February 19, 2007

After Huge Marketing Effort, RED Only Delivers $11.3M

by Piers Fawkes

200702191327The RED charity brand from the Global Fund has reported that they have raised a total of $11.3 million in contributions in the year that it has launched. A tiny fraction of the $6.6 billion funds the Global Fund has committed to 460 programs in 136 countries. 2006 witnessed a huge marketing push which leveraged partners including Nike, GAP and American Express. The charity itself spent less than a million dollars, the LA Times reports but we assume that the advertising spend by the partners must have been massive. We tried our best to find out what the total marketing budget associated with the RED campaign was for 2006 but we couldn’t find a figure.

So we’re left thinking: all the marketing activity behind RED made you aware of the brand, not the underlying message of plight in Africa. If the combined marketing activity raised only $11 million and no one has been left better educated about African concerns, wouldn’t it have been better to have just redirected the ad budget straight into the charity?

Article categories: Advertising & Branding, Ethical Consumerism, Finance & Money

Article Link | Add To Delicious Add To Digg Add To Stumble Upon | Email This | Print This Post |

Popular Articles


More Questions About RED Charity
We highlighted last week the dismal amount of funds raised by the RED campaign in 2006 ($11m). Since then, there have been others whispering about the failure of RED too. Take ...

(RED) & PSFK Have A Little Back & Forth
Julie Cordua, VP of Marketing at the charity (RED), reacted to our recent opinion pieces, that spotlighted the amounts raised by the RED charity in 2006, by calling us up and the...

More (RED) Debate
And maybe fueled a little by you-know-who... We're spotting lots more folk question the (RED) charity. The major article in the last few days has been by Advertising Age. Mya Fra...

3 Responses to “After Huge Marketing Effort, RED Only Delivers $11.3M”

  1. John Frost
    Posted from: 209.16.114.210

    February 19th, 2007 at 2:07 pm

    After working in non profit development for a few years now, I find it all plays toward the marketing budgets of the big players. This ’cause marketing’ is labeled a win-win-win for all parties, but no one claims it is an equal distribution of success.

    Frankly I think major companies should be more committed to doing good just in the name of doing good. Solving poverty, hunger, world wide epidemics, even local problems (Katrina anyone), would go a long way to building up the available customer base for their products. Then when it comes back that American Express or Apple did all this good and didn’t ask for a word of thanks, the payback will be 100 fold.

  2. livingbrands
    Posted from: 10.0.20.17

    March 8th, 2007 at 4:48 am

    Was RED killed by cynicism

    Much has been written over the past few weeks about the seemingly poor return on investment made by the RED campaign. In our neck of the woods, the charge has been led by Piers at PSFK. And the arguments made

  3. What Happened To Converse? « Agency Spy
    Posted from: 66.135.48.143

    August 8th, 2007 at 4:44 pm

    [...] college kids falling for Common’s campaign. However, the whole Red things was pretty much a disaster, so who knows if this “do the world good” approach will inspire any extra [...]

Leave a Comment

We're open to critical discussion but not abuse or spam. Note that your IP address will be published alongside your comment.

Subscribe

Search PSFK

About PSFK

    PSFK is a global trends and innovation company that helps its readers, guests and clients make things better. PSFK publishes websites and reports; hosts conferences and events; and provides advice and consultancy. Contact us.