Money Money Money

Is it right for Angel and co. to charge their clients

  • Yes

    Votes: 20 83.3%

  • No

    Votes: 4 16.7%
  • Total voters
    24
Primal Slayer

Primal Slayer

Did I Fall Asleep?
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
2,186
Age
38
Location
Kentucky
Ok during mostly S2-3(alot in Season3) the Angel gang has charged their clients money for when they help them out, now my question is do you think it was right of them to charge their clients or if it is fair?

To me it was very selfish of them to do, they shouldnt charge people when they save them from something since they signed up to do the whole Helping the helpless themselves, I dont really care if it was for Connor if that is part of the reason why they did it, even checking into their clients to see how financial stable they are.
 
If their clients were able to pay they should.AI needed money to pay bills and they helped whoever needed it poor or rich.I think they deserved at least some money...
 
I'm with ana8...

without money our heros die(or steal banks),and if they die,the helpless ppl die too...though it could have been good let connor die...
 
hey! conner was cool i think that its okay for them to charge cause they did have to make money
 
Originally posted by Magui
I'm with ana8...

without money our heros die(or steal banks),and if they die,the helpless ppl die too...though it could have been good let connor die...
Click to expand...

Not actually(not the connor part) but look at Buffy during Season6, she found all of her money dried up, so she tried to do what Angel and co. did but didnt work so she went out and got a job.
 
But it'd be hard for Angel to find a job,Cordelia still wanted to be an actress and Fred was too afraid of the world to look for a job...
 
Yes they should charge, at least charge those clients who come to them for help, any detective agency charges. They never, well rarely, charge those they help on the streets who did not originally come to them. They are running a business, businesses must make money to continue to run.
 
it's completely normal to charge...They might be saving many people,but still they've to eat...
 
I think it was fine they charged. They need money to keep the place open, buy things, and what not. I don't even think they charged that much, did they?
 
Originally posted by Parker Summers
I don't even think they charged that much, did they?
Click to expand...

you should ask cordy 😉...



I think it depened,if the costumer was rich,they prob asked for more money than what they asked to a babysiter...and about the ppl they saved on the streets,they didn't charged them.
 
I sad yes. They need to make money somehow. Plus, the walk-ins are the ones who pay most of the time.
 
I think they got paid by how much the person is worth, but if they was poor poor poor, they didn't.
 
Originally posted by Ana8
They charge if they know that the client is able to pay...
Click to expand...

Which is better than most businesses, most people don't care if your poor, they still want teh money. At least AI was considerate enough to still help those people they knew could not afford to pay them. How many other businesses do that, that aren't non-profits organizations?
 
I think it was fair, but they've made it clear several times, that they would only accept payment if people could miss the money. They didn't charge and still helped poor people.
 
Originally posted by Allycat
I think it was fair, but they've made it clear several times, that they would only accept payment if people could miss the money. They didn't charge and still helped poor people.
Click to expand...


Yup,that's rite
 
Definitly, they work there @ss off, give up there lives, nearly die and dont you think they deserve a little? I mean ok, thata mean to ask some guy who can just aford to bye bread, but they take it into consideration, they have more clients not charged than actually charged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom