Price of Big Issue

[Kazplus2]

We have a regular Big Issue seller in our town and another homeless person. Both regular long term. I normally just donate an odd pound or two to the homeless man. Last week I thought id get the Big Issue for a change and was a bit surprised at the cost of £5. I had to ask for change and the seller was clearly waiting for a tip above the cost. I know now (after a bit of a Google search) that they normally buy for £2 and sell for £4 and keep the profits. It feels a lot to give as a cash donation. By that I mean the same amount can be given in a more tax efficient way to allow gift aid to be added. Am I the only one that thinks the cost of the Big Issue is too high or AIBU?

Surely there are easier ways to make money. If they have to buy the magazine and then try to shift it at such a high price, it must be very difficult. How much money are they usually making?

I like @caramellandscape 's idea of a social media platform instead

Sorry, going off at a tangent (and not sure why I feel the need to share this) ...

Whenever I see a Big Issue seller, I immediately expect them to shout, in a strong London accent:

"DON'T BE SHY, GIVE IT A TRY"

I spent many years walking past sellers between the tube station and the office! There was one man in particular who would always shout this out.

@XelaM
They usually buy the magazine for half of the cover price, so the recent bumper Xmas edition (cover price £5) cost the vendor £2.50. The cover price has now reverted to £4, and as a special deal, running for the next few months at least, vendors can buy copies for £1.75 each (instead of £2) and therefore make a surplus of £2.25 per copy.

Surely, they should be producing a magazine that appeals to everyone? I would never buy a ranting left wing publication but I would buy a magazine that had interesting articles in it that I wanted to read.

So, if they are aiming it at a left wing audience-many of whom are tighter than a duck's arse and yes, I have done a peer reviewed survey (!) than that is a very silly business model-they are cutting off potential customers.

@ssd why is it bad for someone to sell the big issue for 20 years to support their lifestyle? Everyone works to support their lifestyle. Unless you mean that there should be more efficient/effective ways to support people who are struggling to make a living?

It shouldn’t be necessary for someone to be a vendor for 20 years but clearly some people need it for that long and I don’t see why that reflects badly on them necessarily.

Selling the big issue isn’t begging, it is a form of self employment which allows people with myriad reasons for their situation to earn some money in an honest way and retain some dignity.

If a vendor is causing a disturbance or harnessing people then report them.

So most left wing voters are tighter than a Duck's ass?

What a load of bullshit!

I think you'll find that left wing voters want to help others financially whilst right wing voters want to keep it all to themselves!

S@ssd sorry, just realised it wasn’t you who said 20 years, you said 10. I need an edit button!

I gave some money to a Big Issue seller the other day but didn't take the magazine as I'd probably never read it plus, they could sell it to someone else who might. I hope this person was able to pocket the whole donation and doesn't have to split it with the organisation! Now I'm wondering?

Our local seller has been selling it for 10 years or more too. I don't buy it because I don't want to read it, but also because the charitable aspect is unclear when it's obviously a long term line of employment rather than a temporary stop gap. Somebody recently started a justgiving campaign for our local guy because he has "several" children and recently lost his benefits. There was no info on why he lost his benefits, but it's presumably something that happens when you are no longer elligible for them.

Being homeless and/or unemployed is not an essential requirement to become a big issue seller.
So many people are too hasty to judge.

People are confused rather than judgemental. People are obviously more likely to give money if they think the seller is down on his luck. Many assume they are homeless because the charity was set up to help homeless people.

The Big Issue organisation actually requests that people don't do this. If you're giving the vendors money but not taking the magazine, you are not supporting the business model and are treating the vendor like a beggar.

It detracts from the aims of the organisation.

"There was no info on why he lost his benefits, but it's presumably something that happens when you are no longer elligible for them."

Have you heard of sanctions? Often unfairly applied, causing people to lose their benefits for weeks (or months, if the sanctions are repeatedly applied). There are all sorts of reasons - sometimes very minor or spurious - why this happens to people.

Some DWP staff have reported being given targets (eg a certain number of jobseekers to be sanctioned/ cut off).

Those who have been sanctioned may well end up in debt, lose their housing, lose access to children etc as a direct result of this kind of discriminatory practice.

There is loads of evidence of claimants having 100% of their benefits stopped, and this causing huge problems, including death: www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/david-clapson-benefit-sanctions-death-government-policies

Organisations like Crisis have campaigned vs sanctions since they were introduced - see www.crisis.org.uk/ending-homelessness/homelessness-knowledge-hub/benefits-and-employment/homeless-people-s-experiences-of-welfare-conditionality-and-benefit-sanctions-2015/
and www.crisis.org.uk/ending-homelessness/homelessness-knowledge-hub/benefits-and-employment/benefit-sanctions-and-homelessness-a-scoping-report-2015/
also www.crisis.org.uk/media/20553/submission_to_the_public_accounts_committee_inquiry_into_benefit_sanctions_nov2016.pdf
and www.crisis.org.uk/media/20554/oral_evidence_benefit_sanctions_dec2016.pdf

They sure produce a lot of hot air but so many of them actually do anything.
Talk is cheap but it ain't very good at buttering parsnips.

There will be exceptions but they are the exceptions that prove the rule.

I think the Big Issue is a very readable mag.

Not bought it for years not since the Romanians were selling it in gangs and used old ladies to sell it and the gangs creamed of the money

poor ladies were out on the pitch for 7 hrs in all weathers so i used to buy them a coffee or cake

Where’s your evidence for that? It feels like a low value business for organised crime gangs to become involved in, don’t you think?

I’d like to know the impact on sales caused by the increase in cover price. It went up 33% (from £3 to £4) in December, leaving the ‘bumper’ edition aside. Whilst I can see why you’d try to keep the price at a whole number of £, to save the vendors messing about with change, it’s quite a big increase and it must surely have affected sales, which anecdotally is the case according to the vendor I buy from.

Most glossy magazines cost £5 or more despite being 70% full page adverts for multimillion pound fashion companies.
Don't remember seeing a thread discussing that...

Private Eye costs £2.99 and has three times the content, though. You can’t compare The Big Issue to Bazaar or Elle.