Honesty and transparency are important watchwords
It's disappointing when a company gives a misleading impression - whether it's Virgin refusing apparently standard prices to existing customers, RNLI fundraising then keeping a massive cash pot (http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/rnlis-income-reached-174m-2012/finance/article/1190649), or Wikipedia suggesting they'll do something then seeming to back-pedal on that assurance.
Personally, Wikipedia won't care about me, because I haven't donated, although I'd probably be more inclined to if the demands for support were less invasive. Virgin may not care because they have an effective monopoly on some of the premium services in my area. And RNLI doesn't care now because the company I worked for that was maintaining their site long since went bust while their capital reserves have soared.
Naturally, the RNLI should have other priorities than a fancy website, it just seemed that putting aside around 15% of income with substantial reserves already seemed less than forthright to those being asked to donate whatever they can to help run the service. Virgin it's a question of corporate integrity (and treating your existing customers fairly), and Wikipedia, like the RNLI, it's about being open and honest. If you want us to feel good about donating, don't make us feel bullied into handing over money to you, don't make us feel like we're not getting what we should in return, and don't put yourself in the same boat as many politicians by appearing to promise one thing then doing another.