Nope, they're doing it by saying "hey, buy my product... and I'll give a very small donation to a charitable organization!"
It encourages purchases because people want to help the foundation; instead, they could just donate to the foundation, helping them a lot more, and not add to a company's bottom line.
Do you see what I'm talking about? They use this to help sell more shuffles.
There is another way of looking at it. It's good if you were planning to buy a shuffle anyway.
but you're missing the fact that many people don't just donate to charities. So what if they use the donation to sell more shuffles, any donation is a good donation.
I think that out of the big-box retailers, Target's got one of the best records in donating to worthy causes without treating their employees like slaves. I don't see anything wrong with combining a worthy cause with a high selling product. So, if you like the iPod shuffle and like it in pink, then you'd be doing a good deed. Every one wins here people. If you don't like it in pink, then get it in a different color and send out a check to a charity of your choice. But don't be so negative about someone doing something positive.
I must be one of the few who agree with you. Adding "Breast Cancer Awareness" and the pink ribbon is little more than a marketing gimmick, and quite frankly, I'm a little tired of companies using the "Save the Ta-Tas" campaign to move merchandise.
While it's true that breast cancer is a serious problem, prostate cancer kills more people than breast cancer, but where's my brown iPod?
The thing is that they're agreeing to cut into their own profits to support a charity, and in return MAY sell more units.
Yes, the breast cancer society would do great with a $80 check, but then the person sending it gets nothing. What this really amounts to is people buy an iPod shuffle at the normal price, and then feel good about themselves for supporting a charity in the mean time. If you asked them to write a $15 check most of 'em wouldn't, but you can bet no one thinks twice about spending $0 extra to donate to a charity (unless, of course, they think they're exploiting the sick).
Kind of a negative spin you've put on what turns out to be a very positive thing (and is regularly done). What does that say about you?
As I think someone else said, any money donated to charity is a good thing. Would it be nice if people donated money without buying something at the same time? Sure! But a lot of people simply are not going to do that.... but they might buy a pink iPod or a red whatever and then at least a small amount of money will go towards a charity - and when you add up all the small donation, then maybe it ends up being a decent donation.
Also, don't assume that because a compnay sells a "gimmicked" product for charity that they DON'T also dontate substantial amounts to that charity, or others.
Sounds good, Paul34. Let me know how the Breast Cancer Research Foundation reacts to you convincing them that Apple is only in it for the money and that a non-profit research foundation would in no way benefit from receiving donations based on iPod shuffle sales.
Your argument that Apple's only selling pink iPod shuffles to make more money for themselves is facetious at best ("Oh! I really want to support breast cancer! I know, I'll go buy an iPod shuffle!"). The system works the other way around. A person *already interested* in buying an iPod shuffle has the extra option to donate money to breast cancer research. Even if your logic was correct, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation benefits from the sales either way.
I would argue that every dollar that "cuts into their own profits" is tax-deductible. So it's not really cutting into their bottom line all that much, now is it.
Am I cynical? Absolutely. I applaud Apple, Target, and other for giving money to worthy charities, regardless of motives. But expecting something in return for "donating" money to a charity misses the point of charity altogether. The problem isn't with Apple giving money to Breast Cancer research for each pink iPod sold. The problem is that "charity" has become a business model whereby people expect to get something for their "donation."
That, and Breast Cancer awareness has been so over-marketed, that you can't walk into a store without seeing that damned pink ribbon. It's like the Shrek and Star Wars of charities. What's next? Action Figures?
john, your view of apple's motive behind the breast cancer donations is naive and idealistic at best. the foundation benefits (to what degree is debatable), but apple certainly benefits by enhancing its image and shuffle-awareness in the minds of consumers.
These special versions of products are for people who are going to buy the products anyway.
If you're already going to spend $80 on a red shuffle, why not pick a different color, get the same benefit for the same amount of money, PLUS Apple pays 5% or whatever?
People will buy this because A) Its pink; B) It comes with a $15 gift card and they dont mind pink. Aside from the few psycho apple fanboys that would buy Steve Jobs' used toilet paper if it ended up on the Apple store, nobody buys these charity products for the sole purpose of supporting the charity. People buy these because they want the product, the charity thing is just a nice bonus. Telling them to just donate $79 doesnt get them an iPod.
I would not be surprised if Apple is just trying to get rid of stock from a failed idea, hence the weird packaging and $15 gift card. Regardless of the motive its still better to donate a portion to a charity than not to donate anything.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Interesting, as I'm sure the Breast Cancer Foundation would find a simple, tax-deductable $79 donation much more useful.
But hey, gotta make money even if it means exploiting the sick, right?
They are exploiting the sick by donating money to the Breast Cancer Research Foundation?
Nope, they're doing it by saying "hey, buy my product... and I'll give a very small donation to a charitable organization!"
It encourages purchases because people want to help the foundation; instead, they could just donate to the foundation, helping them a lot more, and not add to a company's bottom line.
Do you see what I'm talking about? They use this to help sell more shuffles.
There is another way of looking at it. It's good if you were planning to buy a shuffle anyway.
but you're missing the fact that many people don't just donate to charities. So what if they use the donation to sell more shuffles, any donation is a good donation.
I think that out of the big-box retailers, Target's got one of the best records in donating to worthy causes without treating their employees like slaves. I don't see anything wrong with combining a worthy cause with a high selling product. So, if you like the iPod shuffle and like it in pink, then you'd be doing a good deed. Every one wins here people. If you don't like it in pink, then get it in a different color and send out a check to a charity of your choice. But don't be so negative about someone doing something positive.
I must be one of the few who agree with you.
Adding "Breast Cancer Awareness" and the pink ribbon is little more than a marketing gimmick, and quite frankly, I'm a little tired of companies using the "Save the Ta-Tas" campaign to move merchandise.
While it's true that breast cancer is a serious problem, prostate cancer kills more people than breast cancer, but where's my brown iPod?
The thing is that they're agreeing to cut into their own profits to support a charity, and in return MAY sell more units.
Yes, the breast cancer society would do great with a $80 check, but then the person sending it gets nothing. What this really amounts to is people buy an iPod shuffle at the normal price, and then feel good about themselves for supporting a charity in the mean time. If you asked them to write a $15 check most of 'em wouldn't, but you can bet no one thinks twice about spending $0 extra to donate to a charity (unless, of course, they think they're exploiting the sick).
Kind of a negative spin you've put on what turns out to be a very positive thing (and is regularly done). What does that say about you?
As I think someone else said, any money donated to charity is a good thing. Would it be nice if people donated money without buying something at the same time? Sure! But a lot of people simply are not going to do that.... but they might buy a pink iPod or a red whatever and then at least a small amount of money will go towards a charity - and when you add up all the small donation, then maybe it ends up being a decent donation.
Also, don't assume that because a compnay sells a "gimmicked" product for charity that they DON'T also dontate substantial amounts to that charity, or others.
Sounds good, Paul34. Let me know how the Breast Cancer Research Foundation reacts to you convincing them that Apple is only in it for the money and that a non-profit research foundation would in no way benefit from receiving donations based on iPod shuffle sales.
Your argument that Apple's only selling pink iPod shuffles to make more money for themselves is facetious at best ("Oh! I really want to support breast cancer! I know, I'll go buy an iPod shuffle!"). The system works the other way around. A person *already interested* in buying an iPod shuffle has the extra option to donate money to breast cancer research. Even if your logic was correct, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation benefits from the sales either way.
I would argue that every dollar that "cuts into their own profits" is tax-deductible. So it's not really cutting into their bottom line all that much, now is it.
Am I cynical? Absolutely. I applaud Apple, Target, and other for giving money to worthy charities, regardless of motives. But expecting something in return for "donating" money to a charity misses the point of charity altogether. The problem isn't with Apple giving money to Breast Cancer research for each pink iPod sold. The problem is that "charity" has become a business model whereby people expect to get something for their "donation."
That, and Breast Cancer awareness has been so over-marketed, that you can't walk into a store without seeing that damned pink ribbon. It's like the Shrek and Star Wars of charities. What's next? Action Figures?
john, your view of apple's motive behind the breast cancer donations is naive and idealistic at best. the foundation benefits (to what degree is debatable), but apple certainly benefits by enhancing its image and shuffle-awareness in the minds of consumers.
These special versions of products are for people who are going to buy the products anyway.
If you're already going to spend $80 on a red shuffle, why not pick a different color, get the same benefit for the same amount of money, PLUS Apple pays 5% or whatever?
you are soooooo deluded.....
People will buy this because A) Its pink; B) It comes with a $15 gift card and they dont mind pink. Aside from the few psycho apple fanboys that would buy Steve Jobs' used toilet paper if it ended up on the Apple store, nobody buys these charity products for the sole purpose of supporting the charity. People buy these because they want the product, the charity thing is just a nice bonus. Telling them to just donate $79 doesnt get them an iPod.
I would not be surprised if Apple is just trying to get rid of stock from a failed idea, hence the weird packaging and $15 gift card. Regardless of the motive its still better to donate a portion to a charity than not to donate anything.