I cannot stand the local charity groups trying to sign me up for a recurring subscription donation. I’d happily give them 50 bucks one-off, but I can’t, so they get nothing.
They don’t do this maliciously though or to increase shareholder value like Disney. Charities are genuinely exhausted with fluctuating monthly income dependent on what’s in the current news cycle. They can’t plan how many help requests they can accept this month if they don’t know how much they get next month.
I’m sure they’d be happy with a one-off donation of any size. I don’t think it’s the charities that are the main problem when it comes to subscriptions…
No. The charity muggers in my country come around to my door, or meet me on the street, and they will not take a one-off donation. They want you to go for a 12 month (and self-renewing) subscription of direct debit from my bank account or credit card that requires time and effort on my part to alter or cancel.
And while they are not the main problem, they are a symptom of the subscription epidemic. When I cannot simply give them 50 bucks because they do not have the means (or willingness) to process it, that is a definite sign that subscriptions have gone too far.
Yes, because these charities want money to pay their employees. You can’t hire someone with a one-time donation. They need reliable, recurring revenue to pay employees.
A proper charity, such as a food bank, soup kitchen, women’s shelter, animal rescue, is very happy to get one-off donations because they are spending the money on supplies and direct action, not on growing headcount.
That is very simplistic. There are a lot of other recurring costs that charities have - even the ones you mentioned have to pay rent at least. A women’s shelter probably needs professional employees. Some charities have to operate planes and boats and those are very expensive. The most important thing is - recurring contributions help them plan long term and realistically gauge if they can take on more projects.
Also, calling a monthly donation a “subscription” is stupid. You didn’t sign a contract - you can just stop giving the money whenever you want.
Generally those recurring costs are covered by large donors or governments. They may even simply be given a space to use without having to pay anything for it, and by relying mostly on volunteers they can keep overhead extremely low so that donations go straight to purchasing supplies or paying for contract work (vet surgeries, for example). Some of them are even run out of a person’s house, as I’ve seen with a rabbit rescue.
A woman’s shelter may need a few staff but they definitely do not need full time professionals such as doctors, nurses, or counsellors. Those services can be provided via donations or other charities. While I’ve never been to a women’s shelter (I’m not a woman) I have benefited from charity-provided counselling at times when I could not afford to pay for it out of pocket.
I cannot stand the local charity groups trying to sign me up for a recurring subscription donation. I’d happily give them 50 bucks one-off, but I can’t, so they get nothing.
They don’t do this maliciously though or to increase shareholder value like Disney. Charities are genuinely exhausted with fluctuating monthly income dependent on what’s in the current news cycle. They can’t plan how many help requests they can accept this month if they don’t know how much they get next month.
I’m sure they’d be happy with a one-off donation of any size. I don’t think it’s the charities that are the main problem when it comes to subscriptions…
No. The charity muggers in my country come around to my door, or meet me on the street, and they will not take a one-off donation. They want you to go for a 12 month (and self-renewing) subscription of direct debit from my bank account or credit card that requires time and effort on my part to alter or cancel.
And while they are not the main problem, they are a symptom of the subscription epidemic. When I cannot simply give them 50 bucks because they do not have the means (or willingness) to process it, that is a definite sign that subscriptions have gone too far.
Yes, because these charities want money to pay their employees. You can’t hire someone with a one-time donation. They need reliable, recurring revenue to pay employees.
A proper charity, such as a food bank, soup kitchen, women’s shelter, animal rescue, is very happy to get one-off donations because they are spending the money on supplies and direct action, not on growing headcount.
That is very simplistic. There are a lot of other recurring costs that charities have - even the ones you mentioned have to pay rent at least. A women’s shelter probably needs professional employees. Some charities have to operate planes and boats and those are very expensive. The most important thing is - recurring contributions help them plan long term and realistically gauge if they can take on more projects.
Also, calling a monthly donation a “subscription” is stupid. You didn’t sign a contract - you can just stop giving the money whenever you want.
Generally those recurring costs are covered by large donors or governments. They may even simply be given a space to use without having to pay anything for it, and by relying mostly on volunteers they can keep overhead extremely low so that donations go straight to purchasing supplies or paying for contract work (vet surgeries, for example). Some of them are even run out of a person’s house, as I’ve seen with a rabbit rescue.
A woman’s shelter may need a few staff but they definitely do not need full time professionals such as doctors, nurses, or counsellors. Those services can be provided via donations or other charities. While I’ve never been to a women’s shelter (I’m not a woman) I have benefited from charity-provided counselling at times when I could not afford to pay for it out of pocket.