re: Ben & Jerry's cofounder leaves business after 47 years

quote:

---

If you zoom in on the ice cream you will see that it’s a special Kamala ice cream

---

The wording got blurry when I zoomed in....is it vodka flavored ice cream?

I like ice cream too much, and avoided B&J because of the radicalism

I had some a few weeks ago, and it really just isn't that good. I'm sure it was pretty good for grocery store fare 20 years ago, but obviously there are 10x as many premium options now. Which makes it easy.

quote:

---

Are they a gay couple? Picture looks like they're a couple.

---

Definite fudge packing vibes in that photo

He's very unhappy that he can't make ice cream as good as Blue Bell

quote:

---

If you zoom in on the ice cream you will see that it’s a special Kamala ice cream, So not only are they gay but they’re also fricking retarted.

---

Gotta be nutty and contain several liquors.

Imagine a giant multi-national purchases a brand by compensating the owners handsomely.....then spends a fortune to restructure the supply chain, improves product quality, increases margins, expands sales channels, develops and executes a cohesive marketing strategy, and ultimately grows the brand to become a giant operation across multiple countries over 20 years.

And they have the nerve to be uncomfortable with the previous owners threatening all of that success by trying to make the brand into a divisive political symbol instead of a fricking consumer product.

How dare they finally draw the line and ask the previous owners with very limited involvement in the business stop inserting their politics into the company!

The founders got their checks and they kept them around long enough. If he wanted to make this into a political symbol, he should have kept fully ownership of company and enjoyed being a small niche operation only to have that brand sold to a giant conclomerate anyways after he dies.

You can't have your $326 million cake and eat it too.

quote:

---

I don’t buy their ice cream.

---

A lot of people don't.....not because of the parent company, but because the founders are politically divisive.

The more distance between the previous owners and the brand, the more success they'll have.

quote:

---

Those two out of touch judgemental nutbags lived their entire lives in their lilly white enclave in Vermont and look down on the rest of us for all of our horrific isms. I would like to see their world outlook after a couple years in Somalia or Bastrop LA.

---

The two founders did extremely well. Unilever took the brand to the next level. The potential here is massive.

But they've reached a market saturation point now that they can't get past unless they either rebrand or the origional founders are separated from the company (and separated long enough where people forget their involvement). There are too many good quality alternatives that are not politically divisive.

Unilever didn't spend nearly $350mm for the brand to only sell to woke individuals. They are attempting to make it as widespread and accepted as a brand as Chevrolet, McDonalds, or Coca-Cola over the next few decades. Can't do that if half of the market thinks you are woke.

quote:

---

They are/were the wokest of the woke companies.

---

The tea leaves are saying that they are trying to curb this. They recent elections may have shown that they could be alienating most of the country with this crap.

Not sure they'll be successful until the guys whose names are on the product are out of the picture. They seem to be liabilities despite coming up with a successful formula originally.

Sort of like Elon Musk.....building a hugely successful consumer brand, then alienating customers by getting political, limiting Tesla's appeal. At some point the value and creativity Musk brings will not outweigh the potential liability he also brings. It's not clear that Tesla has reached that point with Musk, but it's very clear to me that Ben and Jerry's has reached that point with their founders.