My thoughts as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by jobob
Thank you for the open discussion, Susan.
Printable View
My thoughts as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by jobob
Thank you for the open discussion, Susan.
It's too bad Twin Six doesn't offer Fat Cyclist's yearly limited-edition items through any vendors other than their own site. That's something I'd be happy to buy in support of breast cancer.
I'm thinking that this would not be a good investment for TE. I wouldn't have purchased these items before the kerfuffle and I really wouldn't buy them now. And this is coming from a customer who DOES purchase full priced items from TE on pretty regular basis.
I'm another who would not have been likely to purchase them before, but definitely would not now.
I wouldn't be inclined to buy one, partly because I don't feel like discussing Mummy dearest's cancer, and partly because I don't like pink, no matter what the cause. And after the latest kerfuffle, I'm even less inclined to buy anything with a SBK logo on it. In spite of the kerfuffle, I find their percentage of donations that go to overhead beyond the pale.
You mean I'm not the only one that doesn't like pink? Nice to know there are others out there.
Yes, I feel this way too. And also admire "kerfuffle".Quote:
Originally Posted by SadieKate
It's a real dilemma for you in your position. I can completely understand your reluctance to cause harm to one of your vendors. I suspect, though, that your sales on this item will be poor. It's a hard place to be.
I would probably be emailing or phoning the manufacter right NOW and seeing what they plan to do also. I mean I live in Australia and the news of this has reached here. Not just a US thing but a world wide thing now.
I mean as long as the product hasn't gone to the presses things could be changed artwork wise. Choose another charity, change it so it isn't SGK, maybe a generic breast cancer thing. Supporting women, anything else.
I wouldn't have bought one, either, but not so much about the pink ribbon as the only jersey I own that fits me comfortably is a Terry jersey (bought used here on TE forums, thank you, Amy). I'll buy a Terry jersey next time, too. (In fact, I just went and looked and found that pretty Roseroad mesh jersey. Are these coming in more colors?)
I do agree that Komen is toxic at this point.
As an aside, I was in Office Depot yesterday and they had all their pink ribbon items on the can't-give-it-away clearance rack by the door. A big stack of folders and folios and things.
Roxy
I'm with Jo on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by jobob
Since you asked directly "what should we do", here's what I think (coming from a complete outsider who had never heard of Susan G. Komen before now and still just has a vague idea of what it's all about):
- set up a anonymous poll letting people vote on whether they would buy a garment supporting the foundation or not. There may be lots of people who do support them but don't particularly feel like piping up. Your own personal opinion should play a part too, of course.
- if the majority do say "no", get in touch with the vendor, let them know that you would like to buy from them but your customers have made it clear that they do not want to support the foundation, and that that is the reason you are cancelling. If you feel like pursuing it, contact the foundation too.
The vendor may choose to stop supporting that particular foundation. The foundation may get so much bad feedback that they reconsider. I dunno, but if you do choose an active boycott, it's a lot more effective if you clearly state why.
Good luck whatever you do. And thank you for asking for our opinions!
It's not a boycott at all. If SGK were on the list of charities to which TE donated, then taking it off that list would be a boycott, but I don't think they ever were?
Maybe you don't even have this kind of thing in Norway. SGK is most notorious for it and may have started the practice, but in the USA we have all kinds of products sold by private corporations, tagged prominently with the logo of some charity, sometimes costing more than the identical non-tagged product, and promising to make some minuscule donation to that charity for every product sold. I find the whole practice repellent, honestly, much as Tulip said, whether the alleged beneficiary is Komen, Livestrong, some phony invented veterans' charity (a particularly common front for scammers in the US), or even something that I would support with a direct donation. It's a purely profit motivated attempt by manufacturers not affiliated with the charity to make themselves seem benevolent. And to take a tax deduction (albeit usually an exceedingly small one) from money collected collected from their customers, not from their own profits.
Susan's question was whether to offer some of that product in her store. Not whether to boycott other products of whatever manufacturer it is. Which she wisely hasn't said, and shouldn't.
okdoke. Like I said, I'm not very familiar with the details.
eta: but yes, I did use the term boycott wrongly. What I meant was simply refusing to buy something for political or ethical reasons, whether it's her own reasons, or the reasons given by her customers.
If your agreement/understanding with the vendor allows you to cancel the order my inclination would be to cancel. I question what kind of sales you would have for that product at this point.
FWIW. My view may be colored by the fact that I would not buy these items but like many here, I wouldn't have bought them before the kerfuffle.
Interesting discussion. I do not buy 'advertising' items, so I would not have bought a Komen branded jersey before. As several have mentioned, it is a business decision, but I think it is also one personal to TE.