The country's largest ecommerce company ended a program that donated 0.5% of eligible purchases to charities customers selected. This might have surprising negative consequences for Amazon’s brand.
I like big corporations to support good causes, but SMILE is so diffuse, who can relate to the teeny donation that is generated? Wouldn't people rather just get loyalty points or discounts with the teeny percentage of their purchase that goes towards SMILE? I didn't always feel this way. Remember Oodle's program from 15-20 years ago, where people selling personal goods on its platform could apply the revenue to a favorite charity? For sure, I thought it would be a home run. People don't want to waste their time to pocket a few bucks from their used baseball glove, old baby carriage etc. But giving the money to charity. Great! But it didn't amount to almost anything.
THANKS for reading! My main point about Smile is that there's a world of difference between a retailer supporting a charity and an ecom platform enabling ME to support MY charity, and that the de-guilting benefit of the latter went directly to Amazon. I don't actually remember Oodle, but it sounds like a neat idea that just didn't happen to work. What was great about Smile (aside from the benefit to Amazon) was that you could contribute to charity by doing stuff you were already doing... you just had to remember to add smile to the URL. It's a nudge in the Thaler and Sunstein sense...
I like big corporations to support good causes, but SMILE is so diffuse, who can relate to the teeny donation that is generated? Wouldn't people rather just get loyalty points or discounts with the teeny percentage of their purchase that goes towards SMILE? I didn't always feel this way. Remember Oodle's program from 15-20 years ago, where people selling personal goods on its platform could apply the revenue to a favorite charity? For sure, I thought it would be a home run. People don't want to waste their time to pocket a few bucks from their used baseball glove, old baby carriage etc. But giving the money to charity. Great! But it didn't amount to almost anything.
Hi Peter,
THANKS for reading! My main point about Smile is that there's a world of difference between a retailer supporting a charity and an ecom platform enabling ME to support MY charity, and that the de-guilting benefit of the latter went directly to Amazon. I don't actually remember Oodle, but it sounds like a neat idea that just didn't happen to work. What was great about Smile (aside from the benefit to Amazon) was that you could contribute to charity by doing stuff you were already doing... you just had to remember to add smile to the URL. It's a nudge in the Thaler and Sunstein sense...
Best and thanks again,
BB