What it has to do with is the the fact the most corporations’ chariy budget is a subset of their advertising budget. They bought $100,000 worth of goodwill at a 75% discount by betting on a random woman’s inability to throw a football accurately. In the process, they probably made all of their costs, including any payment to the network and the airfare for the husband, a liability of the government.
Folks, there are cheaper and better tortilla chips on the market. I can’t afford any more of these people’s “charity.”
Exactly. If the prize would have been for her, then there would be no problem with giving out less. She didn’t “earn” the 100k. But withholding from a charity because someone can’t perform just seems–weird? It’s like “okay, Timmy, we’ll give you that new kidney you need, but only if your mom can ride this unicycle across this tightrope without falling.”
Actually, that seems like it could be a Kel Varnsen thread.
What would draw more attention to the stunt? Making it a contest or just giving a set amount? The fact that it was a contest meant that way more people watched it and this brought way more attention to the charity which in turn means that it will get more donations from the public. Also, and this was the entire, very obvious point which went way over your head, this was just a ruse to suprise with a reunion with her husband.
They give $25k to charity, give a family a beautiful surprise and you find a reason to bitch about it. Amazing.
It’s very possible that the budget was way under a $100,000 and the marketers purchased insurance to cover the cost if the woman did throw the football through the hole. If the budget was 30K (example only), 25K would be the base prize(donation from Tostitos) and the 5K would cover the insurance if she had done it. There are many insurance companies that specialize in this type of insurance, this cite is just one of them. I personally have dealt with obtaining insurance for Hole-In-One contests at charity golf tournaments myself and it helps attract people to sign onto the charity. Stingy is donating $0. $25K is better than that. The WAG of $5K in my example for insurance could be up for a debate on whether it was a good idea to spend it on insurance or donate it as well straight out for a total of $30K instead of the possiblity of increasing it to $100K.
So, what I should have answered in my initial post was that Tostitos never really did budget $100K to donate and that the outcome was totally dependent on the outcome of the football throw and the insurance coverage.
Huh? What the hell does this have to do with OP.