Geoff Sloan

London

Account Director

I was a big advocate of the hungersite when it started, when it _was_ not for profit. If memory serves the original team had to close it (was costing them too much to run) and it was taken over by the business that runs it now (along with the other associated sites which they introduced). I think at the time of the take over or 'rescue' there was indication that some of the revenue was going to pay for the running of the site but I can't remember if profit per se was mentioned.

The key issue here is 'do these charities benefit from punters clicking on the site?' and the answer is yes. You can say sensible donors should give direct and cut out the commercial middle man, but for every hungersite donor who would get it together to do that instead of the easy clicking on the site there will be dozens, hundreds even, who with the best of intentions will still never get round to it.

What finally put me off was the increasingly American focus of the site, though why I should discrimate against the American hungry rather than, say, the African hungry I'm not quite sure...