Japan crisis

[banjo]

This is truly upsetting. A company shouldn't use such a tragic situation to draw in revenue and that's exactly what's going on here. FSUSA is not donating 10% of anything nor are they "matching" anything....the customer is.

A 10ml bottle of juice costs less that $1.00 to make and FSUSA charges $6.00 per bottle...that's a 600% profit, (if we use $1.00 but I am sure it costs them much less). So, they are offering 20% off which brings the prices down to $4.80. Now...here is what people are missing...FSUSA states they will contribute 10% of the final cost, (i.e. $4.80), so they now "contribute" 48 cents. Oh yes...almost forgot..they will also "match" this 10 % of the final cost so that brings their total match to 96 cents for every $6.00 bottle sold.

Now...let's look at the numbers. The buyer pay's $4.80 after the 20% discount and FSUSA matches 96 cents. $4.80 -.96 = $3.84. Not bad....they are still making almost 400% profit and getting new orders that they wouldn't have otherwise and they haven't had to pay one cent. The customer has paid everything.

If you want to donate to the cause send that $6.00 to a legitimate charity organization. Your $6.00 will go further than the $2.16 made from this "sale."

I don't have a rat in this race, but I do question the math that Edwv30 is tossing around with little to back it up - just another attack on a supplier. To be accurate, and I doubt that is a real consideration here - 400% profit? What happened to the costs for wages, rent, insurance, state, local & federal taxes, payroll taxes, office supplies & equipment, disability insurance, unemployment insurance, SSI co-pays, utilities, phones, interest payments, advertising, CC processing fees, web hosting fees, etc. that have to be part of any cost analysis? And, where do the figures used by Edwv30 come from? So, if we are going to "look at the numbers", we should also look at the source of the numbers, which will tell us as much as the numbers do.

 

[daisyd]

This is truly upsetting. A company shouldn't use such a tragic situation to draw in revenue and that's exactly what's going on here. FSUSA is not donating 10% of anything nor are they "matching" anything....the customer is.

A 10ml bottle of juice costs less that $1.00 to make and FSUSA charges $6.00 per bottle...that's a 600% profit, (if we use $1.00 but I am sure it costs them much less). So, they are offering 20% off which brings the prices down to $4.80. Now...here is what people are missing...FSUSA states they will contribute 10% of the final cost, (i.e. $4.80), so they now "contribute" 48 cents. Oh yes...almost forgot..they will also "match" this 10 % of the final cost so that brings their total match to 96 cents for every $6.00 bottle sold.

Now...let's look at the numbers. The buyer pay's $4.80 after the 20% discount and FSUSA matches 96 cents. $4.80 -.96 = $3.84. Not bad....they are still making almost 400% profit and getting new orders that they wouldn't have otherwise and they haven't had to pay one cent. The customer has paid everything.

If you want to donate to the cause send that $6.00 to a legitimate charity organization. Your $6.00 will go further than the $2.16 made from this "sale."

Well, I guess they could have done what every other supplier is doing right now and have a St. Patrick's day sale and keep all of the profits for themselves.

 

[daisyd]

I don't have a rat in this race, but I do question the math that Edwv30 is tossing around with little to back it up - just another attack on a supplier. To be accurate, and I doubt that is a real consideration here - 400% profit? What happened to the costs for wages, rent, insurance, taxes, etc. that have to be part of any cost analysis? And, where do the figures used come from? So, if we are going to "look at the numbers", we should also look at the source of the numbers, which will tell us as much as the numbers do.

Exactly. People who don't run a small business have no business questioning thier financials.

 

[Zal42]

I just don't see an issue here. Now, if you're accusing them of some kind of fraud, that's different, but companies kicking a percentage toward disaster relief has a very long tradition and is a nice thing to do. I doubt that anyone sees purchasing from any of them as a substitute for actually donating.

I don't think that most companies are looking to profit off of the tragedy as such, but rather trying to adhere to a company ethic and give a little back. I know I did with my company, and certainly recognition and sales weren't a part of my motivation. If it improves business then so much the better (and who am I to begrudge anyone that?), but it's not the purpose.

 

[Nomoreash]

Yes, it is an age old marketing ploy to generate sales for the company. Do the math. Anyone wishing to donate would see more of their hard earned cash go directly to aid if they choose a charity who makes sure at least 90% of your donation goes to your chosen charity. It offends me to see companies profit in these types of situations no matter whether it's huge corporation or a small business.

However or to whomever you choose to donate is up to you, I just like to see the majority of my donation actually going to those who need the help...and Japan needs all the help we can contribute.

I very seriously doubt it'll generate few if any added sales. It might cause customer/s to make a purchase sooner than expected due to the cause but I doubt it would amount to much more than that. I have done the math as I'm sure others have basic math skills as well and know other dedicated methods of donation have a higher margin of the total getting there. I would not, nor do I think anyone else would use this method for a dedicated donation.

What contributions like these do is direct funds to a cause that would not otherwise get there. Ask the MDA, March Of Dimes, Red Cross, etc if this type of contribution from a reputable company is a ploy. Not everyone that makes a purchase would make a dedicated donation, in fact that would be a very small percentage. I think it's wonderful that a company I purchase item/s from anyway, whether it be groceries, gas, juice, etc., dedicate a percentage from the sale and if it's matched which some have said above...makes it even better.

 

[5cardstud]

I just don't see an issue here. Now, if you're accusing them of some kind of fraud, that's different, but companies kicking a percentage toward disaster relief has a very long tradition and is a nice thing to do. I doubt that anyone sees purchasing from any of them as a substitute for actually donating.

I don't think that most companies are looking to profit off of the tragedy as such, but rather trying to adhere to a company ethic and give a little back. I know I did with my company, and certainly recognition and sales weren't a part of my motivation. If it improves business then so much the better (and who am I to begrudge anyone that?), but it's not the purpose.

I don't think it's fraud but I think it would have been a little more honorable to not tie their sales to their charity. If they're going to be charitable that's fine but to use a disaster that huge and tie it to your sales seems a little bit like chasing ambulances.

 

[Bovinia]

I seem to have quite an unpopular opinion on this topic and for what it's worth, I would feel the same way no matter the vendor. My opinion remains the same and so will everyone else's. Let's focus on the main reason I started this and that is a whole bunch of people out there need help. I encourage everyone to give what they can, in any way they can!

 

[ZoSo15]

Hey, it works for me. I was gonna have to buy juice soon anyway and this is just a way to get it at a discount with some of the money going to a good cause. Everybody wins.

If I was actually going to donate directly I'd just text RedCross to 90999. May not be the best option, but it's the most convenient.

 

[Edwv30]

I don't have a rat in this race, but I do question the math that Edwv30 is tossing around with little to back it up - just another attack on a supplier. To be accurate, and I doubt that is a real consideration here - 400% profit? What happened to the costs for wages, rent, insurance, state, local & federal taxes, payroll taxes, office supplies & equipment, disability insurance, unemployment insurance, SSI co-pays, utilities, phones, interest payments, advertising, CC processing fees, web hosting fees, etc. that have to be part of any cost analysis? And, where do the figures used by Edwv30 come from? So, if we are going to "look at the numbers", we should also look at the source of the numbers, which will tell us as much as the numbers do.

Still stalking my posts and derailing threads Banjo? Interesting.

The point of my post is that no supplier should ride on the back of a tragedy to generate sales. No other supplier,(that I know of), has done this. I was also pointing out the small amount of the actual costs being donated. And, you're right...my numbers were off because I Didn't initially realize the 20% off doesn't go towards the donation. So, 96 cents gets donated from every $6.00 order.

I will not even address your "another attack on a supplier" comment because 99.9% of my reviews of suppliers have been positive.

I stand by my original statement....If someone wants to help Japan send the money to a reputable charity.

 

[banjo]

This is truly upsetting. A company shouldn't use such a tragic situation to draw in revenue and that's exactly what's going on here. FSUSA is not donating 10% of anything nor are they "matching" anything....the customer is.

Edwv30: I don't stalk your posts. They are generally not that interesting, but ones like the one you posted here do get my attention because of your misuse and distortion of facts to push a particular point of view, and which do not contribute in a meaningful way to the conversation. You could, of course, prove me wrong by showing all of us exactly how you arrived at your "400% profit" figure. And, while you are at it, explain your statement above. I would particularly be interested to know how you arrived at your keen 'insight" into the motivation of the supplier in question. And, you might want to also tell us how you arrived at the conclusion that the supplier was "not donating 10% of anything nor are they "matching" anything....the customer is."

 

[PastaMonster]

It makes me sad that the community is fighting over one of our suppliers raising money for people who need it.

 

[Edwv30]

There was no misuse or distortion of facts. Numbers like 20%being donated and 10% being donated with a 10% match were being thrown around. Those numbers were confusing at best. Breaking the information down with a real world example simplifies things....96 cents from every $6.00 order gets donated. I believe that's meaningful....and your responses?

I am not responding to your other questions as they have already been answered in prior posts on this thread.

 

[Edwv30]

It makes me sad that the community is fighting over one of our suppliers raising money for people who need it.

The issue isn't about a supplier raising money to help people... it's the way this particular supplier went about raising it.

 

[banjo]

There was no misuse or distortion of facts. Numbers like 20%being donated and 10% being donated with a 10% match were being thrown around. Those numbers were confusing at best. Breaking the information down with a real world example simplifies things....96 cents from every $6.00 order gets donated. I believe that's meaningful....and your responses?

I am not responding to your other questions as they have already been answered in prior posts on this thread.

You are not responding to my questions about your post, and they have not been answered elsewhere. If you are going to make statements, at least have the courtesy to back them up.

 

[banjo]

The issue isn't about a supplier raising money to help people... it's the way this particular supplier went about raising it.

So, your real problem is with the particular supplier - not the issue itself. Very telling!

 

[Levitas]

I really don't understand why the issue at all? Without stepping on anyone's feet, I am just curious as to why it's wrong to have a sale and donate a percentage of the sale to help those in need? Of course, if you want to help those in need, a direct donation is the best way to do this. But, if you're going to make a purchase anyways, why not give some of it to those who need it?

Once again, please take no offense to my asking, but what would you rather them do? Not donate anything at all? Is it because they're having a 20% sale along with a 10% donation? Should it be no sale and just a donation? I'm failing to see what's wrong with what FSUSA is doing? Is it because it seems unethical, as if they're using this merely for building profit?, if so, then so what? If it's only a ploy in the long run to get more sales but they actually donate the money then really it's a win-win. Japan needs every fraction of help they can take. I dunno, just my

 

[daisyd]

Precisely Levitas. None of the other suppliers are having a sale to donate money for Japan. They are all having St. Patty's Day sales, and keeping the profits instead (nothing wrong with that). I think maybe OP has some other issue, either personal or with FSUSA, or both. I doubt if OP marches into KFC when they do thier pink bucket promotion and tells them how terrible they are for benefiting from breast cancer.

 

[Zal42]

It makes me sad that the community is fighting over one of our suppliers raising money for people who need it.

It's not the community as a whole, just a couple of people who object. I'm still really unclear about what the objection actually is. As near as I can tell, the assertion is that it's wrong for a company to donate a percentage of sales to charitable causes. If that's the stance, then I (and, I suspect, most people) disagree.

 

[PastaMonster]

The issue isn't about a supplier raising money to help people... it's the way this particular supplier went about raising it.

No it's your unjustified interpretation of how they're raising the money. Making things up in your head and ignoring their statements to create a controversy, doesn't mean you're right. Shall I link to what they have to say, or will you just ignore it because it goes against your preconceived lies?

 

[banjo]

I just noticed that the "charity sale" FSUSA is having to support the people in Japan, was only posted on the FSUSA sub-forum, not on the suppliers forum, so they were obviously not trying to capitalize on the sale. I also noticed that Edwv30 flamed the sale on the FSUSA forum, which they deleted, so this is a personal matter with him. Here is what he posted there:

Quote Originally Posted by Edwv30 View Post
Folks...if you really want to help the cause donate directly to the organization(s). 100% of your donation will go towards it's intended purpose. This 10% up to $500.00 thing really bothers me and feels like others are taking advantage of a tragic situation. FSUSA should donate what they can and not base it on a tiny percentage of customer orders to line their own pockets. You either donate what you can because you care or you don't...no strings attached.