Wateraid nuisance phone calls?

[johnny-yen]

I've had a few missed calls from a number I don't recognise, 020 3697 3209.

I've googled the number and it's been linked with Wateraid. I can only assume they've got my number from some part of Glastonbury because of their ties.

Anyone else had them ring them?

[pentura]

There was people with Water Aid going around for some sign up thing, did you do that by any chance?

[Splatt]

I've had green peace call be every day recently - my first thoughts too were did they get my number via Glasto.

[eFestivals]

I've been giving WaterAid money for 15+ years and never had a call form them.

But then again I make a point of never giving randoms my number. It helps in stopping unwanted calls.

[pie_and_a_pint]

I think both Greenpeace and Water Aid call people who've signed up as members / donors. It goes without saying that they'll only call you if you gave them your number!

[davefrompompey]

Yeah they're hardly nuisance calls! Answer one and tell them you don't want to give. They'll ask a few times but if you ask for your number to be removed they won't call again. Alternatively, give them some money, because it's a good cause and direct debits are much better for charities than lump sums.

[eFestivals]

direct debits are much better for charities than lump sums.

not if they're a direct debit made via a 3rd party (which most charity dd's today are done by).

The trick is not to make the lump sum the only lump sum you give them. Continue to support the charity, not just because you might happen to have a direct debit set-up with them.

[davefrompompey]

Yeah they pay the third party for the direct debit, but it tends to be equivalent to about 6 months. The average direct debit to a charity lasts 4 and a bit years so they make plenty of money. I meant that the higher the proportion of money coming in by direct debit, the more certain the plans the charity can make for the future - they know that they can comfortably plan to spend 90-95% of their direct debit contributions before they come in, because the attrition rate is less than 5%. They can't plan as effectively with one off donations, because they can't be certain they'll continue to come in (at least to the same extent).

But yeah, moral is - give some cash to Wateraid, they're great.

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

My wife signed up to Water Aid at last years Glastonbury. She was plagued with phone calls from them for months afterwards. My wife only ever answers the phone to numbers which she knows are friends, as in her mind, everybody else can fuck off. Therefore she received these calls as voicemail messages. Well it got to her one day when they called while we were driving and they called again. She picked up the phone and answered their call with words and, I think, a story of fantasy which eludes me right now but I know ended up with the calls stopping. I may have to ask her if she remembers the call and it's contents.

[verrymerry]

I have to say that Greenpeace are really annoying for it, I wish I'd not given them my number!. I've definitely told them not to ring me (I'm a supporter) but they seem to 'forget' and call me every time they have a new campaign.

I understand why they do it, it's probably easier to get a little more money out of me than a brand new supporter, but I wish they'd just 'shut up and take my money'

[UEF]

I got a call from Greenpeace after using their shower

[verrymerry]

I got a call from Greenpeace after using their shower

What did you do in there? haha

[eoJ]

Yeah, Greenpeace have been campaigning today. WaterAid, I avoided their petition people, except when I wanted water, fake name, fake email, phone number blank. Petitions typically do fuck all, and are just to get your details.

[Guest]

Yeah, Greenpeace have been campaigning today. WaterAid, I avoided their petition people, except when I wanted water, fake name, fake email, phone number blank. Petitions typically do fuck all, and are just to get your details.

well, that's what they're there for.... so you can have some water

[eoJ]

well, that's what they're there for.... so you can have some water

I used their water once. Switch it for a tap, and I'd be fine too.

Edited July 14, 2014 by eoJ

[BA4 4BY]

I got a call from Wateraid the other day asking me to sign up for a direct debit, but as I already make monthly payments to other charities and am currently out of work I declined. The guy was quite reasonable and understanding but nevertheless had to give me the full works, so I humoured him while he kept up the blurb and reduced the monthly amount he wanted me to agree to as he went. I offered to make a one-off donation but he said he couldn't accept one. I was a bit puzzled by this at the time but now realise why based on earlier comments on this thread; he / the agency he works for clearly wouldn't get any commission out of one-off donations, which is clearly not in Wateraid's best interest based on the outcome of my call.

The most interesting part of the conversation was when he revealed that Wateraid are hoping to raise roughly £110,000 on the back of the phone campaign after Glastonbury, but the company he works for that have been appointed to conduct the campaign are being paid over £24,000 to raise it.

[eoJ]

he / the agency he works for clearly wouldn't get any commission out of one-off donations, which is clearly not in Wateraid's best interest based on the outcome of my call.

The most interesting part of the conversation was when he revealed that Wateraid are hoping to raise roughly £110,000 on the back of the phone campaign after Glastonbury, but the company he works for that have been appointed to conduct the campaign are being paid over £24,000 to raise it.

I know they have good intentions, but there is something to be said about watching someone squirm when you ask them how much money the company they're working for is taking from the charity.

[Lexbank]

I had the same call and don't see it as a nuisance call at all. I wouldn't have given my details if I wasn't prepared to donate.

What I will be doing though is cancelling the direct debit I agreed over the phone because of the £24k they mentioned and give direct to Wateraid through their website

[davefrompompey]

I know they have good intentions, but there is something to be said about watching someone squirm when you ask them how much money the company they're working for is taking from the charity.

Or making 86,000 quid?

They roughly pay a pound for each four pounds raised... seems like pretty good value for money to me.

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

I got a call from Wateraid the other day asking me to sign up for a direct debit, but as I already make monthly payments to other charities and am currently out of work I declined. The guy was quite reasonable and understanding but nevertheless had to give me the full works, so I humoured him while he kept up the blurb and reduced the monthly amount he wanted me to agree to as he went. I offered to make a one-off donation but he said he couldn't accept one. I was a bit puzzled by this at the time but now realise why based on earlier comments on this thread; he / the agency he works for clearly wouldn't get any commission out of one-off donations, which is clearly not in Wateraid's best interest based on the outcome of my call.

The most interesting part of the conversation was when he revealed that Wateraid are hoping to raise roughly £110,000 on the back of the phone campaign after Glastonbury, but the company he works for that have been appointed to conduct the campaign are being paid over £24,000 to raise it.

Would they be the sole company involved in raising it I wonder? If it were the case that a single company can realistically achieve that sort of goal then it would be most interesting.

I once started donating to an animal charity. I was very young and hadn't questioned anything about it. I had been given the knowledge that they campaigned on animal rights globally, and that was good enough for me at the time. I later actually read through one of their posts to me as a donater and discovered that their CEO was flying here, there and everywhere on behalf of the charity. There may be quite a few reasons why this may actually be a necessity, but my gut instinct said 'fuck you' and I cancelled my direct debit. I wonder if I was right or wrong?

[eoJ]

Or making 86,000 quid?

They roughly pay a pound for each four pounds raised... seems like pretty good value for money to me.

Yeah, I can't blame the charity, business is business, and has costs. But that's the reason I never opt in to these things, or sign petitions. I'd rather not be marketed to even further than I already am, and I can make my own choices and decisions about when to donate to charity, and which ones I feel deserve/need it (and that way, they get 100% of the money, instead of 78% of it - they may not necessarily end up with as much, but if they don't, the remaining money will have gone to another charity that I felt deserved some).

Would they be the sole company involved in raising it I wonder? If it were the case that a single company can realistically achieve that sort of goal then it would be most interesting.

I once started donating to an animal charity. I was very young and hadn't questioned anything about it. I had been given the knowledge that they campaigned on animal rights globally, and that was good enough for me at the time. I later actually read through one of their posts to me as a donater and discovered that their CEO was flying here, there and everywhere on behalf of the charity. There may be quite a few reasons why this may actually be a necessity, but my gut instinct said 'fuck you' and I cancelled my direct debit. I wonder if I was right or wrong?

For any charity, you can at least look up the salaries of the higher ups on the charity commission website (although not sure about the expenses, although I know they do give a vague breakdown).

Edited July 14, 2014 by eoJ

[davefrompompey]

Yeah, I can't blame the charity, business is business, and has costs. But that's the reason I never opt in to these things, or sign petitions. I'd rather not be marketed to even further than I already am, and I can make my own choices and decisions about when to donate to charity, and which ones I feel deserve/need it (and that way, they get 100% of the money, instead of 78% of it).

A lot of people like to do it like that, and that's fine. The companies that charities use to fundraise are good at what they do though - and they also provide effectively free advertising to everyone that doesn't sign up because they're paid by results. Some people are turned off by it, but the charities wouldn't do it if it didn't make financial sense.

[eoJ]

A lot of people like to do it like that, and that's fine. The companies that charities use to fundraise are good at what they do though - and they also provide effectively free advertising to everyone that doesn't sign up because they're paid by results. Some people are turned off by it, but the charities wouldn't do it if it didn't make financial sense.

Yeah, no problems with people who do want to opt in, but since I work in marketing primarily, their chances are pretty low with me, and time would be better spent somewhere else. Just wanted to explain myself since I sensed a bit of hostility. I do try to put as little information down as possible, to save them time, and only an email, since it's very very cheap to send, and will be automatically scrubbed off the list when it bounces back.

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

, and I can make my own choices and decisions about when to donate to charity, and which ones I feel deserve/need it (and that way, they get 100% of the money, instead of 78% of it).

I have made donations by direct debit to various charities over the years. Instead of assuming that I am of sound mind and know that the amount I regularly donate is the one I wish to donate, they call me asking for more money. This pisses me off. I have severed ties with those that push and push by cancelling my donations rather than increasing them. I wonder how cost effective their campaign of trying to put the squeeze on existing donators is when taking into account that others may react to the same policy as I did.

[eoJ]

I have made donations by direct debit to various charities over the years. Instead of assuming that I am of sound mind and know that the amount I regularly donate is the one I wish to donate, they call me asking for more money. This pisses me off. I have severed ties with those that push and push by cancelling my donations rather than increasing them. I wonder how cost effective their campaign of trying to put the squeeze on existing donators is when taking into account that others may react to the same policy as I did.

Agreed. I've received calls from Greenpeace both today and yesterday (and I think possibly the day before, with the volume of cold calls we get here, a lot of them get left if I'm busy). Charity workers get a certain free pass, anyone else would either get a 'get lost, and take us off your list. Bye.' or a 'let me just get them, just a sec' followed by me leaving the phone on the table until they get bored of waiting (sometimes I pick it up again after a minute or two to say 'sorry about this, won't be a minute' ), but charity workers always get friendliness and politeness. I don't like it when certain charities have a tendency to forget you've opted out though, and call multiple days in a row.