‘A beg or a con?’ is a common question we ask ourselves from time to time. It is always a fine line separating the two. Or is it?
When having an outside dinner in KL with my family the last Chinese New Year, we were approached by a burly man selling ‘home made’ honey in bottles which he claimed was pure honey. Initially we said no to him but he persisted in the ‘selling’ by saying that times were hard and he was jobless. By then I could see that everyone around the table were beginning to take pity on him. So, I asked to take a look at the bottle in the man’s hand. I tipped the bottle around, handed back the bottle to him and said ‘no thank you’. With that, the man’s demeanor changed and he started accusing me of looking down on Indians and said that it was a common behaviour among Malaysians - he was an Indian.
This was how I saw the situation. By claiming that he was jobless he was at least partially begging for charity and we were about to be generous. But then I decided it was perhaps more a con because he was a burly man twice my size (desperately poor people do not get to that size), and the ‘pure honey’ he was selling flows quickly backwards when I tipped the bottle over (the poor bees would have a hard time if pure honey behave that way!). I was then quite sure this man's sob story was all part of a sale (or con) strategy to win sympathy, and overstating his product quality was all part of the con. That was finally confirmed by the gall and arrogance with which he claimed that my decision not to buy was based on prejudices about his skin color!
Now, can we see similarities between the recent NKF saga, and the above episode?
Over the years, NKF had been doing or was observed to exhibit the following:
- Over-stating the number of beneficiaries and under-stating the lasting period of its reserve. This is no different from that honey seller above claiming that his honey was pure.
- They spin sob stories aided by whatever is convenient for that purpose. Like that of TV channels and stars who do all sort of ‘painful stunts’ (for sure partly acted given their profession) to do what they were intended for – spin sob stories. Any different from the honey seller above?
- Its staff pay constitutes 40% of donations. The CEO helped himself to among others first class seats and gold plated taps. Some people added to his ‘sob story’ by claiming he worked 12 hours and 7 days a week. Bloody hell, with an office with personal fittings this fella gets, many donors themselves would love to be 'in office' 24 hours a day!
Their ‘poor dialysis patients’ get to have Nemos for company - something that 90% of Singaporeans that donate to them do not have the pleasure of enjoying. This can only mean that the people managing NKF (the board included) found that their ‘returns’ were so good that it was more than enough to meet basic needs of the charity they claim to be running, and they can now feed themselves ‘fat’. This is no different from the ‘fat’ pure-honey seller above.
- When a discerning reporter decided to check and question some of its claims, its CEO decided to sue. This in not unlike the honey seller above with his ‘Indian prejudice’ claim. But then this is nothing new. When a con is about to be called, the standard con strategy is to switch to ‘attack’ mode in the hope of deflecting the focus.
Over time, the above signs and exaggerated claims were too blatantly obvious for many to see, and more and more people began to do their little ‘pure honey’ and ‘fat-man’ checks on the NKF. When that happens, no outwardly manifest ‘fat man’ will be able to hide the sob stories and well-cooked books they rely on all along on the way to personal fatness.
This includes the ‘poor’ patients who got to enjoy the company of the likes of Nemo and who knows what else but kept quiet. Some stupid ones still claim that they owed their lives to this great CEO! It is like a blood recipient saying that he owed his life to the nurse that put the needle into his donor’s body, and that's after knowing that 40% of the blood was going to the nurse! That’s the amazing thing about life - idiots always self-declare themselves.
There are others that claim that NKF’s ability to obtain so much funds is a manifestation of the CEO’s capability and therefore justifies his pay. Such fellas had possibly associated the amount of collections to the man’s capability or even greatness instead of donors’ generosity (in some cases gullibility to fall for the con). If that’s the case, we now know it included the capability of bluffing and threat making.
“Wealth, in even the most improbable cases, manages to convey the aspect of intelligence” said John Kenneth Galbraith.
It is also likely that not just the NKF staff and board were getting fat. Someone must surely be paid to maintain those precious aquariums and Nemos. And how about those nice TV executives and stars that was part of their act? It makes you wonder how many were feeding off this ‘most successful charity’ in Singapore.
We know there was at least one such person with the conscience to say ‘no, this thing had gone from a beg to a con, and I will not be part of it’. We all should say thanks to that ‘retired gold-tap contractor’ that helped bag this particular con.
p.s. 1. A few years ago, this NKF CEO sued an Indian businessman for saying that he saw the CEO flying first class and won! This CEO probably thought he can 'get away' with it again but this time he made the mistake of going against a bigger fish in the form of SPH.2. On last night’s CNA forum, some stupid fella from YMCA commented that it was OK for 30% of all donations to be used for expenses – apparently it was some sort of a ‘unsaid guideline in the industry’. It was a relieve to hear another participant saying that the ratio is not the point – it is how much each individual stood to gain i.e. it’s how fat you are getting.3. Comparison figures between NKF and KDF (forwarded by Sei Kwong):
Collections from donations + grant + sponsorships
- NKF - 67,365,000
- KDF - 4,675,527
Direct charitable expenses
- NKF - 36,191,000 (54% of collections)
- KDF - 3,818,448 (82% of collections)
Employee costs
- NKF - 27,125,000 (40% of collections)
- KDF - 572,696 (12% of collections)
Av mthly cost per employee
- NKF - 2,270 (996 employees)
- KDF - 2,390 (20 employees)
