Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 months later...

I've been in there a few times since the re-opening, mainly for books. Haven't found it uncomfortable, so ignore what I said above.


Have you seen the Mind Christmas cards? I don't think I remember cats on them before, but there seem to be as many now as there are robins. Real cats, too, that is, and out in the snow (but not afaics assaulting robins). Is this a trend, and what does it mean?

If MIND are producing Xmas cards with cats on, then they are marketing to the local demographic, which is to be applauded.If this is the case, It is rather sad that cats are the pet of choice for the hood bludz.


Pets lite for the facebook generation.


Cats are up there with tapeworm in terms of the benefit they bring to society.

Sally81 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Did a little trawl of the charity shops this

> weekend. We picked up a picture that we love from

> St Christopher and it was a fabulous, affordable

> price. The stuff in Mind is definitely too highly

> priced. We all know it's for charity, but most of

> us go in hoping to find a bargain and people know

> when they are paying over the odds. There is a

> jacket in there that was mine at the moment. It

> wasn't expensive in the first place but it is

> priced at more than I paid for it new!

> Also, I do find the staff in there really awkward.

> They don't encourage me to buy at all. It has a

> strange atmosphere.


Amazing isn't it. A charity shop that is highly priced and you are paying over the odds!!!! Next thing you know and they will be trying to make a profit to further the goals of their charity. I think the best thing might be a trade war between the charity shops to drive prices down to the bone so that people can acquire goods at bargain basement prices.


It's in the name 'C-H-A-R-I-T-Y' shop. They aren't there to give you the best bargains, they are there to make profits that can be used to help people. If you want bargains, go shop in Primark and fill your boots with sequined tops made by child labourers in sweatshops.

I thought the original purpose of charity shops was to help those in need of help?? People who would like to clothe themselves and their children in fairly decent clothing because they cannot always afford to buy in chain stores and like to dress in reasonably fashionable clothing. Believe it or not, there are still people out there on the minimum wage who need to decide between food and fairly fashionable clothing - this is where charity shops come into their own. Their main purpose should never be merely to make a profit! This was never the original idea of Oxfam et al - although in this materialistic world, perhaps things have changed ....

I have always understood the mainstream Charity shops to be the exact opposite of what marianne1 suggests. Oxfam, in particular, is and always has been a development charity raising funds for work overseas, consequently, the purpose of their shops has only ever been to make a profit to allow them to do vital work.


Of course there are many who need a low cost clothing supplier and charity shops often provide this, but that is a handy by-product of the mainstream charity shops not their purpose.

cmck83 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I always thought it was a bit of both to be

> honest.


There have always been some small/independent charity shops whose purpose is to provide low cost clothing etc for the local community, particularly in areas generally perceived as deprived, but if you look into the history of the major charities, that have high street shops, their use of the 'charity shop' is quite clearly for the income provided. Most charity websites explain what the charity is for - do a quick google search now and you'll be hard pressed to find any that say that their shops are provided to benefit the purchasers of the donated goods rather than (or in addition to) raising cash to further the societies' expressed intentions.

But, if there are items in there being priced above what was paid for them (and they're not genuinely vintage/retro), then that smacks of bad merchandising from whoever sets the price. If you've got no cost price, then your margin should be good anyhow unless you're in extortionate premises so you should really be pricing to sell and get a quick turnover of stock; it encourages repeat business if people feel they are getting even a slight bargain and encourages others to make donations. I'm not saying that they have to be stupidly low prices but they should be realistic given that the donated items are secondhand.

marianne1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I thought the original purpose of charity shops

> was to help those in need of help?? People who

> would like to clothe themselves and their children

> in fairly decent clothing because they cannot

> always afford to buy in chain stores and like to

> dress in reasonably fashionable clothing. Believe

> it or not, there are still people out there on the

> minimum wage who need to decide between food and

> fairly fashionable clothing - this is where

> charity shops come into their own. Their main

> purpose should never be merely to make a profit!

> This was never the original idea of Oxfam et al -

> although in this materialistic world, perhaps

> things have changed ....


This is a very interesting point of view and one I never considered. Perhaps you are right. On balance, PeterStorm is probably right in that charities don't care about clothing people cheaply as long as they are increasing their funds but perhaps there is a subsidiary effect of providing cheap clothing to those who need it. Although there is perhaps also a view that people of limited means don't NEED fashionable clothes, and it is just aspirational marketing that makes them think that they do...

Gimme Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>................................... Although

> there is perhaps also a view that people of

> limited means don't NEED fashionable clothes, and

> it is just aspirational marketing that makes them

> think that they do...


Good point - 'Fashion' is completely unnecessary and damages our environment. If everyone who wore 'fashionable' clothing recycled their clothes by sending them to the charity shop when the next fashion came along then it wouldn't be so bad, but they don't. Far too much perfectly good clothing goes to landfill in ordinary domestic rubbish. Perhaps if more of us took good quality clothes to the local charity shops there would be the 'pile em high sell em cheap' volumes that would allow the prices to be reduced (as Applespider's post), thereby helping those in local need as well as furthering the charity's aims. Unfortunately, it may simply be that those who manage the shop on a day to day basis don't have the fashion/retail knowledge to tell if something should be ?5 or ?50. Or perhaps they do - just because the original price was low doesn't mean someone might not pay more for a particular item of clothing. The cross-over between second hand and 'vintage' is somewhat arbitrary in the eyes of the buyer.

And then there's fashionable (as in exactly what the market prescribes no matter how ridiculous) as opposed to looking good in 'classic' clothes as opposed to clothes purely designed to keep you decent and/or warm.


I don't subscribe to the viewpoint that poor should be reduced just to the last option. Clothes do serve a purpose beyond warmth and decency. They are vital in that first impression when working (or interviewing) and can give a huge boost in self-confidence and self-worth.


If you are managing a retail shop (even on a partial volunteer basis which I don't believe is the case for the managers), then you really should have some local retail knowledge which would include a rough idea of clothing outlets/prices. And even if you don't when you start, a quick search of completed eBay auctions every so often would probably give you some idea of what harem pants are currently worth...

ahoward3 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> East Dulwich Mind is a rip-off.

> Half of the clothes I have ever owned are from

> charity shops, but this particular shop is

> ridiculous and I've never known anything like it.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


I have to agree, they had a coat in there for forty quid the other day - nothing particularly special, if I recall.


At least they seem to have reduced the price of books though, some of those were ridiculous as well. It's coming to something when you think that charity shop books are so expensive you might as well buy them new!

Yes, it makes no sense to price things at a level at which they won't sell quickly, so as to make room for more. The stock is donated so any sensible price is profit for the charity. If customers know that there are new things every day they are far more likely to visit often I would think. I don't go in the Mind shop because it is too cluttered and overstocked, even after the revamp.

ahoward3 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> East Dulwich Mind is a rip-off.

> Half of the clothes I have ever owned are from

> charity shops, but this particular shop is

> ridiculous and I've never known anything like it.


Rubbish isn't it. Charity shops that aren't really cheap. When their whole purpose is to give people cheap clothes as well.


Don't you think that the Big Issue is a waste of money these days as well...

You could get something to read on the bus for a lot less in a newsagent instead!

Gimme, I think you are deliberately missing the point. If the items on sale for charity are offered at unrealistic prices, and never sold, then donations to them are worthless. When I give stuff to a charity shop I have in mind that someone who needs/wants that item will reuse/recycle it as well as the charity making some small profit. The Mind shop does not make best use of the items donated if so many of us charity shop browsers don't even go in!


P.S. The Big Issue is not worth buying anymore - it used to be great. These days I often give the seller the price of one and don't take the magazine. I also think that devalues the enterprise.

I donated stuff to the Mind shop today and they seemed very nice and appreciative, I did try and donate to the other charity shop on LL but alas I couldn't find a parking space, sorry but convenience plays a major factor to my drop off charity donations..

Agree totally with dazeycat. Surely charity shops should charge appropriately. To try and sell a second hand coat for ?40 to me is ridiculous when high street prices can often be less. Second hand clothes have limited marketability, primark will have done nothing to encourage any change.


Charity shops have to face up market forces as do other retailers, the shop space is after all paid for.


It saddens me also that The Big Issue is not really worth the payment, I haven't bought one for a few years. The last one I bought didn't encourage me to do otherwise.

Ann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> .......Surely charity shops

> should charge appropriately. To try and sell a

> second hand coat for ?40 to me is ridiculous when

> high street prices can often be less.......


Was it a nice coat? I admit to buying the odd thing in Primark but they don't last long - better to buy good quality second hand.

Sometimes the Mind shop staff will get the pricing wrong but if they manage to sell a coat at ?40 rather than ?20 then that's an extra ?20 in the till to be spent on the charity's purpose. It would be interesting to know what the Mind shop takings are each week compared to the other charity shop in Lordship Lane but I suspect that they may be quite high. I have a gift aid card for the Mind Shop (they were the first charity shop in the area to introduce it so they get all my second hand goods) and I get notified on a regular basis the amount that they have received for my donations. Having seen what price was put on goods that I had previously given to the other charity shop and almost wept at the waste I am regularly chuffed to see how much Mind have managed to flog my stuff for.

Gimme Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ahoward3 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > East Dulwich Mind is a rip-off.

> > Half of the clothes I have ever owned are from

> > charity shops, but this particular shop is

> > ridiculous and I've never known anything like

> it.

>

> Rubbish isn't it. Charity shops that aren't really

> cheap. When their whole purpose is to give people

> cheap clothes as well.

>

> Don't you think that the Big Issue is a waste of

> money these days as well...

> You could get something to read on the bus for a

> lot less in a newsagent instead!



I didn't mention the word cheap, I called the shop a rip-off which is exactly what it is; overpriced.

If something is more expensive second-hand than what you can get it for brand new it defeats the point of buying second-hand.

I don't have the money to just give to charity, but some times I need things and so if I can get what I need at a reasonable price and know that the money I have paid is going to a good cause then thats a bonus. That's how a charity shop works. I also donate things to charity shops when I no longer need them.

Sorry for not having more money than sense, but overpriced is overpriced.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...