Probably not ideal to compare this with the National Lottery, as economies of scale are bound to be a factor. But the difference is startling-and not in the way this article suggests.
It is not the charitable percentage that is so different-the Lottery does not give much more than 20% of its income to the Charitable causes. The difference is elsewhere.
The Lottery is up-front about its costs. It takes about 1% as profit, about 3% to the Retailers, about 12% to the Government as Lottery Duty, and about 55% as prizes. I presume the remaining 7% or so goes to its operating costs (10% if you add the retailers).
Whereas the RSPCA charity lottery appears to have operating costs of 74%, and pays out just 5.77% as prizes-little over one tenth of the percentage pay out of the Lottery.
A lot of major charities outsource their lottery management to StarVale, a for-profit company, that is part of the Australian Jumbo Interactive Group (it was sold to them last year), which I believe is another for-profit Company.
Yet the various charities seem to fail to mention this.
Just seems wrong to me that you can big up the charitable causes, and fail to mention that most of the money goes nowhere near the Charity sector.
"Whereas the RSPCA charity lottery appears to have operating costs of 74%, and pays out just 5.77% as prizes-little over one tenth of the percentage pay out of the Lottery".
So just a shilling in the £ goes in the prize pool? That's scandalous.
"Whereas the RSPCA charity lottery appears to have operating costs of 74%, and pays out just 5.77% as prizes-little over one tenth of the percentage pay out of the Lottery".
So just a shilling in the £ goes in the prize pool? That's scandalous.
Try MacMillan. It's just over 3%. At least 60% of the money goes to MacMillan. But the rest appears not to.
its just money laundering , so the rich can circle their money around without the burden of tax i thought , lol i suppose that's just me
No mate it isn't just you. Think of the National motorcycle Museum in Birmingham. It's a huge place which makes heaps of money hosting conferences, receptions and the like. However, it's charitable status means they pay next to nothing in rates, enjoy favourable tax advantages and as a heritage site even get money from the lottery.
I imagine nearly everybody can think of a similar example.
In another example.
This is one reason why when I undertake fundraising challenges or events I personally pay all entry / admin costs. That way I can ensure that all monies raised go to the cause and not some middle mans grubby pocket.
I expect all charities to have costs and expenses and would be alarmed if they didn't but I always ask upfront exactly how much of my money goes to where.
Yes the homeless guy I give a tenner to might run straight around to Bargain Booze with it the minute my backs turned but I'd rather he spent it how he wants than have some of it go to finance another administrators company beemer.
Comments
It is not the charitable percentage that is so different-the Lottery does not give much more than 20% of its income to the Charitable causes. The difference is elsewhere.
The Lottery is up-front about its costs. It takes about 1% as profit, about 3% to the Retailers, about 12% to the Government as Lottery Duty, and about 55% as prizes. I presume the remaining 7% or so goes to its operating costs (10% if you add the retailers).
Whereas the RSPCA charity lottery appears to have operating costs of 74%, and pays out just 5.77% as prizes-little over one tenth of the percentage pay out of the Lottery.
Poor.
Yet the various charities seem to fail to mention this.
Just seems wrong to me that you can big up the charitable causes, and fail to mention that most of the money goes nowhere near the Charity sector.
@Essexphil
"Whereas the RSPCA charity lottery appears to have operating costs of 74%, and pays out just 5.77% as prizes-little over one tenth of the percentage pay out of the Lottery".
So just a shilling in the £ goes in the prize pool? That's scandalous.
https://lottery.macmillan.org.uk/draw/society-lotteries
I imagine nearly everybody can think of a similar example.
In another example.
This is one reason why when I undertake fundraising challenges or events I personally pay all entry / admin costs. That way I can ensure that all monies raised go to the cause and not some middle mans grubby pocket.
I expect all charities to have costs and expenses and would be alarmed if they didn't but I always ask upfront exactly how much of my money goes to where.
Yes the homeless guy I give a tenner to might run straight around to Bargain Booze with it the minute my backs turned but I'd rather he spent it how he wants than have some of it go to finance another administrators company beemer.