Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
When Apple customers purchase a (PRODUCT)RED device or accessory, a portion of the proceeds is donated to (RED).

Does Apple say how much of a portion is donated for each device?
[doublepost=1543712111][/doublepost]
I get that. But it is okay to re evaluate at some point...and it is also okay to have more than one non-profit benefit from the sales of anything.
This one is probably close to Tim's heart.
It's probably not worth worrying about. The sum of all aid given by companies probably pales in amount to that given by countries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexGraphicD
Great Marketing for Apple....look good while profiting off peoples hearts. Why give a straight donation when you can profit from it.

You conveniently "forgot" to mention the millions of dollars Apple has raised towards combatting AIDs in Africa.

Details matter. Not shocked.

Also seems you don't understand the value of Apple raising awareness.
 
Last edited:
Great Marketing for Apple....look good while profiting off peoples hearts. Why give a straight donation when you can profit from it.

Couldn’t they just donate a hundred million? That would be nothing for them

The awareness campaign from Product (RED) is arguably a bigger component than the money itself. As for that, Apple has donated $200 Million, an entire one third of all fundraising done in the lifetime of the charity.
 
Doesn't prostate cancer kill more people, why do the lovies not campaign for that?
Prostate cancer has no moral connotation. Living with Aids means living in shame and isolation since it is viewed as a moral failing.The suffering caused by it is therefore immense.
It also leads to infections spreading since the affected remain silent and spread the virus further. A campaign seems good the fight these mindsets.
 
And how is making other people aware like you and me will contribute anything to this cause? If apple donates $200 million, what is my $5 gonna achieve?
You're like people who think that their one vote doesn't matter. Well, maybe it doesn't matter much, but a thousand votes matter, and maybe with this awareness raising, that's a thousand donations. Easily possible given Apple's influence. Fundamentally, it's a question of which group you want to be a part of: The group who made an impact, however small, or the group of noncontributing zeros who matter to no-one. I'd rather be a part of the former.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RuralJuror
The amount of exposure RED gets from this promotion is probably worth much than the actual cost of turning each Apple Store red for a day.
Can't say I've ever come across RED anywhere (in the UK), except as an Apple promotion.
 
It is amazing how much negativities come out from this. I mean really, for those who are skeptical, have you done something good, if ever, lately? You can call it marketing or whatever, but at least there’s an effort. For those asking why Apple not doing it for a different disease, well, if you think that particular disease is more important, then you can start something to raise awareness as well instead of sulking at Apple.
 
You conveniently "forgot" to mention the millions of dollars Apple has raised towards combatting AIDs in Africa.

Details matter. Not shocked.

Also seems you don't understand the value of Apple raising awareness.

We get that apple has raised millions of dollars. The quiestion is how much of that actually goes to those in need.
 
I think this Product Red thing is great and all, but I want to know how much they are putting into this "Red" change to all their stores? We know Apple only donates like a 3% or something right? So let's say they spend $10,000 per store to do this change, wouldn't it be better if they donated all this money to the fund?

What about the administrative costs of running this fund? How would you know those costs?
[doublepost=1543757400][/doublepost]
We get that apple has raised millions of dollars. The quiestion is how much of that actually goes to those in need.

You might be asking that question of any charity. 25 years ago I worked for the Red Cross. They took great pride in acknowledging that 92% of donations were used to aid families. Meanwhile I was making $20k/year. Would have preferred a few more percentage points were being used to pay employees.
 
We get that apple has raised millions of dollars. The quiestion is how much of that actually goes to those in need.

Since you seem to have serious concerns and doubts, can you research that and report back here to this forum? Perhaps you can also compare Apple's giving to other corporations.

Doing the work to come up with real data is certainly more worthy than stirring up a big bowl of FUD and walking away.

Thanks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: jonblatho


applestoreworldaidsday2.jpg

Does anyone know which store this is?
 
There are always ulterior motives to these press releases. Kudos though to them for this although I rather see them strive for cancer awareness over AIDS.

We are all aware of cancer. I’m not the only one here to lose someone to it, nor are you. Cancer already has a really big mindshare.

And AIDS, unlike cancer, can be fully and permanently eradicated in our lifetime. That would bring an end to a problem that is holding back economic growth globally, and costing support, donations and subsidies that would be nice to free up for other programs. To actually definitively solve a problem in medicine is an accomplishment worth pursuing in its own right, but the gains from solving this one are immense and likely to contribute a lot to dealing with cancer sooner than we would otherwise be able to.

Cancer is complicated. It comes down to the myriad corners nature has cut each and every day that multicellular life has been around, and there’s no one cancer or one cure. Cancer a catch-all term for when your body is doing almost exactly what it’s supposed to be doing, but not quite, and we’ve only the most basic of ideas about how life works as a starting hand for this game.

AIDS is simple. It’s an infectious disease and we know how to deal with that: we contain it, stop it from spreading, until nobody living has it anymore. Then it’s gone. If we’re lucky, we may find ways to speed up the process, and we have found good ways to stop the spread (with more likely to be found). But we already have everything we need to get rid of it, for good.

We just need to put in the effort, which readily translates into spending money, at this point.

Donating company money to treating HIV and AIDS is thus an investment, with a payoff, while donating money to treating cancer is an ongoing expense. Charity should be about investment and cost reduction, aimed at sustainable improvement, not throwing money at people to feel better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jonblatho
Oh please....again, all these expenses and more can be easily covered by the millions that these companies can donate. So what’s the big deal on raising awareness to the average joe too?

There is one Apple. There are millions of average joes.
 
Thanks! I knew I could do that years ago and already donate there. I didn’t need someone in a forum to tell me that. But if you research how little of cancer funding goes to childhood cancer funding, you wound realize how crucial it is that we take it more seriously. AIDS treatment has come so far and isn’t the death sentence is used to be and may even have a cure in the foreseeable future. Childhood cancer isn’t rare and kills kids everyday.

I had a client whose young son died a slow, painful death from cancer. Along the way I learned that, at least according to one of the doctors treating the son, "You cure childhood cancer, you cure all cancer." That seems like a reasonable incentive. Even if wrong, unless something has changed recently, research into curing childhood cancer is woefully underfunded, especially compared to how often children are (or maybe now it's "were") featured on materials requesting a donation.
 
I had a client whose young son died a slow, painful death from cancer. Along the way I learned that, at least according to one of the doctors treating the son, "You cure childhood cancer, you cure all cancer." That seems like a reasonable incentive. Even if wrong, unless something has changed recently, research into curing childhood cancer is woefully underfunded, especially compared to how often children are (or maybe now it's "were") featured on materials requesting a donation.

It is horribly underfunded!!! And under researched! It’s really heartbreaking. So much pain and suffering for kids who go through it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cavepainter
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.