Priorities!

Chaos · 12-11-2008, 01:14 PM

Why does the NSPCC require £2 a month too save a human life, but its £4 a month for Dolphin Aid ?

Something not right there....

12-11-2008, 02:01 PM

Nah, I think it's because human stuff gets grants from the Government and stuff, but Dolphins and Tigers don't get millions of pounds spent on them, so we have to donate more.

Queen Crabbit · 12-11-2008, 02:03 PM

Say there's 100 people that watch both ads.

Say 10 of them can afford £4 a month, but £40 of them can afford £2 a month... Which charity would end up getting more money?

Plus, why bother with either of them when you can sponsor RYL for as little as £10/year or £1 a month???

SnowBerrySnuffles · 12-11-2008, 02:26 PM

Also, the NSPCC is much more well known (I think), and will have a lot more sponsors, so they can ask for smaller amounts but the smaller charity is asking for a larger amount because they need it.

I dunno.. I had a clear point in my head... but I can't seem to write it down right. So sorry if that doesn't make sense.

12-11-2008, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Queen Crabbit

£40 of them

Hehe, I didn't know there could be £40 of people ;]

Accidentally Abstract · 12-11-2008, 03:56 PM

I sponsor the NSPCC £3 a month.
I might need to stop at some point though, being that I can't afford food.. >.<

Potatos · 12-11-2008, 03:59 PM

animals are better than people =]

Caru y Nos · 13-11-2008, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Potatos

animals are better than people =]

Damn, you beat me to it! :-P

BlindSpot. · 13-11-2008, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnowBerrySnuffles

Also, the NSPCC is much more well known (I think), and will have a lot more sponsors, so they can ask for smaller amounts but the smaller charity is asking for a larger amount because they need it.

I dunno.. I had a clear point in my head... but I can't seem to write it down right. So sorry if that doesn't make sense.

That's what i was thinking.

Ali xox

13-11-2008, 03:56 PM

Also, us hoomins already have shelters and such built for us, whereas animals don't, therefore it would cost more.

(Side note, that tiger advert is really starting to annoy me, it's been in every advert break and tis annoying me now)

Buttons. · 13-11-2008, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Plus, why bother with either of them when you can sponsor RYL for as little as £10/year or £1 a month???

Subtle hint there Chels ;-P

BeautyFiend · 13-11-2008, 04:09 PM

Shameless plug =p

Queen Crabbit · 13-11-2008, 04:15 PM

Did you know there are 10 times more animal shelters in the UK than there are homeless ones, Tiff?

Side note, but I think that's disgusting.

uffie. · 13-11-2008, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Queen Crabbit

Say there's 100 people that watch both ads.

Say 10 of them can afford £4 a month, but £40 of them can afford £2 a month... Which charity would end up getting more money?

but I don't think that a person would give money solely based on how much it was, I think they would consider what that charity did more.