Quote:
Originally Posted by Blarg
This is the article I read on this:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...tion-1.4885145
CBC quite literally asked for a comment before printing, and all the teams refused/backed out, instead publishing a joint statement that doesn’t say squat.
I would say that CBC did their due diligence. |
I have to say that this article you link to specifically about the Flames - is much better than the initial article that was linked
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...rity-1.4884705
So thanks for sharing that one.
Quote:
|
Charity Intelligence doesn't include these proceeds because it said most people don't consider buying a 50/50 ticket as a donation, and they realize only half of it will end up going to a cause.
|
And there is the problem with that whole analysis.
They are removing the 50/50 proceeds from the donation equation which is unfair - especially for the Flames since it makes up 65% of their revenue as the report stated. You can't remove the way that they generate money easily with little cost, then only look at the one event they hosted that was expensive, and then say "Look at how inefficient they are".
The argument they used stated that they didn't include 50/50 because most people don't associate that with being a donation - which is kind of B/S the Flames are very open and transparent about their 50/50 draws and who exactly is supporting and getting the donation from that game.
Also you could make the same argument for the golf event and poker tournament. Nobody goes to that event expecting that their entry fee is 100% for charity. It is being spent because that person wants a day of golf, to go be able to chat with Flames and Alumni, and then get a dinner out of it.
Props to Colleen Underwood though - her article had way more context and detail included than the initial piece written by the CBC Manitoba contributors.