i mean i only included a link to their third quarter earnings in my initial comment
4 Likes
Yeah my bad. I’ll fix it. Point still stands at even half the number of buyers, though: Blizz charity pets have never made more than 3 mil. And even if this one did? It wouldn’t be millions more than that.
This is just Blizzard putting a reasonable cap on the whole deal. Don’t all corporations do this? If they didn’t wouldn’t it screw up their books?
Probably, plus in the end even if it sells 4 million then 3 million would have went to a charity that otherwise wouldnt have got it
3 Likes
Yes, most corporations do this. But not just to get numbers right, but because of statutes and contracts. Blizzard needed to communicate with the charity organization first and write up a contract that included the maximum (for up to $X) monetary value which the charity could receive for the donation.
3 Likes
Nah. Social Justice Warrior isn’t implying anti-corporation. There’s a significant overlap but Social Justice Warrior has largely retained its initial definition and that’s people who feel it necessary to inject race and gender politics into literally everything and get offended and jump down your throat for using certain words they deem as offensive to a group of people. Typically so they can morally grandstand about how great of people they think they are in comparison to you because if you use the dreaded “r” word you’ve just become Hitler to them.
Any group is always going to be defined by its extremists, or most visible figures. That’s just how optics work. The Alt Right initially started as the youthful conservative movement who were sick of what the supposed conservative party of America had become and trying to bring the focus more to politics rather than Jesus after the evangelo-conservatives of the Bush Era who opted to focus on religion above all else. Then with a few psychotic extremists, namely the ethno-nationalists claiming to affiliate with the Alt Right it forever became viewed as the radical fringe far right ethno-nationalist movement.
Or a better example, the Tea Party who got their name from the fact around like 2006 they’d host tea parties in town halls as a protest to cartoonish government spending. The Koch Brothers got involved and tainted that movement to forever go from “Get the government out of my wallet” to “Get the government to stop gays from getting married.”
Similarly on the other side of the spectrum, Democrats have largely been divorced of the identity of being a center left party because its most visible members in 2015-2016 became the Progressives who were the very far left which is now what the party has largely become visible as and have been forever married to the Social Justice League as far as the public sees because of the prominent amount of them backing Hillary very visibly in 2015-2016. When most people think “Democrat” they aren’t thinking things like Jimmy Carter, or hell even Obama anymore. They’re thinking of the people like AOC and Bernie Sanders.
It really isn’t SJWs complaining about it so much as people getting sick of Blizzard putting small text on charities as “up to a certain point” that most people will never notice. To be fair, you probably have some loser neckbeard with a chip on their shoulder who is probably combing literally everything to stir outrage like this.
My gripe is more, if you’re going to cite something as a charity, go all in with it. But I’m literally of the belief that charity isn’t charity without altruism. That meaning you MUST give as a self sacrifice and not because it might benefit you. I.E Giving someone 20 dollars vs giving them 20 dollars and expecting them to pay you back. Or for a corporate context, companies and philanthropists who give to charities then turn around and use it as a tax writeoff. They aren’t actually giving.
For what it is worth though, I appreciate the gesture and not railing them for this. I just really wish people would quit attributing things as a charity when it is divorced of altruism. It would not shock me in the slightest if they wrote off the charity donations as a tax writeoff while also pocketing proceeds from it, basically just deferring the payment until a later date while actually not coming to any form of loss.
do you have a tl;dr version of this
Oh good lord no it’s not. 
That’s what fine print is for.
Almost every other charity event I’ve ever seen has the same fine print. People need to stop acting like this is something new.
It absolutely isn’t. At all. 100% of every pet goes to the charity till the time limit or monetary limit. Blizz gets nothing before that.
Do we want to bring up how others have 50% or 75% go to charity instead? Or how about the pet Blizz once did where it was 50%?
Blizz has never hit the 3mil mark on a charity pet. Let’s stop making things up to be upset about.
How you missed the asterisks is beyond me and is no one’s fault but your own.
5 Likes
With regards to the actual charity and not just correcting someone’s speculations on the phrase SJW yeah.
TL;DR - I find it incredibly scummy to deem something as a charity when you aren’t actually incorporating altruism which demands self sacrifice in that you can’t knowingly benefit from the action otherwise it can’t be seen of altruistic or even charitable by extension. Especially when it’s very likely they’ll write off their charity donation as a tax write off which basically comes at a level of zero self sacrifice.
Though like I said, I do appreciate the fact they are doing this, it’s a nice gesture but I disagree with attaching “Charity” to it because it isn’t charity so much as. “If we sell enough we pocket proceeds after we hit the limit and will likely write this off on our taxes anyway so all that’s happening is what we donate we will get back anyway, just at a later point in time but we’ll pretend we sacrificed.”
It’s practically a loan with the payback coming in the form of a tax write off rather than from the charity.
1 Like
The money goes to a charity. That’s why the word is used. It’s a charity pet because thats where it goes.
Yup. Like every other pet that had money go to charity. And literally everyone in the United States can write off charity donations. Why is this an issue?
5 Likes
Wouldn’t all the drama be lifted if they just had some kind of notification in the store that they hit the donation goal and no more purchases will go towards the charity?
For all we know, they might have something like that. But unfortunately, they have never reached their donation goal in the past.
2 Likes
probably, but then itd have to be accurate down to the millisecond or people would complain that it wasnt actually showing how much money is raised and blizzard must be skimming
Charity requires Altruism. Altruism requires that you can not knowingly benefit from your actions. With that in mind, given I am damn certain this will be a tax write off I don’t think altruism exists, therefore it can’t be seen of as charitable so much as they are loaning money to a charity with the payback being a fat tax write off, amounting to zero self sacrifice which is what must exist for something to be altruistic.
Like when I donate to a charity of my own pocket, I don’t write it off on taxes. I give it as a genuine thing. I specifically refuse to write it off on taxes because then it taints the motive because now I’m not doing it to be helpful so much as “Oh I’m going without for the time being but I’ll get it back later and basically have lost nothing.”
I have the same gripe with when you donate to a charity at a convenience store and they give you this little card to fill out they hang on the wall, I just tell them to toss it. When I read through them and people put their name in big bold letters it makes me think “Did you really give to be charitable or did you do it so you can grandstand about how great of a person you think you are for having donated to a charity?”
1 Like
You’re using an entirely different sense of the word. Stop focusing on the adjective.
Make a Wish and WE are charities.
The money goes to two charities.
Thus… we call it a charity pet, because that’s what the money went to.
I swear, people will find the most ridiculous ways.of twisting things just to be upset. 
9 Likes
You heard it here folks. The Make a Wish Foundation is not a charity because donors can write off their donation.
2 Likes
I’m using the sense of the word that using the word “Charity” gives off. When you see the word “Charity” plastered on the advertisement for this pet, do you think “Oh a generous donation” or “Charity Organization”? Arguably you can consider this a lie by obfuscation if you think the former because it’s directly meant to give off the impression of the former, while actually meaning the latter by divorcing it of most of the context as most people when they see “charity” presume a donation to a cause of good will rather than “Oh a donation so we can grandstand then write it off on our taxes later and basically have lost nothing.”
Yes, but like I said. Most people when they see “charity” are going to presume a donation involving altruistic intent. It would be a different story if it was called what it really is and “Pet we will donate proceeds from to a charity organization then later write off our donation on our taxes for a tax break.”
If they marketed it as what it inevitably will be, people would give them the middle finger because it directly states it’ll go back into their pockets. All they really are is a middleman, if I want to donate to a charity and actually be charitable I’ll just donate to the company myself. And certainly not taint my good intentions by so doing by “Yeah but I did it through the middleman so I could have a pet.” Which is an immediate and known benefit to which I question the people buying it on whether they’re doing it to actually donate to the cause, or to get a pet.
Oh no, don’t confuse yourself. I’m not upset in the slightest. I even stated above that I’m glad they’re doing this. Just I wish they would call the spade a spade which is “Pet sale which we will donate 3 million of proceeds to a charity organization then use it for a tax write off come tax time.”
I’m just merely here saying "Given what is likely to happen I refuse to accept this as being altruistic, let alone charitable so much as “We get to act like we’re doing a good thing for optics but really it has no effect on our bottom line and we’re basically just loaning them money and the payback on the loan is coming in the form of a tax break in a couple of months.”
Trust me, I am far from outraged by this. I’m actually glad that they’re at least pretending to be generous since it kind of washes away the whole “Filthy money grabbers” outrage we saw the last couple of weeks with people saying they’re removing the Brutosaur strictly to sell tokens and jack up their sales.
1 Like
altruism doesnt require you to not benefit, it requires you to benefit less than you would, they are benefiting less by not having 3 million in revenue
I’d argue they’re not a charity because they have a horrible track record of pocketing upwards of a quarter of proceeds unless you specifically state otherwise, but you don’t know where it goes after you pay them so you can’t really verify. Even by their own words “More than 75% of all funds go to fulfilling wishes.” Given the marketing language it can be a safe presumption that it’s probably around 76-80% that actually goes to the cost with the other 20-24% going to the company likely to pay their workers, but if your fulltime job is supposedly working at a charity, taking a paycheck makes one question your true motives for working there. It should be volunteer staffed honestly, like pure nonprofit.
And also, just because donors can write off their donations doesn’t make it not a charity. It just makes the donors not genuinely charitable if they choose to do so.
WoW players are performing the charity, just like they have since 2009. A battle pet that isn’t necessary (no store pets are part of any serious meta or battle pet team besides maybe Lil Rag) is a token reward. It’s like buying the Veterans Day poppy.
I think it’s going to a charity. It’s also a donation. You just want something to complain about.
No. They’re going to think, “hey, my money goes to help kids. Sweet.”
Literally everyone can write it off if they want. And people know this. It’s not new. Every company that donates to a charity does this. Let’s not act like that’s some huge issue.
And who cares? The charity gets a crap ton of money. That’s all that matters.
No one is pretending.
These charities are getting up to 3mil. Period. They could’ve just made the pet and pocketed it all right from the start.
shakes head
I’m walking away from this ridiculousness.
3 Likes