Go woke, go broke

[theprestige]

I'm failing to see what makes this place an anti-capitalist operation other than the self declaration of the owner and a few posters on the walls.

That's a good point. When you put it that way, it's definitely more of a "go woke, go broke" thing.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

yeah, "woke" places can go out of business when Republicans make it by law impossible to operate.
Or when their supporters decide to firebomb it.

That has nothing to do with the Market.

 

[Lplus]

Especially when those fighting woke use market tactics like....bomb threats!

https://www.cantonrep.com/story/new...th-terrorist-threats-lgbtq-merch/70261866007/

You must be so proud.

From your source -

police said its dispatch center around 12:40 p.m. received calls from Channel 19 and Channel 5 news saying they had received bomb threats against four Target stores, including the one in Jackson Township. The message said that Target had turned its back on the LGBTQ community and that bombs had been planted in the stores.

So the bomb threat seems to have been from Pro LGBTQ individuals....

 

[kookbreaker]

You actually believe that? The LGBT community knows Target was employing rainbow marketing and that Target was protecting its staff and stores from the right wingers. To date there have been several incidents of violence, harassment and damage done by “anti-woke” types.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You actually believe that? The LGBT community knows Target was employing rainbow marketing and that Target was protecting its staff and stores from the right wingers. To date there have been several incidents of violence, harassment and damage done by “anti-woke” types.

Much ink has been spent in the past about the merits of "rainbow capitalism", and how much the queer community should court and rely on corporations as members of the broader queer community. The Target and Budweiser debacle is proving a lot of the critics right that these queer friendly corporations of recent years were fair-weather friends at best, only interesting in pandering towards liberal values so long as it was easy and made them money.

Right wing reactionaries have identified that these corporations can be chased away from even milquetoast support of general liberal values if they throw a big enough fit. There's any asymmetry of fervor, liberals don't really seem to mind that much when corporations shy away from liberal values, meanwhile reactionaries know they can make up for their lack of numbers by simply being the biggest nuisance (or outright violent threat) in the room.

Libs need to take a lesson from the fascist book and start extracting a cost from corporations that waver in their loyalty to liberal values, at least if this is something they care about at all.

 

[Armitage72]

AB/Bud Light haven't gone broke.

Name one company that has gone broke from going woke. Have you even got one?

It's like an episode I remember of a TV show, South Park maybe, in which a newscaster was sadly reporting how widespread music piracy had tragically forced a singer to get a slightly smaller gold-plated swimming pool than he had originally planned on buying.

 

[Brainster]

Especially when those fighting woke use market tactics like....bomb threats!

https://www.cantonrep.com/story/new...th-terrorist-threats-lgbtq-merch/70261866007/

You must be so proud.

Did you miss this part of the linked article?

In a statement, police said its dispatch center around 12:40 p.m. received calls from Channel 19 and Channel 5 news saying they had received bomb threats against four Target stores, including the one in Jackson Township. The message said that Target had turned its back on the LGBTQ community and that bombs had been planted in the stores.

It's the woke folk leaving bomb threats this time.

 

[novaphile]

Did you miss this part of the linked article?



It's the woke folk leaving bomb threats this time.

That's probably the easiest way to perform a false flag operation isn't it?

Make a phone call and say you're doing it on behalf of 'insert enemy of choice in here'



Talk about low effort.

 

[dudalb]

Little Mermaid is doing well at the box office.

 

[kookbreaker]

Did you miss this part of the linked article?



It's the woke folk leaving bomb threats this time.

And you actually believe that?

Lemme guess, did you donate to the guy who claimed his garage was vandalized by ANTIFA and said they spray painted Anarchy symbols, the word "ANTIFA" and "Biden 2020" on his garage?

 

[Darat]

Little Mermaid is doing well at the box office.

Shush you - facts don't matter!

 

[Brainster]

That's probably the easiest way to perform a false flag operation isn't it?

The conspiracy woo is strong, but couldn't you have thrown a little cui bono in there?

 

[dudalb]

Shush you - facts don't matter!

And wierd thing is I will not go see it because I have not liked ANY of these live action remakes.............................
But they make the Mouse tons of money.

 

[Brainster]

Anheuser-Busch, still not broke, but:

Shares of Bud Light’s parent company are now down more than 20% in the two months since the beer sent personalized memorabilia to transgender social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney, a seemingly innocuous marketing partnership that's cost the company billions amid right-wing backlash.

Go woke only lose $26 billion in shareholder value.

 

[RolandRat]

Anheuser-Busch, still not broke, but:



Go woke only lose $26 billion in shareholder value.

from your link:

"Despite the company’s stock slide, Wall Street remains fairly bullish on Anheuser-Busch; the nearly three dozen analysts surveyed by FactSet have an average price target of about $67 for the stock, implying roughly 25% upside and projecting it to hit its pre-controversy level. "

This means it is expected to bounce back though, right?

Going by this linked article https://www.forbes.com/sites/soniat...d-dylan-mulvaney-controversy/?sh=142d4d9b2581 it seems to be implying that it wasn't "going woke" that was the problem, it was the half-arsed way they did it. They dipped a toe in and when their standard base started screaming, they tried to backtrack rather than doubling down.

 

[Lplus]

from your link:

"Despite the company’s stock slide, Wall Street remains fairly bullish on Anheuser-Busch; the nearly three dozen analysts surveyed by FactSet have an average price target of about $67 for the stock, implying roughly 25% upside and projecting it to hit its pre-controversy level. "

This means it is expected to bounce back though, right?

Going by this linked article https://www.forbes.com/sites/soniat...d-dylan-mulvaney-controversy/?sh=142d4d9b2581 it seems to be implying that it wasn't "going woke" that was the problem, it was the half-arsed way they did it. They dipped a toe in and when their standard base started screaming, they tried to backtrack rather than doubling down.

But of course - if a company tries to expand into a minority demographic and their original majority demographic stops buying their product, the first thing they should do is thumb their noses at their base demographic.

Hmmm, yeah...

 

[Brainster]

from your link:

"Despite the company’s stock slide, Wall Street remains fairly bullish on Anheuser-Busch; the nearly three dozen analysts surveyed by FactSet have an average price target of about $67 for the stock, implying roughly 25% upside and projecting it to hit its pre-controversy level. "

This means it is expected to bounce back though, right?

Going by this linked article https://www.forbes.com/sites/soniat...d-dylan-mulvaney-controversy/?sh=142d4d9b2581 it seems to be implying that it wasn't "going woke" that was the problem, it was the half-arsed way they did it. They dipped a toe in and when their standard base started screaming, they tried to backtrack rather than doubling down.

On the stock yes, it is likely to recover most of the losses, over time. If the stock gets back to $67 in a year or two, that's a year or two of lost value growth.

On whether they should have doubled down, it's hard to see the outcome from that being actually worse than what has happened. Of course a far better idea would have been to stay away from Mulvaney in the first place. I suspect the reason he has so many followers is because he's a complete train wreck. Apparently he uploaded a video in 2022 where he made this announcement:

So I recently told my parents that I may be a little bit romantically interested in women and that was a big shock for them considering the past 10 years of coming out as gay, then queer, then non-binary, then trans. And I think it was just a little bit of a shock. So I tell my dad and he goes- "I would love to see you get a woman pregnant," and I said- "oh no no no no no, she’d be getting me pregnant."

 

[RolandRat]

But of course - if a company tries to expand into a minority demographic and their original majority demographic stops buying their product, the first thing they should do is thumb their noses at their base demographic.

Hmmm, yeah...

Seems reasonable to me. I would fathom it's more about trying to get the new demographic on board. One of the companies reps talked in the article about targeting new age ranges etc. Sticking a toe in the water, pissing off your old customers and then pissing off the new ones by back-tracking seems a tad silly.

 

[RolandRat]

On the stock yes, it is likely to recover most of the losses, over time. If the stock gets back to $67 in a year or two, that's a year or two of lost value growth.

On whether they should have doubled down, it's hard to see the outcome from that being actually worse than what has happened. Of course a far better idea would have been to stay away from Mulvaney in the first place. I suspect the reason he has so many followers is because he's a complete train wreck. Apparently he uploaded a video in 2022 where he made this announcement:

Seems to me this is something a company should probably be doing with a bit more thought and care. Especially one whose customers are probably a bit more "hardcore" in their beliefs.

As for the quote, I have no idea how to even unpack that comment so I'll just leave it be.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Tell me about the shareholders suffering. How bad has it been?

The shareholder suffering is bad enough that I’m thinking of buying shares. The only thing holding me back is that the CEO has no spine. I can’t invest in a company that allows a few twitter tough guys to run off senior staff.

If they hadn’t been so reactionary I’d probably have some bud light in the fridge and the shares likely wouldn’t be so affordable.

The proper response should have been: everyone should enjoy good beer that is why we sponsor such a variety of people including: (exceptionally long list of all the people and organizations bud light has sponsorship or promotional deals with). See: every other marketing campaign that has faced similar scrutiny.

That their CEO was too stupid to see the clear path forward and tripped over his dick to not solve the problem is a huge red flag. I don’t invest in red flags.