Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!snorkelwacker!apple!bionet!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: ritchie@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (David Ritchie)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Sierra Club Considered Harmful!
Message-ID: <11932@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 9 Sep 90 23:57:46 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Hewlett Packard - Boise, ID
Lines: 25
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 633, Message 1 of 12


>insisting that it was my wife who made those decisions.  When I asked
>her about it later, she told me that she'd decided not to send them
>any more money as she felt that her entire initial donation had gone
>to pay for mailings asking for more donations.  She wants to donate to
>a similar organization that A) does good work, and B) sends members
>(at most) a couple of low cost newsletters a year to let them know
>what their money's going for.  I don't disagree!  

  In the Fall 1990 Whole Earth Review, Paul Hawkin wrote an
interesting article about junk mail. In it, he said:

  "One of the largest and most famous environmental organizations in
the United States spends nearly eighty percent of its revenues on postage,
printing and name rental in order to live off of the remaining twenty
percent."

  Above the article, there was an example of how junk mail
solicatations are written for maximum effect. Wonder of wonders, it
was from the Sierra Club. Draw your own conclusions.

  Has anyone seen a Sierra Club annual report to confirm this?


Dave Ritchie