(untitled). . klil @F' So you can pay , 445, 883 on a commercial for starving kids, but you can' t feed them? cad etas : I WONDER THIS ALL THE EDD DAMN TIME. oh
Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
Buy your amazon goods through FJ's link.
Just click this link and search for any product you want. FJ gets a commission on everything you buy.

(untitled)

klil @F'
So you can pay , 445, 883 on a
commercial for starving kids, but you
can' t feed them?
cad etas :
I WONDER THIS ALL THE EDD DAMN TIME.
oh ****
...

Comments(107):

[ 107 comments ]

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#2 - anonymous (06/12/2014) [+] (8 replies)
Anyone that donates to any charity without researching them is a fool. I don't give to a charity unless 80% of income goes directly to the cause.
#8 - nebuelaeus (06/13/2014) [+] (10 replies)
If you go on to TED there is a video about this. Here is how it works.   
   
Lets say a charity spends 70% of donations on towards its goal and the rest goes to infrastructure to keep the charity running. With this model, if they receive 1,000,000 in donations in a year and 700,000 goes to help people.   
   
But, now lets say that 60 of that 70% goes towards marketing the charity and 10% goes towards its goal. With this model the charity receives 10,000,000 in donations in a year. 1,000,000 of that goes towards their goal.   
   
They may be giving a smaller percentage of the donation to people, but because of the advertising, more money is given to people in need.   
   
It may be a smaller piece of the pie, but the pie is much, much bigger.
If you go on to TED there is a video about this. Here is how it works.

Lets say a charity spends 70% of donations on towards its goal and the rest goes to infrastructure to keep the charity running. With this model, if they receive 1,000,000 in donations in a year and 700,000 goes to help people.

But, now lets say that 60 of that 70% goes towards marketing the charity and 10% goes towards its goal. With this model the charity receives 10,000,000 in donations in a year. 1,000,000 of that goes towards their goal.

They may be giving a smaller percentage of the donation to people, but because of the advertising, more money is given to people in need.

It may be a smaller piece of the pie, but the pie is much, much bigger.
#12 - dangerbearr (06/13/2014) [+] (3 replies)
People will donate over $1,000,000 to Rooster Teeth for their movie, but not to starving kids.   
   
   
I'm beyond fine with this.
People will donate over $1,000,000 to Rooster Teeth for their movie, but not to starving kids.


I'm beyond fine with this.
#16 - anonymous (06/13/2014) [+] (8 replies)
you think the money you send them actualy goes to those kids XD **** NO! they poket it. what are you going to do about it? nothing becouse the rich own you xP
User avatar #1 - elyiia (06/12/2014) [+] (2 replies)
Not that I'm defending the commercial costs or anything, but it's far more complicated than just spending money on them. You can't simply throw money, or food, at the problem. You have to build up infrastructure to the point where they can survive without outside exists as well as educate them.

The major problem is that in the poorest areas, often the governments are the most corrupt, taking support money or blocking efforts.
#65 - homohominilupusest ONLINE (06/13/2014) [+] (15 replies)
have a closer look on just a couple of thieves
#70 to #66 - anonymous (06/13/2014) [-]
there are actual treatments out there that work. unfortunately America is run by the almighty dollar and radiation and chemo are more profitable than ctually helping someone to become cancerfree.
>there clinics outside of the US that have a proven track record of defeating cancer
>hoxsey clinic in mexico is one of them
#4 - daddycool (06/13/2014) [-]
You gotta spend money to make money. How much do you figure those advertisements bring in? Spoiler alert! It's more than what they spend.
#34 - grimmwaters ONLINE (06/13/2014) [-]
#38 - anonymous (06/13/2014) [+] (3 replies)
Buying food - 6 million
Realize you need to ship it first - lots of food, so you sell some and spend 1 mil on shipping, 5 mil food
Realize that it is actually more expensive than normal shipping, since people in busy ports aren't starving. People are starving where there are no ports. Shipping 1,5mil, food 4,5 mil
Get there, realize you actually need to pay for unloading and transporting of food somewhere + imports taxes, sell off more food. 4 mil on food remaining.
Realize you have options either to transport food to distant places or organize gathering in a single place,.
3.8 mil on food, 0.2 organisation.
Realize you cannot give away fast rotting food, since that would feed people only for 1 day, so you instead buy dry foods - crops, dry soups, rice etc. Except for bags of rice, everything else is above average price. 3.5 mil remaining on food.

Basically you would loose half the investment ONLY to create ONE place of food distrib. ONCE. That is crazy.
#39 to #38 - anonymous (06/13/2014) [-]
Hence they rather spend a relatively small sum for ads that aim for universal acceptance of the problem so everyone throws something in a big pot and we create a long-lasting system.

I cannot comprehend how again and again people are forgetting the - give poorman a fish, you feed huim a day etc.
Why u so retarded people?
#80 - GEARBOY (06/13/2014) [+] (1 reply)
It's for the greater good



or something..
User avatar #29 - chrisspice (06/13/2014) [+] (6 replies)
As I work in TV let me enlighten you folks on (most of) those commercials.

Since they are for charity they run for free, they do not get charged by the stations in order to run the commercials. I'm sure some do pay for specific commercial spots but most don't and I've never seen it happen at our station.

But if the station doesn't make money why do they run them? Well it's cause the good old FCC used to require stations to run X minutes of PSA's every day. They have become more lax in this area though but most stations will follow the NAB suggested standards.
User avatar #30 to #29 - epicpoke (06/13/2014) [-]
It still costs money to hire narration, to get photos, lighting, filming, etc.
User avatar #23 - royrogersmcfreely (06/13/2014) [+] (3 replies)
We should all get together with money saved up and get a **** ton of food and drinks and **** and go to africa or somthing. Fj would be famous for doing awesome things.
User avatar #5 - efightsfire (06/13/2014) [-]
Takes money to make money, kids.
User avatar #83 - hashtronaut (06/13/2014) [-]
Sam Kinison   World Hunger
#64 - kingpongthedon (06/13/2014) [-]
You know what I hear is a great way to get people to give you money? Sitting on your ass and hoping people will magically find out about your cause and take the initiative to find out exactly where you live so they can drop it off in person because you thought paying for frivolities such as a website or 30-second commercial would detract from the cause.

Seriously y'all, charity is a product just like any other. If you want somebody to purchase your product in today's society, you have to advertise. You can't expect to bring in money if nobody knows you exist.
User avatar #61 - smokingman ONLINE (06/13/2014) [+] (1 reply)
You don't get what advertising is about, do you?
#55 - unbelievable ONLINE (06/13/2014) [-]
**unbelievable rolled image** what I feed instead of starving kids
#54 - MasterManiac (06/13/2014) [-]
The donkey ads are even worse.   
   
"This donkey is used to carry goods between villages and hasn't received a manicure in over a week. Donate £10 a month to put this donkey in a field where it can do nothing but eat grass for the remainder of its existence."
The donkey ads are even worse.

"This donkey is used to carry goods between villages and hasn't received a manicure in over a week. Donate £10 a month to put this donkey in a field where it can do nothing but eat grass for the remainder of its existence."
User avatar #47 - chrisel (06/13/2014) [-]
because the goal of an ad is that they hope that people that see that ad will help or donate and that at the end would make more then it costs so you can help the starving people better.
#13 - guyperplex (06/13/2014) [+] (2 replies)
**guyperplex rolled image** I aint trust'n no ******
User avatar #15 to #13 - noobwilleat (06/13/2014) [-]
I wouldnt trust a ****** either.
[ 107 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)