You haven't made an argument against an NGO operated cafe, you've made an argument against an NGO operated cafe that pays out all its earnings.
Also, assuming that they have any sort of tax or cost advantage (if only from people willing to donate time/effort), for the same amount of business they have more money to put towards their purpose, be it for investment in more cafes or for educating more students now.
> You haven't made an argument against an NGO operated cafe, you've made an argument against an NGO operated cafe that pays out all its earnings.
Ah, there were some unstated assumptions in my post.
1. NGO leadership are usually from a different talent pool and background than business leadership.
2. Business leadership tend to outperform NGO leadership at growing a business.
This leads to the idea that a cafe operated for charity might produce less good than a cafe operated for business, as described above. I think it was definitely true in that specific case. Whether the NGO could've run in a more expansive, business-like fashion? I don't know. I'm inclined to guess no, but I'd be open to being pleasantly surprised.
Also, assuming that they have any sort of tax or cost advantage (if only from people willing to donate time/effort), for the same amount of business they have more money to put towards their purpose, be it for investment in more cafes or for educating more students now.