Bullying is bullying - whoever does it

Raskolnikov

What is more irksome is that Oxfam receive their stock free, enjoy tax relief on their rates, and their staff are largely unpaid volunteers. Given this, why do they charge risible prices for used books - in particular, mass market paperbacks? I believe that the principles of fair trade revolve around a fair price for a reasonable product. Oxfam peruse the internet and come up with 'best' prices that are frequently in excess of the price in a non-charity second hand bookshop where the owner has to buy his stock, give himself and his staff a salary and pay rates at full whack. For these reasons I now avoid Oxfam bookshops. Barnardos are fast catching up.

Noa Zrk

Susan.

I'm in total agreement with you on this. Oxfam is gaining a pre-eminent position in our towns and city high streets and has added the insult of secular sanctity to its sales. How can you not buy, at the high prices so smugly stipulated, for the privilege of having your charitable aid distributed, less overheads, to some foreign case? That donation is of course in addition to the the indirect subsidy you already make through the non council tax or other tax payments this behemoth doesn't make or the foreign aid you already provide through the kindly offices of our governments international guilt aid.
So, for me also charity begins at home. Books go to the local charity or the small independent market stallholder, who even offers to part pay me. Stuff the surly half wits who stare blankly at me in Oxfam, I have my own charities to support!

L0wKey

It isn't just books. The local Oxfam shop near me also sells new instruments and other such paraphernalia, which the local music shop finds intensely distressing. Having spoken to the local MP about it, he said in no short terms that there was little he could do. Bookshops are only the start, with the tax breaks and other bonuses Oxfam get for being, well, Oxfam, they could feasibly put most small high street shops out of business. This on top of the current financial climate is doubly worrying. How a charity can still garner so much public goodwill when it clearly spends the majority of its income on self publicising and furthering its national chains is beyond me. Boycott them, boycott them now.

You are the only person I know to have publicly highlighted this concern, thank you for that. Most do not want to hear it, much less discuss it openly.

Anne Wotana Kaye 1

Oxfam is not alone in conning the naive. Fara Kids Shops are a real disgrace. They are in business for aiding Romanian children in Romania - not those blocking your way in tube trains, as they beg whilst their elders pick your pockets. Fara have taken over prime positions in high streets, and the only good thing I can say is they are making life a little harder fro Oxfam.

Fergus Pickering

In Canterburythere is an Oxfam bookshop. Quite a good bookshop but not the cheapest prices I can get. They are in Whitstable where the Oxford Bookshop, a secondhand bookshop which is NOT a charity, has more books, sells them more cheaply AND buys them. Nobody should bother to go to Canterbury. Whitstable is the place for secondhand books. And of course I am supporting a small business, though that's not why I go there. I go where the best value is. So should you.

Daniel Lionsden

I used to volunteer for an Oxfam bookshop in Croydon some years ago, so I bring a slightly different perspective. The shop was profitable but not profitable enough for the management which were then developing this aggressive style. As I recall the shop was clearing £35,000 (which most charity companies would be happy with) profit a year but the bosses wanted at least £40,000. The shop was on a low rent but Oxfam were messing the owner about by not paying him. They had, however, spent a lot on a shop refurbishment which had not been successful in raising profitability. The prices of books had been increased from the traditional prices to virtually the level of secondhand bookshops despite Oxfam having free donations and mainly unpaid volunteers.
The manager was informed fait accompli the shop would shut just before Christmas, which came as a shock to her and over which I know she is still agrieved. The shop closed 6 weeks later despite staff protests. There is now no Oxfam shop in the whole town.

Judy Astley

Not only are dedicated Oxfam bookshops taking business from other booksellers, but for those of us whose books are still in copyright, we are finding more and more often that readers are happy to buy our entire backlist second-hand without realising the no-income implication for the authors. The old argument that "oh they'll buy one in a charity shop, like it, then buy the backlist from a bookshop" no longer applies while such vast stocks are available for a pittance. This means that the authors get no benefit at all from potentially a large number of new readers. I feel that any Oxfam (or other charity) shop selling more than - say - 500 books at any one time should somehow be linked to a royalty system for authors. I'd suggest it shouldn't be impossible to involve PLR - each shop paying a licence fee to sell books. They already have to do this for music - via the PPL and PRS licensing system.

EC

It is a shame that so many genuine second hand and antiquarian bookshops have been forced to close down in recent years. Their owners cannot make a living wage because of the whopping business rates that they are forced to pay.

Single enterprise ventures like Oxfam bookshops should have to pay the same business rates on their premises as other bookshops.

Mike Arthur

I wasn't aware businesses could bully each other. Is Microsoft bullying Yahoo? Is Shell bullying BP?

There seems to be some feeling in British culture that small local shops deserve some sort of charity. I'm afraid if they can't compete with a charity shop, run mostly by volunteers, that uses a lot of their profits outside the UK, then they perhaps don't deserve to stay profitable and can get another job like everyone else.

In addition, I really don't see any need for the ill-informed climate change bashing. Are you a climate change scientist? Have you done any scientific research on the matter? Have you even talked first-hand to someone who has? I suspect not. I'm not sure why we should listen to an English graduate and author over Professors and people who do scientific research...

Lesley Cookman

I agree with everything Judy Astley says. I am deeply ashamed now for taking part in the CWA/Oxfam event last year, something I won't be doing this year, even though it has become much bigger and could well do my profile a bit of good!

And Fergus, thank you for promoting Whitstable. Yes, the Oxford Bookshop buys my overspill now that the library won't take them, but what is so sad is that our local independent bookshop was forced out of business last year by a combination of supermarket and charity shop trading. Bookshops and authors alike should be campaigning to stop this.

DozyDave

What a misinformed, factually incorrect and myopic article. What has made booksellers struggle is the rise of Amazon, Tesco, Big book chains and the collapse of the net book agreement. This article is basically nonsense Bull is Bull no matter who writes it I'm afraid.

Nicholas

Mike Arthur. Very good but Oxfam is supposed to be a charity and aligns itself with those who deplore corporate capitalism, greed and the ruthless law of the market place. So it says one thing but does another.

That position, and your second on climate change, demonstrates the moral confusion involved in the Left's trojan horse seizure of power. Under socialist rules it is never a level playing field and the reek of hypocrisy permeates the air, so to suggest small independent bookshops have an equal chance and that certain categories of people have no right to express an opinion on climate change is disingenuous. Essentially you choose those protocols which support the causes you believe in and deride and dismiss those that don't. On the one hand you attack capitalism's greed but on the other you exploit it to further the very strange brand of socialism we are currently seeing. On the one hand you deplore people without scientific credentials speaking out but on the other you turn a blind eye to scientists who manipulate and distort data. Very mixed up, but very strident in belief and very arrogant in articulation. Things for ordinary people to be very wary of.

Mike Arthur

I don't turn a blind eye to scientists manipulating data, it concerns me greatly. I just think, in this age of appalling scientific journalism and blogging, that someone who has done no personal research into climate change should refrain from calling it a scam.

I'll delegate my judgement to people to have spend their life studying weather changes on this planet, academics who aren't paid especially well and care deeply about the truth. Some of them are bad eggs, sure, but that can be said about any group of people.

I particularly resent when those doing the bashing are people who probably haven't spent a day learning or reading about science since they were at school, other than what they are told be poorly informed journalists.

Maybe Oxfam is a bullying and capitalistic charity. I don't really care, they contribute huge amounts of huge to many people in need in developing countries and have been doing great work in Haiti. I'll shed a tear for the bookshop owner whose business closes down and can apply for another job or go on the dole when children in developing countries aren't dying of hunger or preventable diseases. Until then, I want charities like Oxfam to try and get as much money to help those in need as possible.

Loosefish

Your right. Charities should pay low wages so they attract only the lowest quality staff - why shouldn't they suffer? They're devoting their careers to overcoming poverty so they should have a bit themselves.

And why should they work in environments that are conducive to doing their jobs efficiently! They should work in dusty cupboards above shops.

Charities also have no right to advertise or communicate with the public - that's the job of our car manufacturers and supermarkets.

Abby Mason

Is it wrong to make money for a well deserved charity? with the amount of shops closing in towns all over the country prime locations are starting to become affordable.. you cant hold that against a charity for making money could you?

If the books are that expensive, then the smaller, cheaper shops will still retain their customers.. I dont see a problem!

Fearless Frank

Mike Arthur: if they can't compete with a charity shop, run mostly by volunteers, ...perhaps don't deserve to stay profitable
Yup, that's the way for shops to survive... get your stock for nothing, replace your staff with volunteers, refuse to pay your rates and get an aura sanctity into the bargain!

Flabbergasted

I'm horrified that there are so many ignorant band-wagon thoughts about Oxfam. So many "facts" are so wrong. For one, Oxfam doesn't "clearly spend the majority of its income on self-publicising" - as you can see in their annual reports (which report fact not fiction), only 9p in every 1 pound is spent on generating future income which includes publicity. In fact 80p in every pound is spent directly on fighting poverty - something completely different to where the profits of Tesco go, and much better than the majority of charities. I think its great that we live in a world where a charity that, contrary to popular beleif, uses donors income so wisely can generate so much more income to make a positive difference in the world. Equally its really sad when they are attacked for doing well.

Suzanne

I think it is absolutely disgusting to entitle this article in such an aggressive manner and the ignorance of the people responding astounds me.

Oxfam is providing an excellent service in so many ways and should be acclaimed not dammed.

1) Oxfam provides books to communities at a good price, making them affordable to everyone

2) it is stopping the wasteful, endless reprinting of books which is negative for the environment

3) it is providing lots of employment to shop managers up and down the country and providing skills and training to thousands of volunteers

4) It raises millions of pounds to develop poor community and provides emergency aid to those that desperately need.

Oxfam like any other retailer meets the demands of the community it serves and shouldn't be criticised for having a good business model which it excelles in delivering.

I am deeply saddened by the selfish and shallow comments of the ignorant people responding to this article with the same old, boring and uninformed arguments about where Oxfam's money goes. Oxfam spends pennies in self advertising compared to many of the large charities in the UK and even so they are right to spend it if it generates more wealth than it costs – it’s simple good business sense!

I suggest that rather than sniping about the competition shop owners get clued up. This is an ever-changing environment and while some industries may suffer others excel. It is down to you and you alone to stay one step ahead of the game and make your self-relevant to the current trends and needs in your community.

Fearless Frank

I'll shed a tear for the bookshop owner whose business closes down and can apply for another job or go on the dole when children in developing countries aren't dying of hunger or preventable diseases.
Mike Arthur - are you in fact trying to stir up anti-Oxfam feeling?

SUSAN HILL

MIKE ARTHUR. I have spent the last 3 years getting scientific information about global warming/climate change. I subscribe to several e-mail round-robins including the Benny Peiser University of Liverpool one and I can assure you that I know a very great deal about the subject. I have read probably 12 books about it recently, and if you would care to ask Lord Lawson - Nigel Lawson - he will confirm my interest in and knowledge of the subject - as much knowledge as it is possible for a non-scientist to have. The wheels are fast coming off the whole scam as anyone reading the Spectator should by now surely know. Even the Guardian and the BBC are catching up. Oxfam should spend their money on feeding and educating the 3rd world not on embarking on masive publicity campaigns about something which is now under such serious doubt in the wide scientific community.

Tim Carpenter LPUK

The core problem here is the distortions to the market created by the concept of "charitable status".

If you steadily removed income tax and shifted to consumption taxes, charities would not need to be supported by "gift aid" or income tax reliefs and they would not need to "ask permission" to be a charity, which, once granted, if anything increases the risk of people unknowingly giving to bad causes.

The concept of charity as a particular kind of company could disappear and be replaced by a general one of "Non Profit Organisation" that could arrange for inter-year tax windows to make provision for big projects possible without being hit by corporation tax as they husbanded resources.

Similarly the other distortions could be dismantled.

Distortions have unintended consequences and we can see that now with OXFAM. The answer is not more distortions but a removal of the underlying problems - tax breaks and the taxes that drove it.

Mike Goodenough

If you valve independent secondhand bookshops and what to support them, try TheBookGuide.co.uk

dearieme

In a coffee shop in Oxford, my wife and I were bombarded by a conversation among Oxfam execs, jeering and sneering at the unpaid volunteers who staff their shops. Nice guys.

Fergus Pickering

Mike Arthur, the reason we shouldn't listen to the professors is that they cheat and finagle and lie in their teeth in order to keep the money rolling their way. Susan doesn't lie, or are you suggesting that she does?

bharper

I'm afraid the problem with this blog is the fact that it just isn't true. In Wales Oxfam has a grand total of 3 dedicated bookshops, based in two of the cities and one large town. That is approximately 1 shop per million people, not exactly a threat to the book industry.
I also struggle to understand the end of your argument where you talk about Oxfam's books being overpirced; surely if this is the case then they should not be a threat to books being sold 'at less than 1 pound'

Redunderthebed

I never realised that I had such a good comrade in Susan Hill. When the revolution comes we'll put Oxfam and their expensive books up against the wall - for the good of the people. Oxfam are driving cheaper booksellers out of business, hhmmm we might need to work on this correlation comrade Hill? And they pay their staff - we hate people getting paid!

Viva comrade hill

Mike Arthur

I'm not suggesting Susan lies but I would suggest she's probably not as knowledgeable about the topic as she thinks. My point is that this blog post, from the Oxfam comments to the climate change one, is terrible journalism and not even good blogging. No sources are cited for any of her information, it's just personal opinion and I'm not sure why that of an author is more valuable about climate change than those who actually study it.

You can look at Oxfam's financials, as pointed above, to how they spend their money. I think publicity is a good way to keep their donations up and thus I am for it. The idea that every penny should be spent helping the poor just shows a lack if business understanding.

Climate change isn't in "serious doubt in the scientific community". If anything, the opposite is the problem. The reason why everyone is bashing the scientists is that they've reached a mass consensus on it and thus people seem to think there's some global conspiracy (rather than the alternative, maybe they are actually right).

I'd challenge Susan (or anyone) to present peer-reviewed evidence published in a respected journal calling the scientific concensus into doubt as this is the standard required by the other side per scientific rigour.

Tom

@Susan I have read probably 12 books about it recently, and if you would care to ask Lord Lawson - Nigel Lawson - he will confirm my interest in and knowledge of the subject - as much knowledge as it is possible for a non-scientist to have.

That much? Really? LMAO!

Nicholas

I see that Oxfam has marshalled its trolls on this one.

Buff Orpington

Ottakar's was a fantastic chain, which is why the OFT received a record number of letters from the public, protesting about the HMV/Waterstone's acquisition. Yes, they did target market towns, but if they hadn't someone else would have and as an ex-employee, I'm grateful that I had the good fortune to work for such a humane company. I'd worked in the independent sector before and Ottakar's was a breath of fresh air.

Nicholas

Mike Arthur: "I just think, in this age of appalling scientific journalism and blogging, that someone who has done no personal research into climate change should refrain from calling it a scam."

That says it all. That is the suppression of free speech which, whether by the criminalisation of thoughts and words or the dead hand of political correctness, the left always resort to. You don't want a debate or any dissent about what you personally believe in. You know best. You just want people to think what you want them to, say what you want them to and write what you want them to. I'm having a real hard job distinguishing that from fascism.

Well, read this. I have done no personal research into climate change but I am calling it a scam. It is a con, a charade. You don't like that? Tough.

Paul B

Agree with Tim Carpenter of LPUK - re the distsortion of the market.

I will save my tears for the poor small struggling shopkeepers and other small businesses, who are struggling to make a living to enable them to pay taxes that supports-EVERYTHING- in this country, even the bloody charities who seem very keen to try to claim the moral high ground. Pass me the sick bag.

John77

My smallish to3wn used to have an Oxfam shop which stocked a range of donated goods but mostly sold books. As the recession hit, more commercial shops were replaced by charity shops Barnardo's, Age Concern, the local Hospice etc and Oxfam has closed because it was insufficiently profitable.
This doesn't prove anything but it does suggest that Oxfam's profit targets are higher than the opther charities.

Woodbine Willy

Every time you buy a book from a shop that isn't Oxfam, a little brown baby dies.
Of aids.
Shame on you all.

Paul B

Thats horse manure Woodbine wonker, save your infantile claptrap for your evil leftie blogs elsewhere, it doesn`t wash here.

EC

I just had a look on the Charities Commission website.

The entry for OXFAM make interesting reading:

Trading to raise funds:
Income = £79.3m.
Expenditure = £62.9m. (*)

Voluntary Income = £133.9m.
Spending to generate Voluntary Income = £19.8m.

Charitable Activities:
Income =£88.4m.
Expenditure =234.4m.(**)

(*) You can see why this is a lucrative activity for them, but is it having a disproportionate effect on local communities? Local shopkeepers are being squeezed out of existence. They do not benefit from the concessions on Council tax(Business rates) 'enjoyed' large Retail Chains and Charities.

(**) On the Charitable Expenditure of £234.4m is anybody clear on where the Charity actually begins and where the Operational costs end?

Andrew

I too have a number of issues with Oxfam, having worked for them for three years, but their book shops are not among them.

I don't know what it's like down your way, but here in Edinburgh the small local independent book stores I used to love pottering about in are a thing of the past.

All were put out of business by the big boys - mainly Waterstones and of course Borders before they too went T**s up.

The independents now only do internet business and have to be highly specialised to survive.

The Oxfam bookshops have in fact revived the corner bookstore notion quite well. However they do not have a clear field. In one street in central Ednburgh dominated by charity shops the other organisations have seen how much money Oxfam are making and have started their own well stocked book sections. The tatty paperbacks of yester-year that would never have been put on a local bookshops shelves are no more and there is a decent level of quality control.

And they are all doing quite well - Oxfam certainly don't have it all their own way.

More power to them say I.

Amanda Craig

Well said Susan! Apart from your views on climate change, I am in total agreement. I also wonder why authors, almost all of whom are struggling well below the national average income, should be losing out on sales of review copies. I've nothing against Oxfam feeding the hungry on the proceeds of genuinely second-hand books, but hands off new ones.
I give my own review copies to local schools, who are in desperate need of good books both for their libraries and for school sales.

Andrew Cork

I read with interest the article about Oxfam bookshops and am in total agreement. As a secondhand bookshop owner there is another side to the story that I would like to raise. I lost out on the chance to buy many good books from customers because they donated them to Oxfam so that they 'were doing their bit' for charity. Most were under the assumption that this was a good way to donate. In fact by time Oxfam have taken out there huge running costs (most shops have a least two full time managers, etc.)very little of the price of the book actually gets donated. In nearly all cases they would have made much more of a difference if they had sold the book to me and then donated the cash directly. I think that there should be a regulation that stipulates that all charity shops have to display in very large letters the actual amount of the turnover that actually ends up in the charity. With Oxfam the figure is frightingly low.

O

What a thoroughly misrepresented and misinformed article. It clearly appears that you are clearly as much of a bully as the organisation you seem to loath so much.

I am a volunteer at Oxfam. Why, because I want to help people in more need than myself. The town where I volunteer has a number of charity shops, all of them work together to further charitable purposes, and will pass on goods that some charities have decided not to help.

As for your comments regarding Oxfam driving out local independent bookshops, you seem to miss the whole point that perhaps the people who have pushed out the independent bookshops are perhaps those big organisations, namely Tesco, Amazon etc (the ones you clearly seem to forget exist - and I'm sure the sort of place that you, and other commenters shop).

Global warming is an issue. Perhaps you choose to deny it is happening. I was in Cockermouth earlier this month. You may recall the unfortunate floods there last year, or perhaps you sit up on your high horse that you are above the clouds and seem to miss these issues! There, the Oxfam shop, like so many others is closed with no apparent solution to the problem that the shop is just soaking. As for the independent bookshop, they are having to operate out of temporary space, but are still going.

Perhaps there is a person driving in a new 4x4, but at the same time, a senior employee in Haiti is having to bury her dead mother in her garden and then immediately return to work to carry out a massive aid program to help millions of people who's life has just been ruined.

What I find most amazing is that someone probably paid you to write the complete misguided drivel. If this is such an important issue, then perhaps you should think about giving your earnings from this article to your local charity shop. I'm sure they need it much more than you!

Adea

Huge chunks of the charity sector have become politicised by a breed of lefty charity professionals. Its a tragedy - some short term political impact at the potential expense of their long term viability. Look at all the charities lining up for the NEF's campaigns - just airbrushed Marxism.

Paul B

Charities, if they want to go into competition with private companieds, should pay the going rate(s) and have no special priveleges. The various Co-ops around the country, although not charities are run for the common collective good (although I would argue so are all businesses) and they are given no favours. Likewise so should Charities, especially when they muscle in on the wealth producing side of the economy, otherwise its unfair trading. In fact , I believe an OFT referral for Oxfam would be in order, from what I have learnt here.

As for Woodbine Wetsop and his/her brown babies dieing- for a start , they are Black babies and although its cheap, your language drives the contrarian in me straight into Amazon or anywhere private. Anywhere but Oxfam. Shame on you!

Nicholas

Funny how Oxfam apologists, climate change scammers and lefties all wear the same Mao suits.

OK, maybe not so funny. Can't get their own way - wave the Little Red Book of Morality and chant what a bad counter-revolutionary person you are for expressing an opinion they disagree with.

'O' - re Cockermouth - check your history.

Woodbine Willy

Paul B: Such an unhelpful comment. Just saying that - even thinking it - has made another little brown baby die.
Fine day's work.
No, as other posters have made abundantly clear, as long as there is injustice in the (third) world, none of us should give a thought for businesses in this country.

david baker

First off lets have a little less self pity from the poor little author! Susan Hill is one of a golden generation of authors who's rewards will seem extraordinary to their grandchildren. In five years the no of new titles published on paper will have reduced and will continue to as the new e-readers come down in price. Self-publishing will be the norm and rewards will be related more to successful marketing than merit.
The world of work will continue to become more unequal, greater rewards going to fewer and fewer. I am not saying this is all good or gloating,just that people need to wake up and not be so babyish! The value of a novel to most people is less than zero. The idea that someone can make a living from it will seem strange soon,just as it did before the industrial processes enabling mass market production were developed. The Oxfam boom will not last long!
I am reading "The Risk of Darkness" £1.50 from Oxfam,Lewes, and enjoying it. That doesn't mean that I will take Susan Hills' views on AGW any more seriously than Dawkins on religion or Clarkson on cycling! We all have predjudice, one way or the other,its not the same as competence,(just look at my punctuation.)

Colin

I work as an Oxfam volunteer in a shop in a fairly poor part of a city in West Yorkshire. I would estimate that 70-80 per cent of the books we are given are immediately sent for recycling because of their poor quality, e.g. children's books scribbled in; out-of-date encyclopaedias; books in a battered & raggermuffin state etc. These are books no independent bookshop owner would ever want to buy. Of the remainder that are sellable, 98% are run-of-the mill titles, and again an independent bookseller would cherrypick from amongst these, and we sell these at a reasonable price. Oxfam prices tend to reflect the neighbourhood in which it is located - so a good quality paperback in our shop would be £1.47, and a good quality and contemporary gardening book around the £2-3 mark. The profits from the sale (or most of it) goes directly to help other people - that is why people donate their books to charity shops in the first place. Once in a blue moon a customer will donate a valuable book - and most customers now, with the rise of the Internet & countless programmes on TV about collectables, have a good idea about book values. These books are put to auction or sold to a local bookdealer, with again the money going to needy causes in the world.

The independent second hand bookshops began to vanish in West Yorkshire & elsewhere a decade or more ago because of a combination of things, but particularly because of the rise of the Internet, which allowed people to find books they wanted from the ever increasing legions of home based sellers of books to be found on ABE/Ebay & similar sites; these are the ones who have really undercut the bookshops. To put the blame of the demise of the independent second hand bookseller on the growth of Oxfam is to ignore what else has been happening in the world of second hand book selling.

Paul B

Woodbine- whoops there goes another one. No problem with over population soon

Bono Vox

'Many a town has many a charity shop and most of them have a few shelves of books of varying quality, often tatty, usually paperbacks, rarely costing more than a quid. But Oxfam bookshops are well organised, clean, uncluttered and pleasant'

Yes, HOW DARE Oxfam run their bookshops as effective retail outlets in order to raise money to help poor people? And CLEAN and UNCLUTTERED? Commie bounders that they are, CLEANING THE SHELVES as part of some sort of Marxist conspiracy no doubt.

'National charities can open where they like and Oxfam is making the most of it.'

Hey guys, Oxfam have worked out they're allowed to open shops, and they're taking advantage in the most heinous way imaginable by, erm, OPENING SHOPS. I wouldn't give up your day job for a life in retail, Susan. Not sure you'd cut it.

' their bookshops which are spreading faster than Tesco once did.'

The number of Oxfam shops has been steady around the 700 mark for about the last five years. I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Tesco have opened one or two new shops in the last five years.

'they have fallen for the whole Global warming/climate change scam hook, line and sinker, and spent a fortune on a daft advertising campaign about how the poor are going to be drowned in the rising flood waters when the glaciers and the polar caps melt, blah blah, that they are by no means politically neutral.'

I don't even have words for the amount of cretinously ill-informed opinion here. 1) Climate change. Weight of scientific opinion. Direct evidence of its existence. Single biggest threat to humanity. Etc. 2) Do you not understand the concepts of marketing and/or fundraising? 3) Given your inability to distinguish the key points in 1) and 2), I suppose it's too much to ask you to grasp the finer points of political neutrality versus political impartiality... oh hang on, I've lost you, haven't I?

EC

"O" dear!

The Oxfam shop in Cockermouth is in a reasonably elevated position half way up Station Street and didn't suffer a biblical flood through the front door as you implied. Water seeped into the cellar at the back of the building from Challoner Street.

As Nicholas has pointed out. North West Cumbria has been historically prone to flooding. If the area didn't get a lot of rain then the the lakes would dry up!

The flooding in 2009 was man made but it had nothing to do with global warming. It was caused by very heavy rainfall acting in combination with several LOCAL aggravating factors.

Highly respected former Workington MP Lord Campell-Savours pointed out in the House of Lords that the problem originated miles upstream with the mismanagement of water levels at Thirlmere reservoir - one of Manchester's water sources. The water company involved had been keeping the water levels unnaturally high, stockpiling, and there wasn't enough capacity to take up any additional heavy rainfall. When the dam was about to be breached they panicked and reportedly released yet more water into the Derwent valley at the height of the floods.

Cockermouth is where the river Cocker flows into the Derwent. When both rivers are in full flow then there is always the risk of flooding. Main Street got swamped quicker this time because a large tree trunk had been washed downstream and had got jammed under the bridge over the river Cocker. This caused the water to back up and come over the Bridge and down Main Street.

Since you felt the need to mention Haiti, perhaps you might also care to give us a briefing on what Oxfam did for the people made homeless by the Cumbrian flooding.

Nicholas

"I don't even have words for the amount of cretinously ill-informed opinion here."

Well, apparently you do in as much as you think it "cretinously ill-informed". Presumably this means you think that our opinion has been ill-informed about climate change by cretins? With that I agree wholeheartedly but probably not in the way you would like to coerce me to.

"oh hang on, I've lost you, haven't I?"

Yep. Complete and utter gobbledygook. But the first part of your name still makes an impression. As Nigel Havers once memorably said - "Tosser".

Bono Vox

'Since you felt the need to mention Haiti, perhaps you might also care to give us a briefing on what Oxfam did for the people made homeless by the Cumbrian flooding.'

A total of 2,239 properties were affected by the Cumbrian floods.

230,000 people have already died in the Haiti earthquake.

Get a grip, you reactionary halfwit.

EC

Dear Vox of St Bono,

Thank you for your admonition but if I'm being honest, and I always am, I couldn't really give a toss about Haiti. Not very nice I know but, unlike you, at least I can console myself with the thought that I'm not a hypocrite.

Phil

The adult education college I used to represent was allowing its premises to be used by a famous national charity and I went to a campaign meeting at their head office.This was 15 years ago and I was staggered by the sharp suits and cutthroat comments and attitudes. I thought I had wandered into the City by mistake. It altered my opinion of major charities and the highly paid people who run them. Small and local, or direct support of an individual project abroad, is my rule since then.

Dick

I read the article by Susan Hill and immediatly felt that it was ill-informed, ill-conceived and ill-timed. I believe Ms Hill has done a grave dis-service to herself and to Oxfam. The growing list of comments has deepened my sadness.
2010 is my 45th year in bookselling, serving my time with WHS, Sherratt & Hughes, Waterstones and briefly, Borders. For the past nine years I have managed an Oxfam Bookshop in Oxfordshire.
May I share my experience and views with Ms Hill and the other commentators?
Shortly after the sale of Waterstones to HMV and after 35 years of bookselling experience my job was made redundant. After a period of reflection and 9 months shelf filing at Waitrose I was appointed as a manager of an Oxfam bookshop. I was at a financial disadvantage by this move and would still be financially better off if I returned to Waitrose as a lowly shelf filler. No grandiose management structure, no fancy company car and in the nine years with Oxfam - no bullying.
Simply, great satisfaction
The opening of my Oxfam bookshop increased the charity shop presence in the small market town to 5, [Cancer Research, Shaw Trust, Local Hospice, a general Oxfam shop and the Oxfam BS]. The town supported a terrific independent bookshop and a Martins.
At our seven years birthday we hit the millionth pound sale!
Now, nine years on the town supports a terrific independent bookseller, a Martins with an increased book offer, a Cancer charity with an increased book offer and the other two charity shops continue to sell books - oh and by the by - a new Childrens Hospice shop opened a couple of years ago with a whole floor dedicated to books.
When the Childrens Hospice shop opened it had the smell of fresh paint and had the look of a stylish, expensive and high quality shopfit - very impressive!
Sadly the quality and pricing of the book stock failed to reflect the 'high' of the shopfit, sadly more of a 'low' of books you really do not want to buy however 'low' the price.
As for a Childrens Hospice shop - well no parent should ever have to bury their child, its against the natural order of life, the child and parent deserve the best of care and here's a thought - perhaps a better selection of stock and more confident and thoughtful pricing could generate more income for the Charity.

We do receive many donations of stock - dozens in a busy week, but here is another thought - one of our customers was a prolific buyer of books, charity shops, book clubs, Waterstones, Blackwells Jumble sale and village fetes - you know the type. Sadly he was diagnosed with a terminal illness, prior to his death he and his wife asked to speak to privately. Simply, after his death all of his books were to be donated to the Oxfam bookshop because we charged the right price, not a cheap, unrealistic price. From his death good was able to be done.
Yes, we are more expensive that most other charity shops, but with all our efforts selling the rare and collectible books through the internet, this year, the average price of a sold item in my Oxfam shop would not be enough to purchase a glass, a SMALL glass, of wine in the local pub. Are our books expensive or is booze cheap?
Whatever, I have a responsibility to make the best profit for my employer [as I did in the commercial world] but also on behalf of our donors; whilst still trying offer offer the customer a good deal. To do less would be a failure of my duty.
Yes we have free labour - they are called volunteers because they volunteer! They range from 14 year olds on a DoE scheme or work experience, to active alert 90 something year olds, from community service to HM prisoners on day release to those recovering from one of life's disasters, illness, bereavement, unemployment etc, to housewives or househusbands with time to spare, to students in vacation gaining work experience. And of couse those made to retire at 60/65 but full of life and enthusiasm.
The volunteer team in my shop number between 50 and 60 - I do not have the luxury of a second manager MOST Oxfam shop don't! - there is me - and I not always there because I do other things for the charity.
Now here is another thought, during the first year of opening we were approached by an independent second hand bookshop owner from a nearby county town, the only one in the town. Faced with a new lease and a large rent review he choose to move his operation to the internet and to bookfairs. Whatever stock he didn't want for his new business he wanted to donate to Oxfam, 3 TONS of books later and a considerable saving on his closure costs a small team of Oxfam volunteers shifted it - in three days
Now here is another thought, many charity shops do get stock in pristine condition bought from Amazon, WHS, Waterstones, Tesco or whoever, hopefully, the customer paid for it. But, in the past twenty years booksellers have been competing to give as much stock away as possible with bogofs, 3for2, 4for3, or at the busiest retailing period and with the bestselling stock compete to offer the biggest discount, 50%, 60% 70% off.
No wonder your customer is confused
And, since when did cheap books increase peoples reading speed? Since when did a 'bogof' persuade people to dedicated more time to reading and less to eating, sleeping, watching TV or having sex?
These books go somewhere - it is the secondhand market - if you want to increase the charity bookselling business please, please do more 3for2s! We love 'em
Since the demise of the net book agreement it appears that booksellers and publishers have conspired to inflate cover prices to offer ridiculous discounts - stupid or what.
So before you blame the new 600 sq ft
charity shop of the problems of your industry take look at yourselves.
I'm old enough to remember the words of the WHS Chairman in the 1970's when asked about ending the Net Book Agreement; his response was something like this - 'For WHS and it's shareholders the end of the NBA would increase sales, profits and dividends - but WHS would prefer to maintain the NBA to ensure a vibrant publishing and bookselling industry'.

Wise words, pity nobody listened!

Tomorrow I will be on the shopfloor, selling a fanatastic range of books, that were donated by willing donors, to interesting customers, supported by a diverse team of volunteers
And, the shareholders - those living in poverty and suffering in 70 countries around the world [inc. UK]

I am not qualified to speak about climate change; but when the weather goes wrong, wherever that may be - the poor and poverty stricken suffer the most other - t'was ever thus, time for change?

Tomorrow, if it is not too busy I hope to spare a thought for the two Oxfam employees who died in Haiti a month ago..........

Thank you to those who took time to read this.

Chris

At long last I've been moved to comment on Susan Hill's incendiary article. I run a small secondhand book shop in a village that has no charity shops, though a neighbouring town has 8 or more, including a 'normal' Oxfam with a small bookroom at the back. Therefore I intend to comment on the thrust of SH's article and NOT get bogged down in issues regarding global warming which are clearly muddying the waters here.

What Susan has identified is the difficult situation that arises when a worthy charity enters the cut-throat world of retailing. The idea of Oxfam opening a book shop next door to an existing Hospice Shop smacks of predatory behaviour, though to be fair, charity shops tend to cluster in the 'secondary locations' in towns, the primary retail units having been long taken by chains and so on. But it remains a fact that Oxfam's Bookshops are spreading like wildfire and are having a deeply unsettling effect on the s/h 'bricks and mortar' book trade.

Fortunately we live in an age of choice. It's entirely up to people as to where they donate their books (I even get a few) and other unwanted goods, and indeed where they buy them. In the case outlined by SH, I would probably favour the hospice shop because they support local charities, and the old adage that charity begins at home still rings true for some.

My 'professional take' on Oxfam bookshops is that they are run by amateurs who simply take their pricing cues from internet book sites without the ability to properly interpret the raw information the net provides. I've seen the same book priced on the net at £10 all the way up to £150. What's it worth then? I'd argue a tenner, but to a charity volunteer, the £150 will doubtless look more enticing. My local Oxfam is incredibly inconsistent when it comes to pricing. Paperbacks are typically about £2.50 - the Hospice Shop nearby charges a flat-rate 80p and has a much larger selection AND without any tat. In Oxfam's non-fiction section, I've seen as-new uber-Modern art books priced at £20 or so, more that I'd charge in my shop because I have a good hunch as to what they will SELL for, not what I feel I can get away with. Luckily for me, one one occasion I bought a book from Oxfam for £6 and (after a year) have just sold it for £75, but believe me, that's the only time I've managed to profit from my local Oxfam as for the most part, their stock is dreary in the extreme.

The grim reality is that with the shrinkage of the numbers of s/h bookshops on the High Street, Oxfam has expanded to fill the gaps. Woodbridge (in Suffolk) used to have a independent secondhand book shop, and there's still one - but it's Oxfam. Another poster has indentified the uncomfortable truth that to make money out of s/h books on the High Street it doesn't half help to have minimal staff costs, free stock and low business rates, which again gives Oxfam an unfair advantage.

Eliza Graham

Judy Astley and Amanda Craig are right--it seems as though authors are expected to live on less and less money. At the same time people imagine that we are very well-paid. I would not be able to support myself as a novelist if I didn't have another job.

I love writing and feel privileged to do it but I also have a family that needs providing for.

John Edwards

Over the last few years I have regularly had to try to reduce the load on my heaving book shelves by disposing of books. Traditional secondhand booksellers invariably never want to know and I end up giving them to Oxfam. At least the Oxfam bookshops are reasonably professional at valuing books and run a Giftaid system.

John Edwards

"I can assure you I know a great deal about the subject [ie Global Warming]. I have read probably 12 books about it recently and if you would care to ask Lord Lawson (Nigel Lawson) he will confirm my interest in and knowledge of the subject - as much knowledge as it is possible for a non-scientist to have." Susan Hill

I doubt whether the ex-journalist and Tory politician would be able to confirm that you have as much knowledge as it is possible for a non-scientist to have. Only that you share his views on the subject.

Mindaugas

Sounds like old news to me, Guardian posted same story in August last year: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/aug/04/oxfam-shops-booksellers

Mike Mullaney

The first thing I want to say was picked up on an earlier comment: the main factor hurting the secondhand (and new book trade, look at BordersUK) book trade is the expansion of online retailing, particularly the rise and rise of Amazon. Loss-leader stategies employed on popular fiction titles, as employed by the likes of Tesco, are also a significant factor. No doubt in local towns a cheaply-priced secondhand seller will be stung by the presence of Barnardos and Oxfam bookshops, but not the traditional high-end antiquarian sellers. Is anyone trying to argue that the long-tail decline of antiquarian sellers is simply due to the existence of Oxfam bookshops? Eh, how about the internet, Abebooks? Antiquarian sellers do not and never have made their significant profit from popular fiction paperbacks or 4/5 year old academic titles. And this is where Oxfam bookshops make the bulk of their revenue. And if Oxfam's prices for these lines are more expensive than the bargain-basement style secondhand sellers, how is this marketplace bullying? Cause it's not underpricing.
If you don't like Oxfam bookshops, don't shop in them. But elevating them to the symbolic apex of everything wrong and immoral about the book trade is just scapegoating and wooly thinking. Go write a letter to Amazon, berate your frinds and neighbours buying Kindles.
In agreement with the argument about royalties though. Would be interesting to work out a compromise here. Authors work very hard for scant reward.

hadrian

My gut instinct is to agree with you on this one. It is extraordinarily annoying to find a charity acting with such slick and professional callousness and a definite 'profit' principle! However the situation is very complex. Market forces inevitably are at work. Plus our own local Oxfam bookshop is the sole outlet on the high street and had nothing to do with the demise of the former independent new bookshop which folded in the late 90's as the demise of the net book agreement tok hold. The trouble is such outlets hold some irresistible delights of serendipity that ordinary bookstores cannot. Out of print, hard to find and long sought after stuff is fantastic to get one's mitts on!
On the Ottakar's front, I have mixed feelings too. They could be ruthless, true, as I now of at least one independent who was approached with a choice- be taken over and survive as employees or compete and go under. The former happened. Chains might have greater financial clout but they are behemoths and make the booktrade far less resilient as loss of local autonomy results in multiple collapses whereas independents would not all go down together. I love charity shops and supporting good causes but I agree some, like Oxfam, seem quite, well, uncharitably ruthless! But if I see a nice book in one of their shops I'll still have to have it, sorry!!

concerned bookseller

Oxfam are not only chainstore charity to employ these tactics. Sue Ryder do exactly the same targeting streets with dolls-house and music shops. This is just unethical. Taking business, money and jobs from the local economy,then, only around 20% of which is spent on the cause itself.Don't be fooled by notices saying things like "100% goes to help....", or "all profits". The 100% can only mean nett profit after all costs, and if the shop has made a loss in the year (which they can, and do)the percentage figure can be minus!
It's no wonder that there is so much animosity towards the chainstore charity shops.A shop selling similar goods which pays zero business rates, has free staff and
countless other benefits opens up nearby to
tap into and steal your custom, should not be allowed. This is unfair competition!
If they paid business rates like proper
businesses there wouldn't be half as many of
them and it would save tax-payers tens of millions of pounds a year.
Because of their parasitical nature you will not find them in shopping malls. They won't let them in as there are bad for business.
Not content with tapping into a shops customer base, they also divert some of its supply sources, by encouraging people to give them the books that otherwise would be sold to the bookseller. If people were aware
both how little money actually is spent on the cause and how much of their donated goods ends up in landfill, they probably would go back to selling them to a shop which benefits the local economy, offers paid employment and pays its way in tax.
Please donate cash direct to your charity instead of supporting these big chainstore
charity shops.

Why don't you see them in shopping centres

Shaun

Nicholas: "Well, read this. I have done no personal research into climate change but I am calling it a scam. It is a con, a charade. You don't like that? Tough."

Nicholas, no one is challenging your right to believe whatever you wish to believe, nor is the poster you were responding to trying to shut down a debate. The point trying to be made is that any argument is pointless without some personal research being conducted, whether that be a thorough review of what other, more qualified people have written on the subject (call it a literature review, be the originators sceptical or not; but the point of any review should be to cover the most ground, if objectivity is the end desire), or through personally-conducted, new research into the area.

Simply spouting a baseless assertion that one doesn't believe in climate change, and waving a lack of personal knowledge about as if it were an asset and not a colossal liability in area of *scientific* debate, makes you sound like an ignoramus. But then, you're free to do that too.

fkm

"Because of their parasitical nature you will not find them in shopping malls. They won't let them in as there are bad for business" Terrible grammer!

Apparently the British now view charity as "parasitical"

What has happened here?