Started By
Message

re: Bud Light: Why the Right loses

Posted on 12/15/23 at 6:48 am to
Posted by Penrod
Member since Jan 2011
40253 posts
Posted on 12/15/23 at 6:48 am to
quote:

So a call was probably made, give UFC, Dana White, Kid Rock, and a bunch of other influencers a boatload of cash, in turn being the sheep back to drinking the goat urine again.

I have a very different take on this. AB was a conservative company that was careless and let a contract marketing firm do the Dylan Tranny thing. The powers at AB were horrified by the whole thing, but we chose to make a stand on that particular issue and that particular product.

Unlike Gillette, whose CEO has said he is glad they became woke and that the lost business was worth it, AB has studiously avoided the fringe woke. They have suffered and repented. They can’t pay enough cowboys and ball players, lol.

The boycott was good and it worked, but the mission isn’t to drive Bud Lite out of existence; the mission is to use these boycotts to affect the behavior of most firms and get them out of the woke advertising business.

What would you do if your two kids were being bad, you disciplined them, then one straightened up and the other was still bad? Well, AB has straightened up. Gillette is still bad. Focus your ire on Gillette, J P Morgan Chase, and others that are pushing the woke envelope. I don’t drink beer, much less diet beer, but if I did I’d start drinking BL again.
Posted by GeauxTigerTM
Member since Sep 2006
30596 posts
Posted on 12/15/23 at 8:13 am to
quote:

AB was a conservative company


Why did they have a 100% score from the Human Rights Campaign prior to caving under the pressure once the Dylan thing exploded? After not fully supporting him and keeping the marketing going, they've since taken a hit...but it's not like they have a 0.

LINK

They'd been conservative in marketing...that's all.

This was AB's score in 2014...

LINK

It took them not supporting Dylan for it to drop...

LINK
This post was edited on 12/15/23 at 8:17 am
Posted by trinidadtiger
Member since Jun 2017
13695 posts
Posted on 12/16/23 at 9:07 pm to
quote:

I have a very different take on this. AB was a conservative company that was careless and let a contract marketing firm do the Dylan Tranny thing.


I know this is the "theme" AB portrayed, but I worked for Pepsi and Miller for decades and the agencies do nothing, let me repeat nothing, without corporate approval. This on line gimic with a trans would have to have been approved well above even the marketing head to the CEO. And if he didnt know he should be fired for not having enough controls in place to prevent someone from fcking with the flagship brand of the company.

There was a time when CEOs would do the honorable think and quit after costing the company billions and tarnishing their reputation forever, but hey thats why they have a former spook running the place, they never take the blame for their fups.

And NC is correct, it was never a boycott, it was disgust at drinking it and being associated with a tran902&*3. And those people wont return and doubtful they will get many entry level drinkers from this point on so the brand will slowly die.

Not dumping on you Penrod, just pissed that pu3347&&* of a CEO tried to blame the agency for his screwup.
Posted by Hewonbyalot
Member since Aug 2021
273 posts
Posted on 12/17/23 at 3:54 pm to
quote:

AB was a conservative company that was careless and let a contract marketing firm do the Dylan Tranny thing. The powers at AB were horrified by the whole thing, but we chose to make a stand on that particular issue and that particular product.


WRONG. AB has an entire in-house marketing staff, never an outside contracted firm. I hope they go out of business, although I know they won't
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram