Further Evidence

Excerpt from a letter I sent to the Editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy in response to their story this week:

"...The article also quotes an Avon representative stating that, "...PTW had priorities other than fundraising for the cause, which was (and remains) the mission of the Avon Foundation." Sadly, the article did not mention that,  according to Avon's own financials, Avon's fundraising for breast cancer from the events dropped from approximately $140 million in 2002 when we were producing them to $29 million in 2003 when Avon produced them on their own. 
Separately, the article's conflation of my $394,500 salary in 2001 (we netted $69 million for charity that year) with the notion of "get[ting] rich," is more evidence of our suffocating double-standards between the for-profit and non-profit sectors. Forbes reported that Avon's CEO, Andrea Jung, earned $11.1 million in total compensation in 2007. Avon's shareholders are neither stupid or gratuitously benevolent. Presumably they pay her that amount because she produces commensurate value. Doesn't the eradication of breast cancer deserve the same talent as the sale of cosmetics - even if we have to pay someone $11.1 million annually? And isn't its eradication what we should be striving after? Surely, women with breast cancer deserve a say in the matter, and it doesn't take a sooth-sayer to predict what their answer would be."

Dan Pallotta Uncharitable

No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL:

Leave a comment