Waterstones - the end in sight?

[french frank]

ams - I agree she rants a bit - but I don't think you wd be 'thrilled' by the competition. Unlike oxfam, you wd have to pay yr staff, pay fr yr stock, pay 100% rates - could you really compete?

I think that the idea of 'competition' in s/h books is a bit like with antiques: shops tend to gather together because they all have a similar clientele but different stock. You've either got what people want or you haven't and unless you're just dealing in people's once-read cast-off best-sellers, within a bit of a margin price doesn't matter. We have a small 'commercial' s/h bookseller and an Amnesty (not a charity) bookshop within a stone's throw of each other. I would guess Amnesty is cheaper than Oxfam but not as cheap as the free box outside their competitor. I often help myself and, if suitable, I eventually take it down to Amnesty ...

As far as Amazon is concerned, I almost always buy from the marketplace which is where secondhand dealers should all be, especially for o/p's.

[Mandryka]

why on earth do you object to Oxfam paying its management ?

There have been recent stories about charity managers becoming 'tycoons', with the huge dividend they are being paid.

[Don Basilio]

I don't see why charities shouldn't employ fundraisers, although I can imagine it's a slippery slope. Is it unethical to receive a salary for fundraising in the same way as receiving royalties for broadcasts of church services? (No, in principle, I'd say.)

[MrGongGong]

There have been recent stories about charity managers becoming 'tycoons', with the huge dividend they are being paid.

do you have a link to this ? as I haven't heard that at all

[vinteuil]

I
. We have a small 'commercial' s/h bookseller and an Amnesty (not a charity) bookshop within a stone's throw of each other. .

It seems that oxfam have made a name for themselves in ruthlessness in a way that others (cf Amnesty) haven't. Oxfam are seen as the Tesco killer-whales here...

I have to confess that I now have so many books that I don't buy much; when I do it tends to be amazon (often amazon marketplace); abebooks; amnesty bkshop (there's one handy for me in Hammersmith) and other independent secondhand shops...

[amateur51]

+ also Oxfam builds on the feelgood factor - doesn't tell its donors just how much the managerial stratum is being paid.

C'mion frances, let's be having some detail here. And make the distinction between Oxfam the charity and Oxfam trading as Oxfam bookshops please. You can't go around trashing a valued brand like Oxfam & expect not to be challenged but I hope that you don't feel that you're being 'heavily criticised' this time

[amateur51]

ams - I agree she rants a bit - but I don't think you wd be 'thrilled' by the competition. Unlike oxfam, you wd have to pay yr staff, pay fr yr stock, pay 100% rates - could you really compete?

I'd be thrilled because it would generate local interest in buying books at no expense to me. Once people got to realise that I offer my stock at modest mark-ups compared to Oxfam's one-expensive-size-fitsall pricing stratgey, my footfall would increase and who knows I might attract some new customers. Plus I'd be employing knowledgeable staff (me!) with social skills and who are prepared to do some work on wants-lists etc, ( "Oh Mr Hartley , it's Amateur Bookshop here, you were looking for a copy of your book on fly-fishing? Well we're in luck ..." etc, I'd soon be quids in. Then there's the huge mark up on greetings cards and wrapping paper etc etc. I'd win out because I'm running a business not ... a charity shop

[amateur51]

There have been recent stories about charity managers becoming 'tycoons', with the huge dividend they are being paid.

It would be nice to hear more about these stories, a few facts perhaps?

[Frances_iom]

C'mion frances, let's be having some detail here. And make the distinction between Oxfam the charity and Oxfam trading as Oxfam bookshops please. You can't go around trashing a valued brand like Oxfam & expect not to be challenged but I hope that you don't feel that you're being 'heavily criticised' this time

can't pull out bookshops from other accounts but 2009 1874 FTE - total UK payroll £55M - it's a commercial coporation with an increasing number of high payers (they only number those paid above £60,000 which numbers seem to have increased by over 10% in last year)
the staff in the shops work for peanuts, the stock is given + the shops pay only a fraction of the rates than any commericial shop would
Whether the amount collected is justified by the 'good' it does I'm not sure - there are many better qualified who heavily criticise the operations of these NGO's - my own opinion is that a fairer trade policy would be more effective and that many NGO's are the support structure allowing truely corrupt regimes to stay in power.

[amateur51]

can't pull out bookshops from other accounts but 2009 1874 FTE - total UK payroll £55M - it's a commercial coporation with an increasing number of high payers (they only number those paid above £60,000 which numbers seem to have increased by over 10% in last year)
the staff in the shops work for peanuts, the stock is given + the shops pay only a fraction of the rates than any commericial shop would
Whether the amount collected is justified by the 'good' it does I'm not sure - there are many better qualified who heavily criticise the operations of these NGO's - my own opinion is that a fairer trade policy would be more effective and that many NGO's are the support structure allowing truely corrupt regimes to stay in power.

Thanks for this frances.

£55m is one hell of a lot of money to raise so the idea of running the shops profitably is a good one, no? And anyone looking after the spending of £55m would need to be on a good salary too, I'd suggest (but we have no detail).

I recall Robin Guthrie, ex Director of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation who became Chief Charity Commissioner addressing the issue of admin costs in charities or NGOs as you call them (isn't Marks & Spencer an NGO?). He told a story about going up to someone holding a tin making a charity collection on the street. He proferred a £1 coin but before dropping it in the tin he asked

"How much of this £1 donation will go towards managing all the £1 donations, ensuring that they reported accurately, looked after, and managed properly and prudently?"

"Oh none at all" said the collector proudly

"In which case, I can't in all conscience give you this £1, can I?" Guthrie replied, returning his coin to his pocket

The Charity Commission keeps an eye on admin costs, reserve levels, etc through its requirement of Annual Reporting, etc.

I don't think that paying someone £60,000 when they're raising and managing £55m is over-the-top at all.

You are entitled to your views on the 'good' that Oxfam's money does of course, but I do think that you should at least try to substantiate your claim that 'many NGO's are the support structure allowing truely corrupt regimes to stay in power', rather than hiding behind 'there are many better qualified who heavily criticise the operations of these NGO's'

[Don Petter]

£55m is one hell of a lot of money to raise so the idea of running the shops profitably is a good one, no?

It's only a good one if you think that having a payroll of £55m is a good thing, which presumably you do?

I suppose it would have to evaluated against the annual total actually given to charitable causes, which we don't know. Is this published?

[amateur51]

It's only a good one if you think that having a payroll of £55m is a good thing, which presumably you do?

I suppose it would have to evaluated against the annual total actually given to charitable causes, which we don't know. Is this published?

It should all be in the published Annual Audited Accounts available online at http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/

It's the law!

[doversoul1]

amateur51

And make the distinction between Oxfam the charity and Oxfam trading as Oxfam bookshops please.

In that case, should they not compete fairly without their special status as a charity?

[amateur51]

Nope because the profits from the company are dedicated to the charity. It's a standard arrangement that exists abns that Oxfam uses very well. If the prices are so high, Oxfam wouldn't sell anything, would they.

I often browse in Oxfam, rarely buy and when I do I mutter "all in a good cause" under my breath

EDIT: Their special status as a charity affects the rates they pay but it does not affect their pricing, which most are agreed are pretty 'competitive' (if not steep). The charitable status enables them to build on the value of the donation which is applied to 'good works'. No-one loses really

[vinteuil]

It seems that HMV will now sell Waterstone's to the Russkies...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13467846