A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Collecting newsgroups » Books
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Oxfam revisited



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 11th 03, 10:01 AM
John Yamamoto-Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Oxfam revisited

On 2003-09-04 at 21:30:16 PST I wrote:

I have only just this minute sent off an e-mail to Oxfam,
with links to the various threads in which we have
been talking about them and inviting them to help us
out where we're making the wrong inferences. Perhaps
they'll be able to clarify all this for us.


I have no wish to resurrect the Oxfam threads (http://tinyurl.com/pwo9,
http://tinyurl.com/pwoj, http://tinyurl.com/pwon, http://tinyurl.com/pwo4),
but since I had had no reply a month later I contacted Oxfam again, and got
a reply from Allan Clarke, data manager of the trading division, answering
the points I raised and saying that my first e-mail must have slipped
through the net.

Firstly, he agreed that their shops are not making much more money now than
ten years ago or so. In fact, he went further and said that in 2000/01
Oxfam's gross income from trading was just £6.2m, little more than a third
of its level in the mid-nineties. The reasons cited were "a tough
combination of changes in retail employment law, sharp rent increases and an
increase in low-cost retailers".

The following year, Oxfam conducted a comprehensive review, which "led to
our Shop Managers being more empowered to make decisions local to their
shop - as it is our shop managers who know their local markets so well. As a
result of this, our profits have sharply increased to £15.4m in the
financial year 2002/03" (i.e., profits from shops are back to their level in
the mid-nineties).

The on-topic part of this posting is the following: "One of the ways we have
achieved this [i.e., the increase in profits from trading] is by being
trusted by our donors of books to get a decent price for them. This success
has led to Oxfam becoming the largest second-hand book seller in the United
Kingdom." He didn't attempt to answer the point about whether their
"collectible" books were always as collectible as they claimed, but he
probably isn't qualified to deal with that issue. From what he says, though,
it would seem that the shop managers are largely responsible for pricing, so
I would imagine that would lead to a tremendous amount of local variation.

He went on to say, "As well as being the most profitable charity retailer,
we are also the most efficient at turning sales into contribution. This is
in no small part due to the contribution of time by 23,000 volunteers."

Then came the question of the apparent increase in total Oxfam expenditure
from £11.1m in 96/97 to £74.5m in 2001/02. He explained that the £11.1m
figure does not include retail expenditure, since at that time the law did
not require charities to report that expenditure. "The law changed and now
charities include...shop costs in expenditure, which is why it looks to have
risen so dramatically."

He wanted to make it clear that the expenses of retail outlets were financed
entirely out of the income received from shops and money from cash donations
was completely separate and was never recycled into subsidising the
expenditure on retail outlets. "Somebody giving Oxfam £5 in cash will see
most of that money going to the programme... None of this £5 will go on shop
costs. If you were to purchase something for £5 in a shop, then shop costs
will come out of this £5."

Anyone wanting further information about any of the above can contact Oxfam
directly at .

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com


Ads
  #2  
Old October 12th 03, 11:54 PM
Graeme & Chris Williams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It is interesting looking at the prices Oxfam charge. In some cases they
obviously have computer literate people checking their stock, in others it
is based on prejudice.

In the first instance, we had a friend in the second hand music business who
found a rare Beatles record in an Oxfam shop. They were charging the top
price for a record of that title but the condition of the LP meant it was
worth a lot less, he informed them of this and they said they had had it
checked by an expert. We had a similar experience in the same shop where
first edition books carried a fine/fine price tag even if they were
ex-library! They obviously had someone who could use the internet to check
prices but didn't know anything about what they were seeing!

In the same shop (and others), however, we have found children's books and
westerns with a very cheap price tag which are very collectable. Clearly in
this instance it is based on prejudice. Of course we don't care because we
can buy them cheap and sell them for a profit.

But in the end, like any business, Oxfam have the right to sell their stock
for the best price they can get. If they sell their stock for the same price
as antiquarian book sellers then normal customer will be happy. It is only
the book dealers who will be unhappy and when have Oxfam had to keep us
sweet!

We don't tend to bother with Oxfam shops much unless we find a very special
title but I have axe to grind. If they can get those prices for their books
good luck to them and it keeps those customers off my back who say "I can
get this book cheaper at a charity shop!" 'cos I can just direct them to
Oxfam and say "be my guest" ;o)

"John Yamamoto-Wilson" wrote in
message ...
On 2003-09-04 at 21:30:16 PST I wrote:

I have only just this minute sent off an e-mail to Oxfam,
with links to the various threads in which we have
been talking about them and inviting them to help us
out where we're making the wrong inferences. Perhaps
they'll be able to clarify all this for us.


I have no wish to resurrect the Oxfam threads (http://tinyurl.com/pwo9,
http://tinyurl.com/pwoj, http://tinyurl.com/pwon,

http://tinyurl.com/pwo4),
but since I had had no reply a month later I contacted Oxfam again, and

got
a reply from Allan Clarke, data manager of the trading division, answering
the points I raised and saying that my first e-mail must have slipped
through the net.

Firstly, he agreed that their shops are not making much more money now

than
ten years ago or so. In fact, he went further and said that in 2000/01
Oxfam's gross income from trading was just £6.2m, little more than a third
of its level in the mid-nineties. The reasons cited were "a tough
combination of changes in retail employment law, sharp rent increases and

an
increase in low-cost retailers".

The following year, Oxfam conducted a comprehensive review, which "led to
our Shop Managers being more empowered to make decisions local to their
shop - as it is our shop managers who know their local markets so well. As

a
result of this, our profits have sharply increased to £15.4m in the
financial year 2002/03" (i.e., profits from shops are back to their level

in
the mid-nineties).

The on-topic part of this posting is the following: "One of the ways we

have
achieved this [i.e., the increase in profits from trading] is by being
trusted by our donors of books to get a decent price for them. This

success
has led to Oxfam becoming the largest second-hand book seller in the

United
Kingdom." He didn't attempt to answer the point about whether their
"collectible" books were always as collectible as they claimed, but he
probably isn't qualified to deal with that issue. From what he says,

though,
it would seem that the shop managers are largely responsible for pricing,

so
I would imagine that would lead to a tremendous amount of local variation.

He went on to say, "As well as being the most profitable charity retailer,
we are also the most efficient at turning sales into contribution. This is
in no small part due to the contribution of time by 23,000 volunteers."

Then came the question of the apparent increase in total Oxfam expenditure
from £11.1m in 96/97 to £74.5m in 2001/02. He explained that the £11.1m
figure does not include retail expenditure, since at that time the law did
not require charities to report that expenditure. "The law changed and now
charities include...shop costs in expenditure, which is why it looks to

have
risen so dramatically."

He wanted to make it clear that the expenses of retail outlets were

financed
entirely out of the income received from shops and money from cash

donations
was completely separate and was never recycled into subsidising the
expenditure on retail outlets. "Somebody giving Oxfam £5 in cash will see
most of that money going to the programme... None of this £5 will go on

shop
costs. If you were to purchase something for £5 in a shop, then shop costs
will come out of this £5."

Anyone wanting further information about any of the above can contact

Oxfam
directly at .

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com




  #3  
Old October 13th 03, 02:51 PM
Giltedge04
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



It is interesting looking at the prices Oxfam charge. In some cases they
obviously have computer literate people checking their stock, in others it
is based on prejudice.

In the first instance, we had a friend in the second hand music business who
found a rare Beatles record in an Oxfam shop. They were charging the top
price for a record of that title but the condition of the LP meant it was
worth a lot less, he informed them of this and they said they had had it
checked by an expert. We had a similar experience in the same shop where
first edition books carried a fine/fine price tag even if they were
ex-library! They obviously had someone who could use the internet to check
prices but didn't know anything about what they were seeing!

In the same shop (and others), however, we have found children's books and
westerns with a very cheap price tag which are very collectable. Clearly in
this instance it is based on prejudice. Of course we don't care because we
can buy them cheap and sell them for a profit.

Normally, the "expert" valuer is just a volunteer with some book pricing
knowledge and in many instances the valuer only gets to see the ooks which have
been selected by the other volunteers as beig potentially valuable so many
scarce titles can still easily slip through the net.

Then of course you get the smart-alec volunteers who decide they can do the
pricing job themselves simply by looking up the values on the internet. As with
the rare Beatles record mentioned no account is taken of condition and so
often a First Edition is priced up based upon the highest price shown on ABE or
Addall where the condition would only merit maybe a quarter of the price. Of
course we all know that there are also some vastly inflated prices shown on ABE
by some dealers and so when an uninformed volunteer charity shop worker see the
top price and values accordingly this leads to farce.

At the Oxfam where I used to do valuations they had a special locked cabinet
for the more collectable items. When I stopped valuing they started to put
silly prices on things and put them in the cabinet and amazingly alot were
selling. It seemed Joe Public thought because they were told the books were
collectable and valuableand put in a locked cabinet they believed it and
bought.

Stan
  #4  
Old October 13th 03, 04:54 PM
Randy Burns
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yesterday I noticed that the Leeds branch of Oxfam apparently is listing
books on ABE. Is that the only one that does this? ABE is probably the
main source of their prices then for items they are trying to mark to a
retail price.

Randy

--

"Giltedge04" wrote in message
...


It is interesting looking at the prices Oxfam charge. In some cases they
obviously have computer literate people checking their stock, in others it
is based on prejudice.



  #5  
Old October 13th 03, 05:35 PM
Giltedge04
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Randy wrote

Yesterday I noticed that the Leeds branch of Oxfam apparently is listing
books on ABE. Is that the only one that does this? ABE is probably the
main source of their prices then for items they are trying to mark to a
retail price.


As far as I know all the Oxfam collectable books are listed through the Leeds
Branch. So if good stuff comes into shops across the country they are sent to
Leeds to be listed on ABE. They have been listing on ABE now for quite some
time.

Stan
  #6  
Old October 13th 03, 09:36 PM
John Yamamoto-Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Giltedge04 wrote:

As far as I know all the Oxfam collectable books are listed through the

Leeds
Branch. So if good stuff comes into shops across the country they are sent

to
Leeds to be listed on ABE.


That's not right. If you go to
http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/ClientQuickList and type in Oxfam you will
get a list of all the Oxfam bookshops that sell on ABE. There are currently
sixteen, fourteen of which are in England, and one each in Scotland and
Ireland.

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Level 5 revisited William Bosner Pens & Pencils 0 January 6th 04 02:28 PM
1979 Buick Comp Tape Revisited Shrubman 8 Track Tapes 0 December 17th 03 10:21 PM
Fantasy Sports autographs revisited :) Rick D Garrett Autographs 0 October 14th 03 01:08 AM
Charles Dickens autograph Cort Bassett Books 11 September 6th 03 03:35 PM
Oxfam John Yamamoto-Wilson Books 9 September 4th 03 03:20 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.