MMD: Would you tell a charity shop that a Chloe bag was under-priced?

eurovision_fan

I would snap it up but offer to pay at least double to lighten my conscience, but i've actually had a reverse encounter to this a few month back,

once a month i go to my grandad's house, and at the weekend generally wander round charity shops, in an oxfam shop i spotted a hardback copy of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban and written on the inside cover was (1st ed. £15), now if it was I would have snapped it up as even a battered copy could still fetch at least £300, but upon checking I saw the numberplate stated it was in fact a 3th edition, and so I told the shop keeper to reduce the book price incase a more foolish fan than myself worth pay for a dud and told trading standards, although I felt awful telling the old lady, i thought it was better than a potential case of false advertisment.

Eurovision_fan

Aldahbra

I thought part of the function of charity shops was to provide items for people who couldn't normally afford them for what ever reason.

I was once allowed to have a really good babies toy for 75p, well under the price it was worth. I could have sold it on ebay at a large profit. It was an extra my baby would not have had else. When the time came I passed it on to another baby. No I didn't feel bad about taking it.

Now my circumstances are better, I give to charity shops. What turns around comes around.

I would not donate items to a charity shop which I felt were going to ask unreasonable sums of money for the items. Presumably the person who dontated the bag knew its worth, they probably wanted to share a bit with those less fortunate.

Cloudane

I'm taking "charity shop" to mean a shop set up to raise funds for charitable causes, by selling stuff they've been donated (like Oxfam etc). Rather than a shop set up to provide things at low cost to people who can't afford full price, which is an entirely different ball game.

This is another of those dilemmas with too many conditions to give a clear cut answer.

My moral policy about this sort of thing would be roughly:
* If it was something I'd use myself (need before greed), then chances are the "Charity starts at home" rule would apply and I'd snap it up. Although "chloe bag" sounds like a showy luxury item rather than a necessity so this would be taken into account.
* If it was just to buy and sell on eBay for a profit I would either just let them know, or would go ahead and do so but give some of the profit back to the charity.

It'd all be variable based on the charity. If it was for some specific charity that I really deeply cared about then I'd feel far more guilty. To the point where if it was a cause that I really wanted to help out I'd buy it, eBay it.... and then hand the full profit back to them. The reasoning being that I can do a better job selling something for a profit on eBay than some thrift shop will do selling it to the public, even if they did have an idea of its worth. So I'm doing "my bit" for the charity.

If it was a charity that I kind of wanted to help but wasn't quite as bothered about (maybe it's a generic "For Charity" that gets split between them all) I'd take more of the profit for myself, the reasoning being that... especially with bigger charities... they often employ people or pay lots of money for marketing and branding redesigns and whatnot. So let's just say they're paying for *my* time and knowledge too - they'd never have known if they hadn't been told, so it's fair.

And if it was for a Help The ASBOs charity or something, then sorry but the profit's all mine :P However as it's a sudden windfall for me, I certainly wouldn't rule out donating some or all of the profit to a more worthy cause.

In reality, I'd say "what the heck's a Chloe bag when it's at home??" and not have a clue what it's worth myself.

babyjaike

I like the idea of reusing etc... but I find that charity shops have priced themselves out of the market. Their prices are too high.. the items are donated, the staff are volunteers, and they pay reduced rent on the shop. I once offered a lower price for a china dish than it was priced at and was told no. Surely some money is better than none? I say buy the bag and smile! :-) xx:T

dbfisokay

The main point about this dilemma for me is that the bag is in a "charity" shop. As I understand it, the dynamic of these shops is that they are given goods for nothing and "traditionally" price them at a level that is affordable to those who may not be able to spend much i.e the shops have a dual "charity" function that helps all round:-home and abroad. Increasingly these so called charity shops are charging ridiculous prices for worn, used and often damaged goods and often vulgar prices for designer labels that effectively disbar the local clientele giving the shops the status of dealerships associated with collectors and retailers. I've worked in a charity shop and believe me the corporate mentality in SOME of them is astonishing. Long standing, poverty stricken customers are often priced out in favour of private dealers. As far as I'm concerned if it's given for nothing then it should be passed on for next to nothing-anything else is pure target driven fundraising-not Charity. You can't even calculate the profit on something given for nothing-Let's avoid Charity Inc. Helping hands not greedy handbags!

GiveItBack

dbfisokay wrote: »

As far as I'm concerned if it's given for nothing then it should be passed on for next to nothing-anything else is pure target driven fundraising-not Charity.

fundraising not charity? What on earth do you mean? Charities need to raise funds to do whatever it is they do, to help whoever it is they need to help.

Do you think you can go out and fix the world's ills for free?

"hi, we're going to feed you, but you can starve to death because if we'd asked for £10 the bag instead of £5 it wouldn't be 'charity'."
When you buy something in a charity shop you're buying, I'd argue it's closer to not even making a donation - you're getting something in exchange for your cash, the only difference is that the money is going to help someone instead of lining the pockets of Mr Walmart / Mr Asda / Mr Tesco.

It seems people think "let's not help charities that need lots of money to do big things, let's only help little charities that only need a little of our money to make a wee bit of a difference to a few people."

Again, the charity shops have an OBLIGATION to bring in as much income as they can to help their beneficiaries - the people their legal status says they'll help. If they start giving out things for free to 'poor customers', they're acting unethically because they're spending money on people they're not set up to help.

xXx_Princess_xXx_2

I would buy it and say nothing!

Cloudane

GiveItBack wrote: »

Again, the charity shops have an OBLIGATION to bring in as much income as they can to help their beneficiaries - the people their legal status says they'll help. If they start giving out things for free to 'poor customers', they're acting unethically because they're spending money on people they're not set up to help.

This is very true. (Or should I say "Yay! Someone gets it!"). A lot of people seem to assume that if it's a charity shop then they're the beneficiery, and a lot of weird senses of entitlement come out. (I've worked in one, seen it all before).

I can't help thinking to myself "the charity is not for *you* dumbo! Just because you happen to think you're poor and deserve lots of free stuff because you couldn't be bothered to get a job, doesn't mean it's you the charity's aimed at". But I digress.

Well I can't claim to be a saint either (see my previous post). But it really does help to understand that the point of charity shops is to raise money to help their chosen beneficiery, which means making a profit. ('Profit' in a revenue minus cost sense, not a legal sense, as charities don't have shareholders). People Buying Stuff are basically donating money, and not supposed to be claiming the 'charity' for themselves.

Contains_Mild_Peril

I volunteer in a charity shop, but when I shop there or in other local charity shops my motive is not "donating money".
Of course I like the ethical aspects of buying from charity shops, but when I want to donate I will put money in the collection box or sponsor someone who's running a marathon or whatever, or I'll donate saleable goods or my time as a volunteer. When I do my shopping I'm not "donating", I'm looking for a bargain, as I suspect are most other shoppers, and I will not pay more for a secondhand item than it would cost new just because it's for a good cause. This is a point which seems to be overlooked by some charity shop workers.
That said, a point often overlooked by some customers is that just because the shop is given goods for nothing does not mean that they don't have running costs to meet as well as a cause to help.
And yes, some people do literally give us rubbish. We regularly get things like secondhand socks and dirty dishes, and we were even given a broken glass vase held together with sticky tape!

jojo2004

GiveItBack wrote: »

<<<RANT ALERT>>>>


here we go again... SImply, you are wrong.

Look, a tiny percentage goes on salaries, MOST of the money goes to the place it's needed, the care, the feeding the hungry, or whatever. Very few charities will spend more than 30p of your pound on 'admin', you know, 'admin', like paying for trained staff, putting petrol into the RSPCA vans, that kind of thing.
Most charities spend less than 30% of their money on admin, so clearly, by far MOST of it goes to the 'needy'.

Are these the same charities that offer EIGHT POUNDS AN HOUR to chuggers (charity muggers) who clog up every high street, most of the day long, and employ some pretty annoying tactics to get you to donate "just five pounds a month" for whatever? What rate of return do those "trained staff" (ha!) give to the company?
Are these the same charities that can pay for advertisements on national television asking for "just three pounds a month" for whatever??? All this comes out of 30% of their takings, does it? That must be some turnover they have.