Charity Christmas Cards - through the post

[grannymem]

I did as Zazen suggested and returned them to the charity - but I did feel guilty!

I'm not sure what I'll do next year as I seem to receive then from the Association of Mouth and Foot painting artists (NOT Foot and Mouth!) every year. I guess I must have been caught out one year and sent a donation - and now I shall receive them for ever more!!! Aaaaggghhhhh....

[bubblewrap]

You know what I mean - although I confess that I thought of the Ministry of Agriculture!

Thats what DEFRA is:

Defra - Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

aka Department for the Eradication of Farm Reared Animals

[grannymem]

I'm feeling a bit better because after following Zazen's wikepedia link I discovered the Association of Mouth and Foot artists has been the subject of lots of criticism for unethical behaviour, including sending unsolicited cards. There's some doubts about whether it's a charity and where the profits go.

By the way, Bubblewrap, WATCH IT!! My OH worked for DEFRA and really isn't in to any eradication - not even of slugs and wasps ...

[Shadylane]

Yeah I read it too, I'd say they're deffo not a charity and if they won't even provide proof of how much the artists actually get...hmm, well says it all doesn't it. My in-laws get these cards, I didn't realise they got them unsolicited through the post. They think it's ace though bless them.

[organic]

No need to feel any more guilty when sending back the cards than when refusing to donate to a collector in a town centre or at your door.

If you want the cards, pay for them and use them.
If you don't want them, send them back or bin them.

I suppose I can understand some people feeling guilty, we can give the impression of being uncaring when we won't "help" a charity (regardless of supporting the British Legion, Lifeboats, local MRT, Age Concern and so on) but I wouldn't let it bother me.

It strikes me that returning them with a note asking not to be sent them again or following Rhona's donation and request to stop (assuming it's a bona fide charity) are probably the best choices to stop getting the cards.

[Two_Sheds]

They sound very worthy, even if you don't like their tactics (but is it any more underhand than WHSmith only giving a penny from a pack of cards to the actual charity?) here's their website, if anyone's interested: mfpa

[northepaul]

I agree the charity seems worthy, two sheds but its the tactics that are questionable...if you want to buy charity cards surely you want to choose which charity to give your hard earned money to?

[grannymem]

I think my problem with this association is that we are referring to it as a charity but it is not in fact one.
I'm pasting the following quote from the Wikepedia site (not always reliable I do accept!)

"criticism includes:

* That AMFPA effectively poses as a charity organization although it is purely a commercial venture, in effect conning charitable people out of money.
* That only a fraction of the surplus is paid out to the handicapped artists, since only 94 (2008) of them are fully employed by the company, which in turn allegedly turns a world wide profit in the hundreds of millions US$. [4][5][6]The precise world wide profit is confidential.
* That high salaries, favourable loans and property lease contracts are given to AMFPAs long-time legal adviser Herbert Batliner, his friends and family and other lawyers employed at the AMFPA. Recently retired Batliner is himself a controversy, being previously accused of money laundering for Colombian drug barons and for his alleged involvement in the 1999 German CDU contribution scandal.
* That funds are being diverted to unknown parties via a network of "mailbox" companies.
* The use of high pressure sales tactics by sending its main sales item, Christmas card packages to consumers via unsolicited direct mail with an option to pay afterwards
* The secrecy maintained by the company.

No claims have been made suggesting any illegal activity by AMFPA. The criticism has been centered on what is perceived as bad ethics.

The AMFPA has in some news reports and court hearings responded to some of the claims, stating that AMFPA has never intentionally presented itself as a charitable organization, but instead has explicitly pointed its commercial nature out to consumers. AMFPA has also stated that 80% of the world wide profits are distributed among the artist. AMFPA declined to present financial records to support this claim"

[Two_Sheds]

.if you want to buy charity cards surely you want to choose which charity to give your hard earned money to?

Of course you do, and you do have a choice: there is no obligation to buy.

To be devil's avocado for a moment: if you'd never heard of Foot Mouth Artists, and they can't get Smiths to stock their cards, how could you ever donate to them?

I hate unsolicited mail myself, but Smiths taking most of the charity cards money for their own profits is actually more offensive to me (read the back of the pack folks)

[mendacious dog]

Hmmmmm. Sounds slightly suspicious to me.

On a slightly similar topic, my kids’ school has tried out a new trick on us this year. They have apparently (as part of an art lesson) got each child to design their own personal Christmas card, which they have subsequently got printed out by a professional into the traditional packets of 12. They are showing each and every child’s designs in the main hall on the parent’s open day next week, with of course the option for the mums’n’dads to purchase packs of their offspring’s cards on the day. The school makes a profit on each pack sold.

Although it has been stressed that the purchase is completely optional, I cant imagine many parents will walk round the hall, make appreciative sounds in front of their kids about their artwork, and then not actually buy any.

For all that it is a wonderful school, they certainly know how to back you into a corner!

Woof

[Flummery]

I would never feel guilty about using or throwing away something I had been sent unsolicited. It's blackmail. I would not send them back and pay postage either. They want to tug your heartstrings. Some of us haven't got any!

I send charity gifts to those family members who don't really need much. I'm not totally heartless, but I WON'T be manipulated.

[Eco-Chic]

I no longer feel blackmailed into supporting charities who send me unsolicited pens, ribbons, cards etc. I don't feel bad about it because they operate like businesses and this direct mail approach obviously works for them or they would desist.

[dexterdoglancashire]

We've just received cards from the foot and mouth charity (wrong name, I'm sure, but you know what I mean!)

Glad it's not just me then. Interesting to read everyones information about this organisation.

[Hilary B]

I really don't care what the organisation is, if they resort to emotional blackmail they lose my support. These 'survey' things about 'did you know that we do......?' ending with 'how much will you give us to help with this?' annoy me sufficiently that they get binned (I usually keep the pen, if it is any good). Charity cards sent unsolicited come on the same page.
If a charity I donate to sends them, they will get a polite reply (buy or send back saying "no thanks", depending whether I like the cards). Otherwise, they get binned.
On the other hand, if I am giving to a charity and they phone up, or send letters asking for the DD to be increased, they are risking that I cancel it instead........ (I say no once, warn that I am not impressed once, third time at too short an interval, I stop paying)