5 ms·
> However, after almost a decade, the program has not grown to create the impact that we had originally hoped. With so many eligible organizations—more than 1 m
by beders 4y ago
> However, after almost a decade, the program has not grown to create the impact that we had originally hoped. With so many eligible organizations—more than 1 million globally—our ability to have an impact was often spread too thin.
What BS is this?
Can we have the real reason?
- wccrawford 4y agoWhile I'm sure this isn't the real reason, I could see that the accounting and check-cutting for 1 million organizations will have an noticeable impact on the amounts they're giving to each organization, especially the ones that get almost nothing. Others have already suggested cutting the list of charities down to a manageable number, perhaps from the list of charities that got the most interest already. I suspect this would end up producing bad PR from their curated list, so they've decided to just pick a handful and be done. But again, I suspect there was more to this and we'll never know the real reason.
- freeAgent 4y agoI assume this will simply allow them to increase their margins by eliminating what was, essentially, their special affiliate program for charities.
- jxramos 4y agoI'd love to see a spreadsheet of each of the participating organizations and hear their take on it.