Forum Forum Home Bandit’s Posts Today’s Posts

[Andymitzy WANTED $64 Spectator]

I think a lot of u are a little confused. I see comments saying give the money to charity and “the true followers” are still here..? well it isn’t about that if u think about it. It’s about bringing in more people to the website, meaning more people using the gambling links. Meaning?…yes speculate to accumulate lol u really think Steve sits at home smiling and loving life knowing 5 or 6 of u are on every second of the day? U do a good job of talking I suppose. But at the end of the day most of u don’t even use his links or let alone even gamble anymore ha. So yea he could give away to charity but in the long run that doesn’t entice people to the page I’m afraid…

[Andymitzy WANTED $64 Spectator]

Tbh most of u agree it should go to charity and coming from some of the people that seem to spend hours each day on this website I really think if u spent that time u spent here and joined up to help a charity it would be better time spent and u would really see a reward from it. I only do 2 hours a week for charity but it helps. Ps give the money charity ???

[eejit101 WANTED $312 Outlaw]

I have a better system 😀

Step 1 – Anyone on the forum with over 20 posts.

Step 2 – Anyone who has entered a previous draw on any site other than Videoslots int he last 6 months.

Step 3 = done

[Haz40 WANTED $1,166 Outlaw]

Andymitzy wrote:

I think a lot of u are a little confused. I see comments saying give the money to charity and “the true followers” are still here.. well it isn’t about that if u think about it. It’s about bringing in more people to the website, meaning more people using the gambling links. Meaning?…yes speculate to accumulate lol u really think Steve sits at home smiling and loving life knowing 5 or 6 of u are on every second of the day? U do a good job of talking I suppose. But at the end of the day most of u don’t even use his links or let alone even gamble anymore ha. So yea he could give away to charity but in the long run that doesn’t entice people to the page I’m afraid…

So why don’t you have to use his link to enter the prize draws then. Video slots betfair and if I’m not mistaken i think there may be another one.

[Rb Rbreen91 WANTED $493 Outlaw]

Haz40 wrote:

Andymitzy wrote:

I think a lot of u are a little confused. I see comments saying give the money to charity and “the true followers” are still here.. well it isn’t about that if u think about it. It’s about bringing in more people to the website, meaning more people using the gambling links. Meaning?…yes speculate to accumulate lol u really think Steve sits at home smiling and loving life knowing 5 or 6 of u are on every second of the day? U do a good job of talking I suppose. But at the end of the day most of u don’t even use his links or let alone even gamble anymore ha. So yea he could give away to charity but in the long run that doesn’t entice people to the page I’m afraid…

So why don’t you have to use his link to enter the prize draws then. Video slots betfair and if I’m not mistaken i think there may be another one.

Paddy power mate.

[Anonymous WANTED $55 Inactive]

…….

[Anonymous WANTED $55 Inactive]

Rbreen91 wrote:

Quavercat wrote:

Deffo not charity because very little of the money goes to the cause buy equipment for  a good cause dont give them the cash

That’s a pretty misinformed statement.

No its not, most charities waste up to 90% of donations due to bad administration. Giving actual items bypasses this problem.

[kojak WANTED $64 Blocked]

MurciPete wrote:

Rbreen91 wrote:

Quavercat wrote:

Deffo not charity because very little of the money goes to the cause buy equipment for  a good cause dont give them the cash

That’s a pretty misinformed statement.

No its not, most charities waste up to 90% of donations due to bad administration. Giving actual items bypasses this problem.

Na I’m not having that, I’d like to see it backed up if you have a link or a reference online? There are a couple of good websites which break down charity costs and fees and tell you exactly what gets to the end user. For example Oxfam used to be around half – their director was one of the highest paid in the country which I disagree with very very strongly, its disgusting that a director of a charity is getting minted off the back of it.   These days they claim 82% gets to the humanitarian aid they provide, almost the exact opposite of your claim I’m afraid.

And the second part – donating goods means better value for money? – is also something I think you’re  wrong about. I used to make a very good living picking up under priced goods to sell on ebay, charity shop “experts” dont deserve to be paid in brass washers the amount they let slip through. As it happens I now advise some of my local ones, and any decent jewellery or watches they get donated I sell through my shop commission free (its 20% usually).  I used to love finding valuables they had missed but now I get incredibly frustrated by it – they have a duty of care to their patrons and donators (errrrr… donatees??) to raise the most money possible from the items they are given. I had a stand up row with an old dear in my local hospice shop because she’d priced a white gold collarette as silver, and was adamant that she couldn’t possible be wrong about it.  As it turns out I bought it for 20 quid and put another 20 quid in the charity box, but I did everything i could (no, really did EVERYTHING i could) to get her to stick another zero on the price ticket.

Charities are flawed, the volunteers they get are generally pretty rubbish but they’re doing it for nowt so what can you do?

[Anonymous WANTED $55 Inactive]

kojak wrote:

Deffo

So you would rather a director of a charity earned peanuts?   Where would you find this person thats has the relevant skills to run said charity for such a low salary?    Or would you prefer somebody who lacks the skills, who doesnt want to be paid much?         I can give you a very good example.   My wife  joined a very well known military charity,   She was paid about £100k,   When she joined this charity, it was running at a loss a massive loss,    By the time she left it was several million in profit.        You see, and it may be difficult for you to understand,  but if you pay peanuts you get monkeys.    The reason i said give goods rather than cash is so that you know what you are giving goes to the source. the administration charges of most charities are crazy.  Why?  Because they pay peanuts, get monkeys and money gets wasted.

[To Tommy_e WANTED $1 Outlaw]

eejit101 wrote:

I have a better system

Step 1 – Anyone on the forum with over 20 posts.

Step 2 – Anyone who has entered a previous draw on any site other than Videoslots int he last 6 months.

Step 3 = done

Yeah but that wasn’t the criteria at the start though and therein lies the problem.
I appreciate some half wits have ruined it for everyone but you then have a credibility issue if you change it to something else rather than the agreed criteria. What you are proposing now is favouring YOU and others who are complaining. You don’t see an issue with that?

 

[kojak WANTED $64 Blocked]

MurciPete wrote:

kojak wrote:

Deffo

So you would rather a director of a charity earned peanuts?   Where would you find this person thats has the relevant skills to run said charity for such a low salary?    Or would you prefer somebody who lacks the skills, who doesnt want to be paid much?         I can give you a very good example.   My wife  joined a very well known military charity,   She was paid about £100k,   When she joined this charity, it was running at a loss a massive loss,    By the time she left it was several million in profit.        You see, and it may be difficult for you to understand,  but if you pay peanuts you get monkeys.    The reason i said give goods rather than cash is so that you know what you are giving goes to the source. the administration charges of most charities are crazy.  Why?  Because they pay peanuts, get monkeys and money gets wasted.

Why would that be difficult for me to understand? I dont earn 100k a year but I own all three of the businesses I run, two online and one bricks and mortar. Sorry, does that dislodge the chip on your shoulder slightly?

Yes, I firmly believe that charity workers from the bottom right to the top should be paid in line with their skillset, but to a level. A director on a salary which puts them in competition with hedge fund managers is going to put me off that particular brand. Even now I refuse to give a penny to oxfam because of the money they’ve blasted on staff, advisors and management at the higher levels.  Sorry, anyone going into that particular sector needs to have at least some sort of humanitarian interest rather than wanting financial gain.

You’re still wrong about giving goods. If I donate 100 quid that money starts immediately on it’s way to the end user – minus whatever percentage the charity runs at for costs. If I donate an item worth 100 quid, I know for an absolute fact it’s either going home with a volunteer or going out on the shop floor at a drastically reduced rate. I work closely with the salvation army, help for heroes, British heart (less so now they maintain a decent website) and lots of small hospice and homeless charities, and you know as well as I do that I’m not talking bollocks here if your wife is a charity high-flier, I just dont think you expected to get pulled on your rubbish.. ?

[kojak WANTED $64 Blocked]

To add to that, I must say that in the oxfam example cited,  what disgusted me was the fact they were paying in excess of 2 million pounds to a board of executives, not just one directors salary. I have no problem with a CEO being paid 100k, that’s literally nothing in the grand scheme – I’ve worked at corporations where that sort of money is three or four tiers from the top floor – but I do take offence at the “jobs for the boys” culture where they are taking money for fuck all. Quite literally in some cases, listed as “trustees” and providing nothing to the daily running.

[StuartK91 WANTED $27 Outlaw]

Don’t pay to charity thats shite what disgusts me is that britain put millions upon millions and they still cant afford water, look to your own then?? as for cat rescue whoever said that, they’re cats if you hate it get another pissy little hoors yous are too nice about pis all here on biam

[Avernite WANTED $23 Outlaw]

eejit101 wrote:

I have a better system

Step 1 – Anyone on the forum with over 20 posts.

Step 2 – Anyone who has entered a previous draw on any site other than Videoslots int he last 6 months.

Step 3 = done

Now that isn’t very fair. I chucked my name in the hat in the off-chance I’d get lucky and have a bit of excitement. I don’t post much, don’t gamble anymore (and even if I did I’m self-excluded from all of said casinos). If the duplicate votes is a thing that can’t be fairly sorted then I’m all for giving it away to charity, but the giveaway was made the way it was for a reason.

[Rb Rbreen91 WANTED $493 Outlaw]

MurciPete wrote:

Rbreen91 wrote:

Quavercat wrote:

Deffo not charity because very little of the money goes to the cause buy equipment for  a good cause dont give them the cash

That’s a pretty misinformed statement.

No its not, most charities waste up to 90% of donations due to bad administration. Giving actual items bypasses this problem.

That just isn’t true. Don’t post fucking nonsense.

[Author]

Posts