NFL breast cancer research merchandise

[PorkChop]

Only 8.01% of money spent on pink NFL merchandise is actually going towards cancer research. That's shit.

http://www.businessinsider.com/small-am ... ch-2013-10

[Messiah]

The NFL isn't a charity. The point is to raise awareness for the charity. The fact they donate anything at all is impressive unless you are advocating for them to not pay the employees and for the program who are responsible for getting the job accomplished (keep in mind the NFL is a non-profit organization, so it isn't as if they are making a profit from this and a business is certainly not going to look to lose more money than they earn).

[The Legend]

The NFL isn't a charity. The point is to raise awareness for the charity. The fact they donate anything at all is impressive unless you are advocating for them to not pay the employees and for the program who are responsible for getting the job accomplished (keep in mind the NFL is a non-profit organization, so it isn't as if they are making a profit from this and a business is certainly not going to look to lose more money than they earn).

First of all, for a company/industry that makes 9 billion dollars a year to claim they are non-profit is truly ridiculous and laughable as a notion. They just happened to drive their Brinks truck through one of the gigantic loopholes in our tax code. Second of all, they could donate all of the proceeds (the money that is made after paying employees) to breast cancer research just for those items and still make a gigantic amount of money on all of the other products they sell. And finally, they should donate a far large sum of the proceeds because they knowingly mislead customers to buying these things while thinking they are making a difference for the charity and they are not. It's false advertising and simply lying.

[Messiah]

Second of all, they could donate all of the proceeds (the money that is made after paying employees) to breast cancer research

That is exactly what they do.

They take their cut for agreeing to advertise it, which is only 25% and 90% of that 25% goes to ACS. If you read this article, it explains what is going on well.

http://www.businessinsider.com/small-am ... ch-2013-10

In other words, for every $100 in pink merchandise sold, $12.50 goes to the NFL. Of that, $11.25 goes to the American Cancer Society (ACS) and the NFL keeps the rest. The remaining money is then divided up by the company that makes the merchandise (37.5%) and the company that sells the merchandise (50.0%), which is often the NFL and the individual teams.

The NFL takes only 1.25% of it all and the money they do make is helped to cover the costs.

People have for the longest always misunderstood stuff like this. No, they are not misleading anyone. Anyone who thinks every dime they send to a place actually goes to what you are trying to help or fight does not quite understand. Applies to every organization that raises money for something.

This is a business. The simple fact is the NFL is not going to spend their own money to pay for something unrelated to them, hence why they are given a cut unless you are advocating for people who are involved in helping to not be paid, which is fair if you believe that, but I 100% guarantee you that you wouldn't think the same thing if you were in that position. You might not like that but it is the truth. It comes down to this. Would you rather the NFL do nothing at all to raise awareness? Again, this isn't restricted to the NFL. It is the case always. The American Cancer Society who have a lot more of a reason to research for cancer only donates around 71% to actual cancer research, meaning they take around 29% of the cut compared to the NFL's 25%.

The charity is benefiting from this a lot more than the NFL is. They don't have to do anything. People painting the NFL out to be villains here are dead wrong.

[The Legend]

^^^ Did you read the excerpt yourself? Focus on the end, where 50% of the sale goes to the company selling the merchandise which is the NFL and its teams. A chunk of that 50% should be going to cancer research as well.

[Messiah]

^^^ Did you read the excerpt yourself? Focus on the end, where 50% of the sale goes to the company selling the merchandise which is the NFL and its teams. A chunk of that 50% should be going to cancer research as well.

Of course I read it and knew you would bring it up.

Teams and everyone involved would have to agree to that - help manufacture and sell merchandise without actually making enough in return. This is where the dilemma comes in and I pointed it out. This is a business. You or anyone else may not like it but the cold hard truth is while cancer is unfortunate, a business is not going to spend their own money to advertise it and help grow awareness if they are not reaping the full benefits themselves. For them to spend a considerable amount more funding it than they actually do bringing back cash. Whether they are rich or not is irrelevant. If you were a billionaire, would you take considerably less than what is needed to pay for the cost of advertising and raising awareness for a charity if they were to ask you to?

This is not the case with only the NFL. It is the case all the time. It is common sense that paying the NFL $100 isn't going to lead to all $100 being put into research. It isn't the case when sending money to ACS, it isn't the case when sending money to SGK, or any organization. Everyone ALWAYS takes a cut and usually a big one.

I ask the question again. Would you rather the NFL be doing nothing at all to raise awareness? Because that is about the only other alternative. Not all money is going to research, but without the NFL, no money would be going to the research.

But maybe I am explaining all this wrong. Somebody put out this link that explains it well.

http://www.npr.org/2013/07/05/181693499 ... ut-charity

Listen to the podcast.