Charity Shops

[mhall]

I am a very charitable person but the number of charity shops does depress me. Let's face it, with cheap rates, cheap rent and volunteer staff, you'd need to be pretty crap not to make money.

What DOES annoy though me is when these same charity shops, and I am talking PDSA, Oxfam, Scope etc., simply go to fairs, buy the stock and sell it at below Retail price.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind competition but when I'm competing against someone with almost zero overheads it simply is not fair. Somewhere down the line there should be a mechanism to stop Charity shops gaining this unfair advantage - and let's start with a fair rates bill.

..and of course, another supplier scrubbed of my list, this time Heaven Sends who I really did have high hopes for - vist your local PDSA and see what they are doing.

I hope there are some decent suppliers at the shows in January and February - I'm running out of people I can trust !!

Or is it just me?

 

[Banned]

It's just you!!

Actually they don't get reduced rent, but the rates is an unfair advantage. If they can con people into working for free then who's the fool? Why would you volunteer to work for free when your manager is being paid?????

I have no problem supporting charities, but I have a problem - like you - with the government giving an unfair advantages to a particular sector of retail, which then means they can undercut the businesses that do pay rates, staff and everything therein.

 

[andygambles]

It is not just you. I am a member of the local chamber of trade. We have raised the issue with the council and government.

The particular point being charity shops selling brand new goods when they receive significant discounts in rates and other benefits. Some of these charities are better described as multi-million pound organisations that are perhap not for profit.

They have such huge finances they are able to purchase new products in massive quantities which allows them to heavily discount (less overheads as well). Compared to the local trader who can only buy in quantities of 10 for example has full rates has staff to pay and NI / Tax etc.

 

[MarkMandel]

I think this thread gives a slightly unfair impression of charity shops. They don't get reduced rent they have to secure locations like any retailer, but they do occupy shops, often in tertiary locations, that often would not be occupied if they were not there.

In most cases they only sell new goods to a maximum of 10-15% of their stock. After all if people come in and give you stock for free and you get volunteers to process it for free, then your cost of sales is 0% and your margin is around 100%, so how can bought in goods compete with that! Of course larger charities with chains of 200 -500 shops do buy competitively. Most charity shops do have at lease one paid member of staff.

Also bought in goods only are sold for short periods in lots of charity shops.

In addition I think that this neglects the fantastic good that charity shops do in recycling clothes, furniture and other items that otherwise may be costs to local councils to do. In addition charity shops can help young people get work experience and create better community. Of course they also raise funds for charity when times are particularly hard.

I think with the "Big Society" all sorts of business needs to get used to competition from charity or other social enterprises.

Full rates would probably kill of charity shops, at this time I don't think another 9,000 empty units on the high street does any retailer any favours.

• 7,350 in England
• 800 in Scotland
• 450 in Wales
• 250 in Northern Ireland

 

[Banned]

but they do occupy shops, often in tertiary locations, that often would not be occupied if they were not there.


Full rates would probably kill of charity shops, at this time I don't think another 9,000 empty units on the high street does any retailer any favours.

Why would full rates kill off charity shops more than other retailers? I would say the opposite as retailers also have to pay for stock and staff whereas charity shops don't.

If retailers could get the reduced rates charity shops do I would wager all those charity shops, and more besides, would be full and the High Street would be a far more interesting place.

 

[mhall]

I think this thread gives a slightly unfair impression of charity shops. They don't get reduced rent they have to secure locations like any retailer, but they do occupy shops, often in tertiary locations, that often would not be occupied if they were not there.

In most cases they only sell new goods to a maximum of 10-15% of their stock. After all if people come in and give you stock for free and you get volunteers to process it for free, then your cost of sales is 0% and your margin is around 100%, so how can bought in goods compete with that! Of course larger charities with chains of 200 -500 shops do buy competitively. Most charity shops do have at lease one paid member of staff.

Also bought in goods only are sold for short periods in lots of charity shops.

In addition I think that this neglects the fantastic good that charity shops do in recycling clothes, furniture and other items that otherwise may be costs to local councils to do. In addition charity shops can help young people get work experience and create better community. Of course they also raise funds for charity when times are particularly hard.

I think with the "Big Society" all sorts of business needs to get used to competition from charity or other social enterprises.



Full rates would probably kill of charity shops, at this time I don't think another 9,000 empty units on the high street does any retailer any favours.

• 7,350 in England
• 800 in Scotland
• 450 in Wales
• 250 in Northern Ireland

Sorry, but I don't agree with much of this. Charities are not scared to push their charity status down the throats of landlords to try and screw a far cheaper rent than anyone else would get. They DO get cheaper rent purely on the basis that they are a charity, they use this as a major negotiation tool. I am not bemoaning that fact, just stating it. They are a business and I don't begrudge them that, but they should not hide behind the charitable status. They also use their charitable staus to get short term lets, and in three of the towns we are in they have these short term lets for free as the council wants to be seem to be charitable - I am guessing I wouldn't get the same deal.

Goods bought in are a permanent fixture in Scope and Oxfam and have been for years, the space allocated has slowly been increasing and, like the pop up shops, explodes around christmas for purely commercial reasons.

Each charity shop will have one paid member of staff- yes -on minimum wage "because we are a charity" - Chief executive of Barnodoes gets £105k, Scope 95k, Oxfam 75k, Cancer Research UK 140k and the CEO of the Donkey Sanctuary gets £94k - nice bit of charity work if you can get it. Again, I don't mind, it's a business like any other, but don't hide behind your charitable status.

**EDIT** Those figures relate to 2003 - heaven knows what they are now

...and don't even get me started on the tiny amount that actually goes to the front line of the charity.

If anyone is willing to work for me for nothing, I'll do my best to make sure that they get all the REAL work experience they need- using that argument to praise charity shops is laughable.

As for recycling- as the councils are finally realising that there is good money to be made in this area, they would be on it in a heart beat.

Full rates would kill charity shops ? - er hello ? - could that be why so many shops are becoming empty, rates are killing us all. Your argument is fundamentally flawed as that is what is happening to all of us trying to earn a living. If you don't want empty shops, reduce the rates for everyone, don't just make it easy for charity shops. I walked down the main street of Lichfield at the weekend- 200 yards and 8 charity shops

I know I sound like a killjoy, but I am not. I like charities, I really do. But can we stop looking at them through these rose tinted specs

 

[MarkMandel]

If rates are too high that is not Charity Shops fault. Charity shops also turnover a lot less than other shops hence the issue with rates. Charity shops only compete in a small way with other retailers in a selected range of cards/gifts, 95% of retailers they don't compete with.

If rates killing high street retail is the issue then I suggest you get the government to get Amazon and all other .com's to pay rates!

But I think it will take more than that to save high street retail.

 

[Banned]

If rates are too high that is not Charity Shops fault. Charity shops also turnover a lot less than other shops hence the issue with rates. Charity shops only compete in a small way with other retailers in a selected range of cards/gifts, 95% of retailers they don't compete with.

If rates killing high street retail is the issue then I suggest you get the government to get Amazon and all other .com's to pay rates!

But I think it will take more than that to save high street retail.

I know for a fact that charity shops turn over equal or more than a same sized "real" retailer in a similar position, at least in my town. So that doesn't stack up.

I think you'll find amazon and all the .com business do actually pay rates so not sure what that has to do with the discussion :|

As I said in a previous post good luck to them if they can get free staff and goods, I'm just not sure why they get preferential treatment where rates are concerned, it simply doesn't make any sense.

 

[mhall]

If rates are too high that is not Charity Shops fault. Charity shops also turnover a lot less than other shops hence the issue with rates. Charity shops only compete in a small way with other retailers in a selected range of cards/gifts, 95% of retailers they don't compete with.

If rates killing high street retail is the issue then I suggest you get the government to get Amazon and all other .com's to pay rates!

But I think it will take more than that to save high street retail.

Bizarre argument - are you saying that rates should be based on turnover?, how would that work then?

I am not saying it's the charities fault - I don't mind anyone getting cheaper rates if they can, I am saying that they should NOT get preferential treatment purely because they are a charity. It doesn't matter who they compete with, they compete with someone else paying full whack at that is simply unfair. To say it doesn't matter because they only compete with a few people is simply mad.

..and all other businesses pay rates, and living a few miles from an Amazon distribution centre, I know they pay A LOT of rates.

 

[andygambles]

One of the 'charity' shops on our high street is taking £1,500 a day with 100% rent relief.

 

[MarkMandel]

. I walked down the main street of Lichfield at the weekend- 200 yards and 8 charity shops

You would prefer they were empty? Are you suggesting they are keeping out retailers that would be paying full rates?

 

[Banned]

You would prefer they were empty? Are you suggesting they are keeping out retailers that would be paying full rates?

Yes, if normal retailers could get the same "deals" these shops would probably be let in many cases.

 

[DarrenTSO]

Bizarre argument - are you saying that rates should be based on turnover?, how would that work then?

I think effectively what he's saying is to do away with such a regressive tax as rates (it is incredibly regressive on small businesses, especially start-ups) and just put a couple of percent on the overall rate of corporation tax (or just not put it down like has been planned).

There are obvious downside to that (very large businesses would complain), but overall I think the effect on would be positive for a lot of people.

 

[MarkMandel]

So eliminate rates and retailers will pass on the savings to customers so much to reverse the trend of moving online and save the economy?

I really think you are shooting at the wrong target with Charity Shops being the cause of all woe within retail.

Often they provide services that would require government spend, tax is a two way argument both getting tax in and what its spent on. Charity shops may get tax breaks but they fund vital public services that otherwise would be funded by the tax-payer from homeless housing to supporting people with cancer. Don't be too disrespectful you may need one of the services one day. You say you may give someone work experience but have you actually done that?

Remember lots of charity shops are small and provide services within their communities like hospicies for example. Your fat cats argument just doesn't wash in the real world. Most charity shops are manned by committed people to a cause.

 

[josor]

Remember lots of charity shops are small

Which charities?

 

[MarkMandel]

is a list of most charity shops hundreds of organisations

and here is two good examples..

Cornwall Air Ambulance Trust with six local shops. Raising money in the area where they provide a service.

and Watford New Hope Trust with two local shops raising money for homeless in Watford from shops in the area.

Of course you can say... Government should pay for Air Ambulances and Homes for Homeless people but of course then you would probably have to put up rates!

So retailers in Cornwall have to put up six charity shops "competing" with them, but on the other side they get an Air Ambulance when required, is that really a bad trade off?

 

[Banned]

So retailers in Cornwall have to put up six charity shops "competing" with them, but on the other side they get an Air Ambulance when required, is that really a bad trade off?

No not at all. But why do they get discounted rates?

Personally for me it's just as essential that I can pay to keep a roof over my head and feed my family, so can I please have discounted rates?

 

[josor]

is a list of most charity shops hundreds of organisations

and here is two good examples..

Cornwall Air Ambulance Trust with six local shops. Raising money in the area where they provide a service.

and Watford New Hope Trust with two local shops raising money for homeless in Watford from shops in the area.

Of course you can say... Government should pay for Air Ambulances and Homes for Homeless people but of course then you would probably have to put up rates!

So retailers in Cornwall have to put up six charity shops "competing" with them, but on the other side they get an Air Ambulance when required, is that really a bad trade off?

What about the main ones that you see in most towns ans cities you can goto

YMCA
British Heart Foundation
Barnardos
Cancer Research UK,
Age UK
Oxfam
Save the Children,
Scope
Sue Ryder Care

All mainly situated on the main high street, yet don't pay the premium business rates

Have volunteer staff, so no staffing costs, 87% of the stock is donated so less overheads with that as well

 

[andygambles]

is a list of most charity shops hundreds of organisations

and here is two good examples..

Cornwall Air Ambulance Trust with six local shops. Raising money in the area where they provide a service.

and Watford New Hope Trust with two local shops raising money for homeless in Watford from shops in the area.

Of course you can say... Government should pay for Air Ambulances and Homes for Homeless people but of course then you would probably have to put up rates!

So retailers in Cornwall have to put up six charity shops "competing" with them, but on the other side they get an Air Ambulance when required, is that really a bad trade off?

The issue (I have) is with the national charities who have enormous resources to purchase brand new stock and at big discounts.

 

[mhall]

Personally I think you are confusing sentiment with argument.

I have nothing against any charities. Although I actually feel that we pay enough taxes to mean we shouldn't need to have them, I am comfortable with charities being an extra tax that we can decide whether to pay or not, based on our local or personal situation.

Charities do a wonderful job, I grant you - and if you want to support a charity, you have every right to do so. It's one reason I don't believe in business grants - any spare public money should go to people like nurses, or prop up the services we all need to be funded. (note, not to charities)

I dislike Business rates but putting it on corporation tax won't work as the big boys will always lose the "profit" in the figures

But that is not the discussion

My point is that Charity shops should NOT get rates relief if they are selling full price goods. That is NOT a charity shop, it is another Retail shop that chooses to give a tiny amount of it's profit to a named charity and is not operating from a level playing field.

The current system was originally designed rather like a golf handicap - they get to pay less rates because they are selling second hand goods - we pay more rates because we are selling brand new, and somewhere in the murky fog, we all accepted that it all more or less balanced the scales and the playing field became level.

That is no longer the case.

We give a small percentage of our profit to a local hospice for very personal reasons, but that doesn't make me a charity or allow me to claim cheap rates.

 

[MarkMandel]

I think charity shops could easily stop selling new goods but I don't think it would make a blind bit of difference to the high street.

Then if they didn't sell new goods I assume you would remove your objection?

You keep repeating "tiny amount". 80p of every pound raised for CRUK goes to research.

And their shops raise £65m to directly fund cancer research (after all costs) last year hardly tiny. If they paid rates that would just reduce the money they use to fund cancer research how does that help anyone, even retailers?

 

[MarkMandel]

What about the main ones that you see in most towns ans cities you can goto

YMCA
British Heart Foundation
Barnardos
Cancer Research UK,
Age UK
Oxfam
Save the Children,
Scope
Sue Ryder Care

All mainly situated on the main high street, yet don't pay the premium business rates

Have volunteer staff, so no staffing costs, 87% of the stock is donated so less overheads with that as well

Whats your point. Charities should pay more local tax and spend less on on the people they are trying to help?

 

[Cobby]

I think with the "Big Society" all sorts of business needs to get used to competition from charity or other social enterprises.

It's not competition without a level playing field.

You would prefer they were empty? Are you suggesting they are keeping out retailers that would be paying full rates?

They are keeping out retailers that would be happy to occupy given the same rate discounts.

 

[MarkMandel]

as per example quoted, 8 Charity shops on one high street.
Charity shops only sell new goods ranges of Christmas/other cards and some gifts.

They don't sell new furniture, dvds, coffee, tents, bicycles, food, alcohol clothes, shoes etc.

The 8 charity shops would not be replaced by 8 Gift/Card retailers on the same high street. Lets be real.

 

[Banned]

The 8 charity shops would not be replaced by 8 Gift/Card retailers on the same high street. Lets be real.

Maybe not, but because of their unfair advantage they are taking business away from other retailers by selling those cards cheaper. Unlike charity shops retailers rely on the Christmas trade to finance January and February when sales are generally low but overheads remain the same.

 

87% of the stock is donated so less overheads with that as well

I used to work with a charity that had four small shops and I can tell you that taking donated goods does not reduce your overheads in any way.

New goods from a distributor come in a nice big box and you open it and you put the shiny new products on the shelves.

Probably at leat two-thirds of donated goods are completely unsellable. People dump stuff they don't want and can't be bothered to take the tip. Goods are damaged, broken, filthy, unsanitary... All of this stuff has to be sorted by the workers in the shop and it can be a disgusting and soul destroying experience.

The four shops run by the charity I worked with were not on high streets because they couldn't afford the rents. Yes it's true they did get UBR rellief but that amount to around £1,000 - £3,000 per branch per year.

I know it's different for the very big charities, I'm just asking you not to tar all charity shops with the same brush. Honestly there are lots of small charities that do great work and they rely on a few thousand pounds a year from their shops. Without donated goods and volunteers and UBR relief they simply wouldn't be able to run them..

 

[Banned]

I used to work with a charity that had four small shops and I can tell you that taking donated goods does not reduce your overheads in any way.

So what's the cost to the shop in taking in donated goods?

Lets say you buy in a box of cards for £100 and sell them for £300 that is a £100 cost.

You now have a box of goods that cost zero, you sort it and sell what you can for £300, what has that £300 cost you?

 

[mhall]

I think charity shops could easily stop selling new goods but I don't think it would make a blind bit of difference to the high street.

Then if they didn't sell new goods I assume you would remove your objection?

You keep repeating "tiny amount". 80p of every pound raised for CRUK goes to research.

And their shops raise £65m to directly fund cancer research (after all costs) last year hardly tiny. If they paid rates that would just reduce the money they use to fund cancer research how does that help anyone, even retailers?

er, never believe all you read : £433m raised, £332m on research, I make that 23% spent on costs, and as the figures are so high they are distorted. Also the accounts show a turnover of £482 million

and that of course does not include the many off shoots that are NOT charities but still get the benefit. The most important one in your example being Cancer Research Trading Ltd with a turnover of £23million and a pretax profit of -£8,000 and assets of £6.5 million. Or the Cancer Research Technology Limited with a turnover of £32million and a profit of £2.7 million coupled with assets of £10 million and at least eight other non trading Limited companies that can be utilised for tax no doubt


I don't want to pick on Cancer Research and I repeat for the umpteenth time, they can raise what they want but it's an example you raised.

In my view the problem with a lot of charities is that the people involved are more concerned about the financial viability of their jobs than the good work done by the charity.

 

[mhall]

I know it's different for the very big charities, I'm just asking you not to tar all charity shops with the same brush. Honestly there are lots of small charities that do great work and they rely on a few thousand pounds a year from their shops. Without donated goods and volunteers and UBR relief they simply wouldn't be able to run them..

and these types of charity shops I will always support

 

[MarkMandel]

You should have just titled this - Why I hate big charities - would have been more accurate..

 

[fastbuck]

.....a lot of charities is that the people involved are more concerned about the financial viability of their jobs than the good work done by the charity.

..and finally, the right answer.
A cookie for you

FB

 

[MarkMandel]

yeah 160,000 charity-shop volunteers working for nothing, giving up their time for zero money.... they are worse money-grabbers than bankers.

 

[Cobby]

as per example quoted, 8 Charity shops on one high street.
Charity shops only sell new goods ranges of Christmas/other cards and some gifts.

They don't sell new furniture, dvds, coffee, tents, bicycles, food, alcohol clothes, shoes etc.

The 8 charity shops would not be replaced by 8 Gift/Card retailers on the same high street. Lets be real.

Okay, let's be real. How are those 8 shops on one street - all selling second hand ladies and old-man clothes, video cassettes and used board games - helping to bring money or shoppers to an area?

With small business trying to combat the supermarket 'convenience' factor (i.e. consumer laziness), taking diversity away from a high street is analogous to throttling it.

 

[fastbuck]

... Chief executive of Barnodoes gets £105k, Scope 95k, Oxfam 75k, Cancer Research UK 140k and the CEO of the Donkey Sanctuary gets £94k - nice bit of charity work if you can get it. Again, I don't mind, it's a business like any other, but don't hide behind your charitable status....

Funny how these "jobs" aren't "voluntary"

FB

 

Okay, let's be real. How are those 8 shops on one street - all selling second hand ladies and old-man clothes, video cassettes and used board games - helping to bring money or shoppers to an area?

Well unfortunately they attract lots of poor people.

Who should have been shot at birth.

Earl

 

[MarkMandel]

Okay, let's be real. How are those 8 shops on one street - all selling second hand ladies and old-man clothes, video cassettes and used board games - helping to bring money or shoppers to an area?

With small business trying to combat the supermarket 'convenience' factor (i.e. consumer laziness), taking diversity away from a high street is analogous to throttling it.

With 14.5% of units empty, I cannot see any retailer stuggling to find a space. Surely they are better than another 9000 empty units?

You basically seem to be saying Charity retail is bad because it isn't saving high street retail. I don't think its their job.

 

[Banned]

With 14.5% of units empty, I cannot see any retailer stuggling to find a space. Surely they are better than another 9000 empty units?

And if retailers could get the rate relief charity shops do that percentage would be a lot lower, which is back where this thread started.

Job done, good night

 

So what's the cost to the shop in taking in donated goods?

Lets say you buy in a box of cards for £100 and sell them for £300 that is a £100 cost.

You now have a box of goods that cost zero, you sort it and sell what you can for £300, what has that £300 cost you?

Fair point, but a box of donated goods might "cost" zero but it doesn't cost zero to get onto the shelves in the shop.

I'd say when you have to sort through the amount of crap that peopoe donate to charity rather (often rather than being bothered to take it to the tip) in ours shops it at least tripled the amount of time needed to sort and shelve goods

It's all very well to talk about volunteers but the process of recruiting, training and managing volunteers is not free.

If the shops had just been receiving boxes of goods to open and put on the shelves they would have needed half the number of volunteers and probably half the number of paid shop managers as they would have been able to manage more than one shop..

Charity shops aren't immune to the real word, The shops still had to use trade waste services and when two thirds of your donations need throwing away the costs add up.

I'm not saying charity shops are perfect.. I'm just saying that the reaction to some of them is a bit harsh. If you really want to solve the problem then get the great British Public to donate enough to charities that shops become unnecessary .. I think you'll find most charities don't run shops for fun

 

[andygambles]

Donations are down as shoppers flee the annoying town centre chuggers.

 

[MarkMandel]

And if retailers could get the rate relief charity shops do that percentage would be a lot lower, which is back where this thread started.

Job done, good night

Except of course that isn't going to happen.