I have never heard of anything so stupid in my life!! An award for rasing money for charities must be the biggest waste of money ever. As a very small charity with a turnover of £15K ayear we have just bought a football strip for a very poor club in Nigeria, one of the richer oil states, for £200. On our small budget this must rate as a piece of good work???????? Last night I was called by a company trying to get me to pay £95 to put a link on a Solicitors general website in order to get legacies. I firmly believe that there should be no such thing as a professional fundraiser unless they help at least3 small charities for nothing, pro bono. Wake up people there are minnows in the pond that need help without paying through the nose

Agreed Adam

Overseas challenges (or any fundraising event, for that matter) will never be as efficient as a simple donation.  Of course it brings an emotional, personal ask directly to you, encouraging you to give to a charit that might otherwise never have been able to ask you at all.

The key here is where does giving inefficiently fit on the scale between giving efficiently, and not giving at all.

The real question here, of course, is;

 How did you avoid the curtains?

True, but people are entitled to change their opinions.  I don't think less of them if they do, in fact, I often think more of them.

I could have just said: So, “Normally, we think these are a bad thing.”, but after spending a little time talking to the people that run charities, and who have decided that these are worth doing, you now think that they’re a good thing.  The charities were right then. 

But the fact is that I don't think that.  As with so many aspects of charity work and fundraising, Overseas Challenges can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on the charity, the situation, the way it is run, the audience and a host of other factors.  The thing is that charities should have evaluated these before deciding to run one, and if they have done, then they should evaluate afterwards.  Guess what, they mostly do.  A concern that I have with IG is that it can give the impression that every single charity rushes out and do things without planning, researching designing, tweaking evaluating and tweaking again

I will never say that overseas challenges are universally a good thing, or a bad thing, they have strengths and weaknesses, like almost all fundraising and profile building activities, and as long as people are aware of them, I think that it's fine.  As long as charities know why they're doing things, and it isn't just because everyone else does, than it's fine.  I think IG should be pointing this out, along with the strengths and weaknesses of them all.

The point of this post was to say that there's nothing wrong with altering your opinion when you're confronted with new information, whether it's a slight alteration, or a 180degree turn

I agree with part of what you're saying, mikemuses - and yes, LMC, I do remember those posts from times past!  But whether challenge events are a Good Thing depends on your perspective. 

For the charities which run them, I'm sure that they're almost always positive.  But if you're a donor and are asked to sponsor one of these jaunts, I think - as ever - that you'd be better off giving your money elsewhere.

From the charities' perspective, challenges offer all sorts of advantages - like I said in the original post. They can bring in serious money, and they provide lots of free publicity.  This sounds pretty much like an open-and-shut case.

But from the donor's point of view, many challenge events represent appalling value. A lot of the time, your gift will end up subsidizing someone's holiday - and the companies that run the events have to make a profit too.

The events director I spoke to wasn't that bothered about this. He was just pleased that challenges brought in hard cash and publicity. And I can't disagree.  But that doesn't mean I'm any more likely to fund my friend Doing The Inca Trail for charidee.

Adam, Intelligent Giving

Sponsorship and overseas challenges

twice, in fact <<< you posted on that one Adam!

-----------------------------------------------

... nearly Vlad the Impaler

Umm, well, mikemuses, it depends what you mean...

In some ways, undoubtedly yes: overseas challenges are a good thing.  But I'm not going to cave in that easily - because I still think that they have some pretty big drawbacks. I'm going to ponder this a little more, and post a more satisfactory answer later!

Adam, Intelligent Giving

PS - I must apologize to CW for my comments on the champagne.  Actually, it was lovely. And as benno says, it also was extremely free flowing.  Extremely generous, I thought, actually.  And - in the fundraising world - I doubt there has ever been a more glamorous evening.  Lovely.

So, are overseas challenges a good thing?

I was there too. The champagne was eminently quaffable - and extremely free-flowing. The audience was engorged with fundraising's gurus and glitterati ("I must say it’s a delight to see more Fellows of the Institute, gathered here in this room this evening, than I can quite remember seeing together for some time" – wasn’t that the observation from the presenter as Mr Burnett was being honoured?) The atmosphere was friendly and energized, the ceremony mercifully brief.  But: "some awards ceremony”? It's the future of peer to peer recognition of fundraising excellence from what I saw!

I think Mr Rothwell is a bit of a wine snob.  What, I would ask him, is wrong with Piper-Heidsieck?  In my opinion, it's a perfectly nice champagne - heavy on the pinot, but still better than the overrated Veuve.  And surely he's grateful that he wasn't served something truly horrific, like Moet?  Surely he doesn't expect Krug at some awards ceremony?