NOT TRUE: Als foundation admits that 73% of donations are not used for als research

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
People looking for a reason to be outraged and not donate to charities. Why am I not surprised their some of our resident lefties. The OP and others thought they found a good reason. The rest of us know how stupid that logic is based on this evidence.

Oh by the way, some of the richest people I know work for non profits. Just because the organization is for non profit doesn't mean they pay like crap. Actually, when you think about it, they don't have to compete with other business or meet and $/share figure so higher pay makes sense.
 

Kushina

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2010
1,598
2
81
32% -- public & professional education. What does that entail? I think this category could be reduced.
 

Jimzz

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2012
4,399
190
106
32% -- public & professional education. What does that entail? I think this category could be reduced.

That group is one of the biggest places a "charity" can scam. They send out pamphlets for example but it just happens one of the top people has a wife/Bil/etc... that owns a printing company. Instead of going with the best price they have them print them and pay them a very high rate.

Even the one for fund raising can include upgrading the electrical at a top persons house for a "fund raising" party. Or plane trips and high end resorts to "raise money" is also in that budget.

Not saying ALS charity is like that but its a very common thing many do.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
32% -- public & professional education. What does that entail? I think this category could be reduced.

You ask what is entails then think it can be cut back? That is an amazing conclusion you came to.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,637
30,913
146
Oh by the way, some of the richest people I know work for non profits. Just because the organization is for non profit doesn't mean they pay like crap. Actually, when you think about it, they don't have to compete with other business or meet and $/share figure so higher pay makes sense.

When you consider that the NFL shares the "non-profit" category, you can imagine a rather uneven skew on those numbers. :D
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
When you consider that the NFL shares the "non-profit" category, you can imagine a rather uneven skew on those numbers. :D

The NFL as a league doesn't make profit though. Every dollar they, the organization, makes from things like TV deals and such, gets divided equally among the teams (and it becomes the salary cap!). The teams themselves though, make tons of money from merch and such. The NFL isn't "making" billions in profit, as nearly all of that money is going out to the teams to pay their players.



Also, the idea that you need low overhead for a charity is stupid. It has been proven that charities with much larger marketing budgets actually give more money. Think about it. If a charity only has a 5% marketing budget brings in $1 million a year, $950,000 goes to the mission. If a charity with a 15% marketing budget brings in $3 million a year (if it were to scale linearly), $2.85 million goes to the mission. More advertising has shown to bring in more total money, thus making it better than having a low overhead.


And, using ALS as an example is incredibly stupid. In this year alone, ALS donations are likely be more than in the past decade combined. Even if only "27%" of that goes to research, it is still a hell of a lot more than in years past.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
The NFL as a league doesn't make profit though. Every dollar they, the organization, makes from things like TV deals and such, gets divided equally among the teams (and it becomes the salary cap!). The teams themselves though, make tons of money from merch and such. The NFL isn't "making" billions in profit, as nearly all of that money is going out to the teams to pay their players.

A non-profit isn't just an organization that doesn't make a profit, it's an organization set up under strict regulations governing donations and acceptable use of funding towards stated priorities that have been deemed beneficial to society (hence the reason charitable gifts are often tax-deductible). Don't think of it as "non-profit," think of it as "not for profit," as in the organization is legally prohibited from making a profit or using the funds raised for anything outside of their agreed purpose. If your only definition of non-profit was "they don't make profit," then General Motors spent several years as a non-profit leading up to their bankruptcy. The NFL being established as a non-profit is ludicrous from every angle and impossible to justify unless you think that having a professional football league is a net benefit to society that should have protection from taxation (a league that pays its commissioner $44 million annually mind you).
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,731
3,440
136
Its the same sick bastards who convince you to drink milk. They are behind this. You guys got ice bucket bitch slapped by the epic hand of thievery.
 
Dec 10, 2005
27,658
12,068
136
A non-profit isn't just an organization that doesn't make a profit, it's an organization set up under strict regulations governing donations and acceptable use of funding towards stated priorities that have been deemed beneficial to society (hence the reason charitable gifts are often tax-deductible). Don't think of it as "non-profit," think of it as "not for profit," as in the organization is legally prohibited from making a profit or using the funds raised for anything outside of their agreed purpose. If your only definition of non-profit was "they don't make profit," then General Motors spent several years as a non-profit leading up to their bankruptcy. The NFL being established as a non-profit is ludicrous from every angle and impossible to justify unless you think that having a professional football league is a net benefit to society that should have protection from taxation (a league that pays its commissioner $44 million annually mind you).

The NFL has a special exemption, courtesy of Congress. It's organized as a 501(c)(6):

Section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code provides for the exemption of business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards, boards of trade and professional football leagues, which are not organized for profit and no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.
http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Other-Non-Profits/Business-Leagues
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
Dec 10, 2005
27,658
12,068
136
I'm well aware of how the NFL came to be classified as a non-profit organization. It's ludicrous. It's also not even remotely representative of any other non-profit organization in this country, so it's hardly a good example to bring up if you're discussing anything except the NFL.

I agree it is ludicrous. Just as ludicrous as how they go extorting cities and states for taxpayer money so the billionaire owners don't have to foot the bill for new stadiums (and idiots line up to hand them piles and piles of cash for said stadium construction).
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
The NFL being established as a non-profit is ludicrous from every angle and impossible to justify unless you think that having a professional football league is a net benefit to society that should have protection from taxation (a league that pays its commissioner $44 million annually mind you).

Do you disagree with this?

I mean isn't it basically the modern equivalent of the Roman gladiators?

I would think the much bigger complaint with the NFL is not the over-seeing structure operates tax free, but that the taxpayer picks up the tab for the stadiums.
 

AyashiKaibutsu

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2004
9,306
4
81
OP are you trolling or just ignorant? The numbers look fine even if they are listed weird.

14% -- fundraising
7% -- administration
27% -- research
32% -- public & professional education
19% -- Patient & community services

14% for fundraising? understandable. they need people to donate.
7% for administration again understandable. they need talented people.
research? duh.
education? again duh
patient and community services? this makes sense too.

This. I don't think people would look twice at me decrying outlandish executive salaries... but they're not making millions while giving tiny fractions to their cause; their salaries are actually pretty much in line with most companies/charities.
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,513
580
126

Linux23

Lifer
Apr 9, 2000
11,370
741
126
TV time aint cheap, and with only .001% of the population as patients to get the word out, we need advertising!

no we need volunteers in local communities all over the country getting the word out. keyword volunteers.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
no we need volunteers in local communities all over the country getting the word out. keyword volunteers.

You mean like professional athletes and celebrities dumping buckets of ice water on their heads on instagram and youtube to spread awareness and increase our funding by a thousand fold? Already did that, it was the marketing department...

Why would we need professionals to be educated on things like how to properly diagnose and treat ALS? Let's just get a bunch of volunteers to do that!
 

Linux23

Lifer
Apr 9, 2000
11,370
741
126
You mean like professional athletes and celebrities dumping buckets of ice water on their heads on instagram and youtube to spread awareness and increase our funding by a thousand fold? Already did that, it was the marketing department...

Why would we need professionals to be educated on things like how to properly diagnose and treat ALS? Let's just get a bunch of volunteers to do that!

the dumb flows through your veins huh?