-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Wounded Warrior VID Very Cool
- Thread starter 1J04
- Start date
FUCK WWP! They can take their U.S. Congress given D- rating and their anti-gun/anti-2nd stance and go straight to hell. They don't deserve any honorable mention on a pro-gun website like the Hide.
p.s. Fuck Wounded Warrior!
p.s. Fuck Wounded Warrior!
Let's be clear here ladies, I dunno about all the bullshit you're talking about. Thought it was pretty fucking neat to see a "Wounded Vet" to this degree go for what looks to me to be the ultimate ride.
Carry on
Carry on
Last edited:
^^Ignorance of their policies and anti-gun views is the only reason they even exist. They cater to a bunch of low-info ideologues...
I'll obviously have to make myself familiar with the organization. I would be the ignorant one. I cannot support them if they do not support us regarding 2A and anti-gun views. Learn something new "almost" every day.
I am a member of the Wounded Warriors Alumni (I was wounded in combat, received a purple heart, and 100% VA rating. Just to clarify the misconception I will share this with you all.
"We've had a lot of questions recently that started when we declined an opportunity to appear on Gun Talk Radio. We want to clarify and help answer some questions. We have seen through this process that the language on our website and our response to the invitation to appear on the show weren’t clear, and we are working on clarifying our approach. There is now much inaccurate information about WWP being anti-gun rights, an issue as an apolitical organization we do not take a stance on. We understand and appreciate that many of our Alumni are gun owners, and we facilitate multiple hunting and outdoor opportunities for our Wounded Warriors throughout the year.
In the past, we made our logo available to appear on wide variety of products, including guns. As an organization, we owe it to our donors and constituents to maximize the return on investment of our dollars and brand. We are always looking at our business practices and whether we should continue with them in the future. In the case of cobranding, we've decided that we're not going to offer our logo to appear on weapons anymore - whether they're guns, knives, bows, swords, or any other type of weapon. There are still a few of the guns around for sale that had licensed our logo years ago, but there aren't any new ones being made. This is purely a business decision based on a review of a return on investment, especially when compared with other types of cobranding ventures.
Regarding the question of donations and events, we do permit fundraisers that are shooting- and gun-related, such as gun raffles, shooting competitions, etc., and we're incredibly appreciative of those who are willing to give their time to host or participate in an event. Likewise, we gratefully accept donations from companies and individuals connected with the gun industry.
As indicated above, we know that hunting and shooting sporting events can be very therapeutic for many of the Wounded Warriors we serve, and we're happy to work with the community to make these types of events available to our Alumni. Hunting and shooting sport enthusiasts are an incredibly supportive and generous community, and we've been honored by how often folks have opened their land and homes, and volunteered their time to make these types of events possible for our Alumni. We're so sorry if it seemed that we didn't appreciate that support with our confusing communication of a business decision. It certainly wasn't our intention!
I hope this post provides some clarity and helps answer some questions. We welcome the opportunity to have a warrior on Gun Talk Radio to discuss how hunting or events of the like have supported their recovery. We responded too quickly to his request and should have delved a bit deeper."
"We've had a lot of questions recently that started when we declined an opportunity to appear on Gun Talk Radio. We want to clarify and help answer some questions. We have seen through this process that the language on our website and our response to the invitation to appear on the show weren’t clear, and we are working on clarifying our approach. There is now much inaccurate information about WWP being anti-gun rights, an issue as an apolitical organization we do not take a stance on. We understand and appreciate that many of our Alumni are gun owners, and we facilitate multiple hunting and outdoor opportunities for our Wounded Warriors throughout the year.
In the past, we made our logo available to appear on wide variety of products, including guns. As an organization, we owe it to our donors and constituents to maximize the return on investment of our dollars and brand. We are always looking at our business practices and whether we should continue with them in the future. In the case of cobranding, we've decided that we're not going to offer our logo to appear on weapons anymore - whether they're guns, knives, bows, swords, or any other type of weapon. There are still a few of the guns around for sale that had licensed our logo years ago, but there aren't any new ones being made. This is purely a business decision based on a review of a return on investment, especially when compared with other types of cobranding ventures.
Regarding the question of donations and events, we do permit fundraisers that are shooting- and gun-related, such as gun raffles, shooting competitions, etc., and we're incredibly appreciative of those who are willing to give their time to host or participate in an event. Likewise, we gratefully accept donations from companies and individuals connected with the gun industry.
As indicated above, we know that hunting and shooting sporting events can be very therapeutic for many of the Wounded Warriors we serve, and we're happy to work with the community to make these types of events available to our Alumni. Hunting and shooting sport enthusiasts are an incredibly supportive and generous community, and we've been honored by how often folks have opened their land and homes, and volunteered their time to make these types of events possible for our Alumni. We're so sorry if it seemed that we didn't appreciate that support with our confusing communication of a business decision. It certainly wasn't our intention!
I hope this post provides some clarity and helps answer some questions. We welcome the opportunity to have a warrior on Gun Talk Radio to discuss how hunting or events of the like have supported their recovery. We responded too quickly to his request and should have delved a bit deeper."
Would you care to post the percentages of monies raised that are in fact used to benefit wounded Vets vs. the percentages spent on overhead, administration, advertising etc. ?
My issue with WWP is evident in your post DocUSMCRetired. There is a lot of discussion about "business" and "brand" and "return on investment." Return to whom? I don't agree with charities focused more on business than on the people purportedly served. I don't deny that WWP has done some great things for wounded vets, but with the resources they have had available, I wonder that more has not been done. I probably don't have a good grasp on the economics involved, but I can look at returns vs. distribution for a project like Food for the Poor and understand that more of my money is going to those in need than to the people running the program, whereas with WWP, it seems there is a large degree of (individual) profiteering.
I'm a vet and I won't ever support WWP because it's such a huge business: https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12842. Not too mention their regional folks have indeed been anti-gun. I'm appreciative for any groups that that helps vets, but if I get my choice, I'll take pro-gun over anti-gun any day. And remember, WWP only backtracked when they started losing support from pro-gun vets like myself and donors who care about the 2nd Amendment.
Check out the Special Operations Warrior Fund, it's much higher rated and pro-gun: Charity Navigator Rating - Special Operations Warrior Foundation.
Check out the Special Operations Warrior Fund, it's much higher rated and pro-gun: Charity Navigator Rating - Special Operations Warrior Foundation.
5% goes to administrative purposes. 60% goes directly to events. The rest is spent on advertising, fundraising, promotional stuff.
Their extremely high overhead is why the U.S. Congress gave WWP a "D-" rating. They are a business plain and simple and prey on suckers with the same practices the Susan B komen business model uses, i.e. tons of advertizing and very little (in in Susan's case virtually zero) money going to their stated purpose. WWP has Mark Whalberg as a spokesman, that alone is enough reason to distrust their gun stance as Mark is hyper anti-gun as well as WWP.
I have read somewhere in the past year that WWP gave around 5% to wounded Vets. One certainly should open their eyes before opening their checkbook. Simply amazing how gentle words and patriotic sounding verse will separate $$$ from other wise intelligent and level headed men. ( and others )
Yep, all you've got to do it target the right crowd (low info mindless hyper-patriot types) with a dumbass country song written by a corporation and sung by another anti-gun country star, play it over and over and over on FOX news and watch the millions roll in. I watch FOX until that commercial plays and then I change the channel and avoid FOX for the rest of the day.
What do the advertising, promotional, and fundraising activities entail? I understand it costs money to raise funds, but normally you make more out of it than you spend, if you are doing it right. So either 30%+ is spend on advertising and promotionals (advertising), or there is something funny going on. So, 35% overall is effectively just rolling from people's personal funds to the businesses and sponsors that have ties with WWP. That seems quite high to me. I guess 5% admin cost isn't so out of line, but when considering the total amount of $ per year, I wonder how that overhead is broken down.
So, because there has been much discussion on this, and we shouldn't take people's opinions as gospel, let's look at the actual numbers.
From the Charity Navigator site:
REVENUE
Contributions
Contributions, Gifts & Grants $143,772,582
Federated Campaigns $3,364,908
Membership Dues $0
Fundraising Events $1,047,555
Related Organizations $0
Government Grants $0
Total Contributions $148,185,045
Program Service Revenue $0
Total Primary Revenue $148,185,045
Other Revenue $6,773,856
TOTAL REVENUE $154,958,901
EXPENSES (Adjusted)
Program Expenses $55,386,953
Administrative Expenses $5,412,693
Fundraising Expenses $34,711,903
TOTAL FUNCTIONAL EXPENSES $95,511,549
Payments to Affiliates $0
Excess (or Deficit) for the year $59,447,352
Net Assets $90,237,753
So here is my problem with this whole situation. You have $150M revenue, and only $50M is spent doing what the organization is supposed to be doing. That's a 33% effectiveness, missing more than you are hitting. On top of that, $59M is retained as "excess," or as I read it, profit - $9M more than spent on services. Yes, I expect there is some restriction on how the assets of the company may be used, but it doesn't look like it's going to services. Where then does it go other than to business partners or employees? Is there some other need and use for this amount of excess on a yearly basis?
From the Charity Navigator site:
REVENUE
Contributions
Contributions, Gifts & Grants $143,772,582
Federated Campaigns $3,364,908
Membership Dues $0
Fundraising Events $1,047,555
Related Organizations $0
Government Grants $0
Total Contributions $148,185,045
Program Service Revenue $0
Total Primary Revenue $148,185,045
Other Revenue $6,773,856
TOTAL REVENUE $154,958,901
EXPENSES (Adjusted)
Program Expenses $55,386,953
Administrative Expenses $5,412,693
Fundraising Expenses $34,711,903
TOTAL FUNCTIONAL EXPENSES $95,511,549
Payments to Affiliates $0
Excess (or Deficit) for the year $59,447,352
Net Assets $90,237,753
So here is my problem with this whole situation. You have $150M revenue, and only $50M is spent doing what the organization is supposed to be doing. That's a 33% effectiveness, missing more than you are hitting. On top of that, $59M is retained as "excess," or as I read it, profit - $9M more than spent on services. Yes, I expect there is some restriction on how the assets of the company may be used, but it doesn't look like it's going to services. Where then does it go other than to business partners or employees? Is there some other need and use for this amount of excess on a yearly basis?
Came to pretty much post this.
Great idea for a cause but its extremely unfortunate they turned a charity into a mouthpiece for bullshit. Focus on your fucking principles and give to those you represent yourselves as giving to, and stay neutral as fuck on anything outside of it.
They'll never get a dime from me. All they are are a wolf in sheeps clothing holding a salvation army can.
Similar threads
