Apple Promotes Music Single to Help Support Victims of London Grenfell Tower Tragedy

Apple is asking visitors to its U.K. site to consider making a donation to help those affected by the Grenfell Tower tragedy in London by purchasing the iTunes single "Bridge Over Troubled Water", which went straight to the top of the U.K. charts just two hours after it was released on Wednesday.

Artists for Grenfell represents more than 50 musicians including Craig David, Liam Payne, and Stormzy, who recorded the cover of the Simon & Garfunkel classic to support victims' families and survivors of the fire. Residents and survivors of the London tower block also feature as part of a choir led by Gareth Malone.


Download this moving cover of the Simon & Garkunkel classic (featuring Stormzy, Rita Ora, Liam Payne, Jorja Smith and many more) to support those affected by the Grenfell Tower tragedy. And if you’d like to donate further to the Artists for Grenfell and London Community Foundation appeal, please visit http://smarturl.it/AFGDonate.

At least £0.76 for each download of the song featured on this page will go to The London Community Foundation (a charity registered in England No. 1091263).
Combustible cladding is believed to have been responsible for the rapid spread of the fire at Grenfell Tower last week, which left at least 79 people dead or missing. The government has been heavily criticized for its response in the immediate aftermath, and has pledged to house the Grenfell Tower fire survivors as quickly as possible.

The charity track achieved 120,000 downloads and streaming equivalent sales on Wednesday, which is the biggest opening day figure for a U.K. single this decade. You can download "Bridge Over Troubled Water" on iTunes here. The track is also available to stream on Apple Music.



Top Rated Comments

(View all)
Avatar
25 months ago
"At least £0.76" and in the fine print "into a special donation fund set up to avoid taxes". Absolutely poor showing. How about ALL is being donated and Apple will match each dollar with another extra $9 of its own???

Apple needs to STOP asking customers to make donations that it often takes ownership of in its company reports.

If Apple is so concerned about this particular issue then Apple needs to move millions or billions of its stockpile of dollars into this and other charities on its own accord.

Apple has enough money to help out these kinds of situations so it shouldn't be suggesting or inviting customers make those contributions.

Open the wallet Apple and help make a change in the world.
Rating: 7 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago
Only MacRumors could get outraged about Apple providing a way for people to donate to a charity.

Instead of getting upset, why don't YOU make a donation?
Rating: 3 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago

The charity should receive the full 99p not just 76p. Disgusted that Apple is making a profit from this.


Agh. Really?

Please note the description on iTunes, which states:

"This includes 100% of Apple's share"


[1]

Which I think should end any talk of "profiteering". I invite the posters who claimed as much to retract their slurs upon Apple.

[1] UK iTunes page screenshot, 23 June 2017, 19:10 BST
Rating: 2 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago

If Apple really cared they could give one days profits for these people.

Instead they are profittering from this disaster.


Apple is profiteering off a tragic situation. If they were donating, they'd donate the entire amount, not a partial payment.

Disgusting business practices from Apple.


As per forum rules, could you please back up your accusation with actual evidence that Apple are withholding any profit at all from the sale of this track, or else retract the accusation? I've already pointed out that most of the difference between the minimum 76p they say will be passed on and the 99p sale price is down to tax (17p), which leaves only a maximum or 6 pence difference, some of which at least can logically be attributed to running costs. In the UK, VAT is included in the stated sale price.

Please present your evidence that Apple is "profiteering" to the tune of ~5 pence maximum. I would agree that even if they are taking a profit of 1 pence from this track that would be disgraceful, but I find it unlikely.
Rating: 2 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago

I don't particularly care for the cover, but I've already bought the track in support. My heart goes out to everyone affected by the fire - a tragic and outrageous situation that should never have happened.



After tax, credit card processing and other costs I doubt that Apple is seeing any profit from this. I agree it'd be nice to see them make an additional donation of their own.

Tax, credit card processing and other costs should be Apple's responsibility.

Apple shouldn't be making profits from charitable contributions.

It would actually be nice to see Apple make their own donation in the first instance. Apple haven't yet made any donation, customers have made donations, not Apple.
Rating: 2 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago

It would actually be nice to see Apple make their own donation in the first instance. Apple haven't yet made any donation, customers have made donations, not Apple.

How do you know that Apple haven't donated?
Rating: 1 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago

As per forum rules, could you please back up your accusation with actual evidence that Apple are withholding any profit at all from the sale of this track, or else retract the accusation? I've already pointed out that most of the difference between the minimum 76p they say will be passed on and the 99p sale price is down to tax (17p), which leaves only a maximum or 6 pence difference, some of which at least can logically be attributed to running costs. In the UK, VAT is included in the stated sale price.

Please present your evidence that Apple is "profiteering" to the tune of ~5 pence maximum. I would agree that even if they are taking a profit of 1 pence from this track that would be disgraceful, but I find it unlikely.

You answered your own questions and highlighted the decrepency. Pick up the tax tab, Apple. Pick up the running costs, Apple.
FACT is that customers are making the purchase, it is the customer's sale being directed to charity (it's not a contribution from Apple), BUT even still, Apple is retaining a portion of that charitable purchase. The customer's expectation is that the whole purchase is to go to charity, directly to the victims, not a slush fund.
Fair and reasonable individuals would expect Apple to direct the COMPLETE TOTAL OF SALES, NOT A PORTION. Apple sits on billions and can't even get charity right. What Apple is doing is not charity.
Total scum corporate culture at Apple. Disgusting executives.
Rating: 1 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago

No, the charity wouldn't be expecting the full 99p, because they understand VAT.

The customer wouldn't be expecting 99p to go to the charity because it says "at least 76p', right on the purchase page, as quoted by MR and myself in this thread.

If you want to say you think Apple should donate an extra 23p themselves then that's fine (and I wouldn't disagree with you on that, why would anyone?). But you and others claim it's "profiteering" which seems an evidently false specific claim, so invite you again to retract it.

"No, the charity wouldn't be expecting the full 99p"

Actually, I'm certain the charity WOULD be expecting the full 99p. As would the customers making the purchases frankly.

The charity is losing ~24% of the expected amount. That's insanely crazy.

Apple needs to get its thinking cap on instead of basking in the glory of the generous giving of its customers. This was a badly thought through plan.

Someone's profiteering from the missing 23p, we certainly know the charity and victims are not.
[doublepost=1498245705][/doublepost]Th

Next time you get a call for charitable donations, ask the solicitor what percentage of the donation actually goes to the charity. They are required by law to tell you. It's usually below 20% and often closer to 10%. The rest goes towards "operating costs".

In this case, Apple guarantees that ALL its profits will go to the cause. The amount varies from country to country and even state to state depending on tax laws, exchange fees and processing fees. So "at least 76p" is as good of an estimate as they can do. I would be very surprised if Apple makes a penny of this deal, and they'll most likely round up the payments to the charity.

The 23p difference should be made up by Apple. What's everyone so afraid of? The customers are giving a full 99p. Apple is only passing on 76p of the customers full payment, so why can't Apple put in its own donation of 23p? What's everyone so afraid of Apple covering the difference to ensure the full 99p gets to the charity?

As it currently stands, Apple is making ZERO donation and simply passing on ~76% of the customer donation. At the same time Apple is seeking publicity through this process having given ZERO donation from itself.

That's really messed up.
Rating: 1 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago

The customer and charity is expecting the full 99p, not 76% of it!

Next time you get a call for charitable donations, ask the solicitor what percentage of the donation actually goes to the charity. They are required by law to tell you. It's usually below 20% and often closer to 10%. The rest goes towards "operating costs".

In this case, Apple guarantees that ALL its profits will go to the cause. The amount varies from country to country and even state to state depending on tax laws, exchange fees and processing fees. So "at least 76p" is as good of an estimate as they can do. I would be very surprised if Apple makes a penny of this deal, and they'll most likely round up the payments to the charity.
Rating: 1 Votes
Avatar
25 months ago

Only MacRumors could get outraged about Apple providing a way for people to donate to a charity.

Instead of getting upset, why don't YOU make a donation?

What this person said. You guys don't have to always be so negative. Apple is trying to help in some way, you guys aren't. The end.
Rating: 1 Votes
[ Read All Comments ]