Does Movember take a cut from 'donations' for profit?

Imagine shaving every day without any of the benefits!

*hehe*

I couldn’t handle it myself. The thought of being facial-hair non-symmetrical makes me itchy for some reason.

Well, he is a kind of cool, arty person, so it sort of looks that way once you get used to it. But mostly you kind of meet him, and he can see the shock and horror reflected in your eyes, while you try and put on a mask to cover it up. Then you don’t know where to look, like if someone’s got a big pimple on their nose and you’re trying not to look at it, and the harder you try the worse it gets. But you do kind of get used to it after a while. For some reason it is just very confronting!

*chuckle*

That sounds pretty freaky. How does it look?

I know a guy who has half a beard on one side of his face, and the other side is completely clean shaven. It is very socially challenging until you get used to it.

I’ve seen dudes wandering around with full beards and no mos, surely they’re Amish. Don’t tell me they’re not raising barns with that getup.

Jim Jones said :

Do you reckon you could get some Amish dudes to grow moustaches? The beard without a mo thing always freaks me a bit.

are there any amish in australia?

Do you reckon you could get some Amish dudes to grow moustaches? The beard without a mo thing always freaks me a bit.

It’s just another OUTRAGE post, but this time the source of a heap of incorrect information was ‘a friend of mine’.

It’s like the forum-based version of Today Tonight.

… coming up next, the cat that can count!

peterh said :

considering that they provide funding to both the men’s prostate health and Beyond blue, I am going to go in it with a work team.

I did it last year, week 4 is annoying and itchy – definitely go the handlebar

this year we are paying a guy who has a mustache for 25 years to shave it off for 2k

So, where is the Canberra\RiotACT link in this article, or is asking for closer financial analysis of their business model a backhanded RiotACT way of boosting Movember’s media profile?

considering that they provide funding to both the men’s prostate health and Beyond blue, I am going to go in it with a work team.

never grown a mo, time to see what I will look like.

As a year-round moustache wearer I take the opportunity to let my skin breathe for a month in November. I have no desire for passers by in the street to suspect that I’ve been inspired to wear a ‘tache by the likes of Andrew G or whichever third division Rove-approved comedian is spruiking ‘Movember’ this year.

Charities have to follow a lot of regulations. You can’t just have 15 million sitting around in a tin in some volunteer’s house.

Charities that advertise ‘100% of donations’ go to the cause are getting someof their funding from elsewhere to cover running costs.

You could still ask the doctor to give you a go if you and he\she are keen, but a blood test should only take a second to gather a sample.

(Not that I know on this one, worrying about that is still decades away for me)

Neanderthalsis,
I was told a few months back that the rubber glove examinations are no longer required.

But as for those whinging about charities that cover costs – stop and think for a moment. If they ran at a loss every time, they’d stop after a year or two. So a charity uses 17% to cover the costs of their work? So what. Do you go to work for free every day? Grow up!

Just to break a common stereotype, prostate exam is done via blood test these days.

Most men are to chickensh1t of being digitally raped to get checked – so go get a blood test – make sure you’re all good…

I don’t know about not contributing to the real economy Frontrow, encouraging men to have their prostate checked keeps the latex glove and lube manufacturers in business. 😛

So movember have 7 people on the board, they are all unpaid for their directorships.

In 2007, the administration costs were $691,000.

That covers 8 full time staff, office rental, web hosting, prnting and postage, the present packs, legal and auditing costs ( including software ) etc.

No one is getting rich.

** From the Annual Report you can request via email

People performing activities that make no contribution to the real economy, all their funds arising from contributions made by real workers. They justify themselves by claiming their activity is beneficial to the community, a public service if you like. They have the temerity to demand payment for this rather than donating their time. Shameful. Surely such a thing could never happen in this fair city.

Thanks for posting the actual figures realityskin. Interesting stuff to check out – I’ve got a fair idea of how complex such things can be (through prior experience with organisations such as RSPCA and Red Cross), but events based charity is a slightly different beast.

I-filed said :

How much can the actual costs be for a one-month promo?

One month promo, but 12 month organisation that processes over 15 million dollars.

Knob.

I’d only support Movember if the only costs ‘skimmed’ were non-salary. How much can the actual costs be for a one-month promo? Can’t people donate their time? I’d like to know more detail about how much the founders are paying themselves for their bright idea. Whether they give some money to a cause isn’t the issue – they clearly do. The issue is whether they are profiting unreasonably.

yeah, and I don’t even drink the swill.

Brisbane Man of MOvember and they gave you VB?

Shame, shame, shame.

Today tonight or ACA (one of the banal infotainment shows for the commonfolk) did an article on MOvember when it first began saying they skimmed a fair whack off the top, the organisers were driving flash cars and giving themselves huge salaries (from memory an SS ute was classed as a luxury sports car).

MOvember came back on the other show with audited statements to show they only covered costs and the salaries of the staff were in line with market remuneration for a smallish charity.

MOvember do some great work in promoting mens physical and mental health, get on board and grow a mo…

Disclaimer: I was awarded Best Mo in Character (for my Odd Job impersonation) and Brisbane Man of MOvember in 2007; I won a years supply of VB for my troubles.

“100 per cent of funds raised should be going to the cause”

In an ideal world yes, but as realityskin pointed out there are a lot of things which cost real money, and the people who provide these services full time still need to live themselves.

Jonathon Reynolds said :

Was it the Red Cross that had outrageous overheads some years ago (has it changed)?

I don’t think it was the red cross, but yes there was a few “charities” a few years ago which where operating with higher 80% costs, there was even a couple of cases (in the sponsor a child type area) which the “charity” kept the money, and sent across photos and letters from children which had already died.

industry average is 17%, i think movember fell in at 10% , quite reasonable

Was it the Red Cross that had outrageous overheads some years ago (has it changed)?

er no

apart from

Administration Costs

* Audit and accounting costs
* Legal costs
* Salaries for the admin support staff which at its peak was 8 people
* Insurance
* Telecommunications and computer equipment
* Office rent and general office running costs
* Printing
* Postage

Fundraising Costs

* Salaries for staff processing and receipting donations which at its peak was 6 people
* Development of the systems and technology to process over half a million individual donations securely
* Bank fees
* Travel

and

Surplus Retained

At the end of the 2007 campaign, after all costs were paid and donations made to the PCFA and beyondblue a surplus of 1% existed. This surplus will be invested in the 2008 campaign.

it all goes to beyond blue and pcfa, they each got 6.5 MILLION last year.

http://au.movember.com/outcomes/content/Financial-Summary/