staff - the leaflets we hand out, the head office staff who administer the gift aid and raise the charity profile. Around 75% of everything we take through the till goes directly to worthy causes and this is pretty standard for the charity sector. People who think charities should have no paid staff and never pay for anything haven't a clue.

I don't have an issue with this sort of charity auction. Nobody is forcing bids out of people. It's all about maximising income for the charity.

TheWrathFromHighAtopTheThing Tue 15-Nov-16 09:56:55

Ha, yes, no tennis for me either!

But where the money goes is another issue; it's the clutching of pearls at the vulgarity of it all that rankles. As if it's ok to donate money if you've scraped the bottom of your purse, but if you've got it to lose then it somehow doesn't count.

Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 09:59:18

How does it actually work? Is it like Ebay, when the highest bidder wins and pays up? Or do ALL the bidders have to donate their bid? And are they actually paying or 'pledging'?

Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 10:00:23

So I could ring up and say i was donating 8k to run with Mo Farah, get a mention on R2, immediately get outbid then never have to pay up?

LunaLoveg00d Tue 15-Nov-16 10:02:57

Yes highest bidder wins. Just like Ebay. Underbidders pay nothing. So in theory yes you could bid a lot in the hope you get immediately outbid, but you may not. Risky. I would imagine too that a big organisation such as Children in Need has some sort of vetting process - you'd have to give your credit card details or something when placing bids or you'd get muppets bidding £500k for something and never paying up.

Vango Tue 15-Nov-16 10:03:18

SW grants (active November 2015). 32 pages. A little more than £150k...

downloads.bbc.co.uk/tv/pudsey/grants/CN0187_Grants_Listings_South_and_West_and_Channel_Isles.pdf

Piscivorus Tue 15-Nov-16 10:07:01

I hate it. It is ostentatious giving. Hated it when Terry Wogan did it, hate it now with Chris Evans

Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 10:07:19

Yes I volunteer for a charity in the SW which received 100k from CIN so I know it does good work

which makes my curmugeonly attitude even more confusing confused

Megainstant Tue 15-Nov-16 10:07:55

thanks LunaLoveg00d

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now