Subject: Oxfam: 'the Tesco of the secondhand book world' ?

Do you think Oxfam really have been targeting areas with second hand book shops already in situ? Sounds counterproductive to me.  At the end of the day charities, like any other company have to behave competitively to achieve their goals.

Harsh reply to this issue in today's Independent newspaper saying that charity shops damage the high street and are parasites eating away at prosperity and commerce.

What do you think?

It would appear this story has been picked up by quite a few media sources since I first posted. Be interesting to know what thoughts people have on this issue.

The viewpoint that charity shops damage the high street is wrong. Our high streets are not exactly packed with small independent shops anymore. As you visit towns across the UK it is increasingly hard to feel any character as they are lined with the same chains over and over selling the same stock. Personally I welcome charity shops on the high street as they bring some personality and uniqueness. Long may they have a presence....

And why shouldn't charity bookshops target areas where their presence will succeed? They are businesses like any other and must do their research to ensure their efforts are not wasted.  Surely there are enough different books in the world to mean that a cluster of bookshops is a good thing bringing a variety of stock? Afterall the booktowns of our country (Hay, Sedbergh and Wigtown) encourage more bookshops to attract more visitors.

The Oxfam bookshop debate rumbles on....

CEO of Oxfam is on You and Yours on Radio 4 at the moment justifying their activities. Kevin Curley from NAVCA is arguing that larger charities should help smaller ones. She replies by saying that they do pass on their experience via the Association of Charity Shops.

Here are some of the questions from listeners on the programme:

• why do Oxfam books cost so much?
• why do Oxfam spend so much on publicity?
• don't Oxfam willfully destroy the books they can't sell so they can't be read?
  

showing again the disconnect between public view of charities and way charities have to operate.

What can we do to help people understand that charity fundraising (be it shops or other activities) has to compete for attention and must behave in a business-manner to survive?

Are second hand/high street book retailers not affected far more by Amazon, ebay, Play etc? I do have sympathy for their plight, but I think singling out Oxfam is more than a little unfair.

And do Oxfam really destroy unsold books? (Although if it's their excess of Dan Browns I can begin to understand...)

Apparantly they don't destroy unsaleable books (someone asked why they rip off the cover and the first few pages - CEO said they don't). Instead they go to the Oxfam Bookbarn where they may get sold or reused.

As an Oxfam bookshop volunteer, I know that our books are priced at the market value for them. The overheads for an Oxfam shop, even with a discount on the business rate, are still substantial, especially if one's shop is in a high rates area.

Our prices reflect the care taken by staff in pricing books, and researching potentially valuable books.  At my shop we feel that there's something to suit every pocket.

Charities are always being encouraged to act in a more business like way and this is exactly what Oxfam appear to be doing in making measured assessments of where shops are most likely to succeed and basing their shop location decisions on this.  Indeed I think it would be wrong if they didn't act this way as surely the role of decision makers (trustees and those with delegated authority to act for them), is to act in the best interests of the charity - including seizing opportunities to maximise funds.  After all, there are significant set up costs for a shop and this use of funds must be justified in terms of making the largest return on investment possible.  I'm also sure that the other shops wouldn't hesitate to exploit any form of competitive advantage that was offered to them.