Budweiser hires trans spokesperson and the right loses their mind

[Aristides]

Even after this hit, InBev stock is up almost 9% since the beginning of the year. I don't think I would be selling if I owned it.

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Even after this hit, InBev stock is up almost 9% since the beginning of the year. I don't think I would be selling if I owned it.

 

10 minutes ago, Aristides said:

It's a stock price. Doesn't cost a thing unless you are selling it. It has already recovered about half that loss.

It was supposed to gain, not lose. So - instead of going UP as it was, it went down. Which means no matter how you slice it this cost shareholders money.

Revenues are down too apperently. Which is WHY stocks are down. And so smaller dividends and such.

to pretend that the investors and the people who run the show don't care about stock prices because they don't mean anything is not being honest.

[CdnFox]

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Even after this hit, InBev stock is up almost 9% since the beginning of the year. I don't think I would be selling if I owned it.

But it should be much higher than that.

You don't get wealthy by making half the money you should have. Dividends will be lower, stock value will be lower, etc etc and i absolutely guarantee you that makes a VERY big difference to a lot of execs and shareholders.  This idea that "nobody cares if you lost 6 billion, pfffft!" just isn't a real thing.

[Aristides]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bud-light-draws-backlash-after-promoting-trans-activist-dylan-mulvaney-but-marketing-pros-say-its-a-smart-move-9c9becac?mod=mw_quote_news

 

Bud Lite customers are generally older and slowly dying off. They are looking to their future market.

The Kid Rocks of the world should grow up. Their reaction to everything they don't like is to shoot it or blow it up. Immature twits.

Edited April 16, 2023 by Aristides

[West]

1 hour ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

This is choice.

You're contending that InBev, the World's largest beer supplier, are inept at marketing?

As I already posted, this was a tiny blip for InBev as is evident by the fact that their stock has already recovered and Ms. Mulvaney is still a spokesperson for InBev.

https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/bud

Well they lost 8 billion overnight

[CdnFox]

Just now, Aristides said:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bud-light-draws-backlash-after-promoting-trans-activist-dylan-mulvaney-but-marketing-pros-say-its-a-smart-move-9c9becac?mod=mw_quote_news

 

Bud Lite customers are generally older and slowly dying off. They are looking to their future market.

Sorry but there's gong to be a tonne of this kind of fake 'opinion' pieces out there for a while.

You think bud isn't calling every single newspaper or media outlet they've ever advertized on and saying "positive stories NOW or never get another cent"?  Hell they're calling trump and saying the same thing. And trump is out there stumping for them.

You and i both know that the future of bud light is NOT the transsexual community. The trans they sent the beer to with her picture on it doesn't even drink beer.

This was engaging in identity politics for the purpose of making bio-straight people who consider themselves 'allies' feel like bud is sufficiently woke. This was  a political message, not trying to break into the trans market.

Which is fine and dandy - but right now that was the wrong move. People are sick of 'woke' and identity politics and now they've got a backlash.

[Aristides]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sorry but there's gong to be a tonne of this kind of fake 'opinion' pieces out there for a while.

You think bud isn't calling every single newspaper or media outlet they've ever advertized on and saying "positive stories NOW or never get another cent"?  Hell they're calling trump and saying the same thing. And trump is out there stumping for them.

You and i both know that the future of bud light is NOT the transsexual community. The trans they sent the beer to with her picture on it doesn't even drink beer.

This was engaging in identity politics for the purpose of making bio-straight people who consider themselves 'allies' feel like bud is sufficiently woke. This was  a political message, not trying to break into the trans market.

Which is fine and dandy - but right now that was the wrong move. People are sick of 'woke' and identity politics and now they've got a backlash.

Companies make long term decisions that affect short term stock prices all the time. I don't think the trans market is big enough for them to go after on its own, they are looking at future attitudes of the general public toward trans people. 

It has nothing to do with politics, this was a business decision. You think it is a bad one. We'll see but it is InBev that is putting its capital at risk and they think you are wrong.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

Companies make long term decisions that affect short term stock prices all the time

So your argument now is that they INTENDED this to be a loss in the short term.

Their reaction makes it painfully clear that was NOT the case. This was not a 'long term' plan. This was something they thought was simple and cheap - and it backfired.

Lets not try to pass it off as some sort of example of 3 d chess.

[Aristides]

Just now, CdnFox said:

So your argument now is that they INTENDED this to be a loss in the short term.

Their reaction makes it painfully clear that was NOT the case. This was not a 'long term' plan. This was something they thought was simple and cheap - and it backfired.

Lets not try to pass it off as some sort of example of 3 d chess.

Like I said, we'll see. Sometimes you have to go backward a step in order to keep going forward.

I don't really care. I don't own the stock and if don't like their presenter there are lots of other choices.

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Like I said, we'll see.

We have already seen. They're freaking out. They are calling trump demanding he speak to conservatives on their behalf to try to stop this. The media reports they're having freak outs in their own executive. They seem to be both denying supporting trans and at the same time saying they support trans in the same breath before shutting up. This has spun WAY out of control for them.

We can see the answer right now - this isn't some sort of long game, it was a simple little endorsement they did to look a little woke that VERY unexpectedly blew up in their face.  there will be NO hordes of trans people out there rushing to the stores to buy enough beer to cover the losses.  The trans in question doesn't even drink beer.

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Sometimes you have to go backward a step in order to keep going forward.

This isn't a case of that C'mon dude, even you have to realize you're reaching like hell right now.

The only positive spin you might get on this is that it's been a learning eperience about the dangers of political messaging on sensitive subjects.

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

I don't really care. I don't own the stock and if don't like their presenter there are lots of other choices.

Great - i don't drink their stuff either. But we're also probably not their target market.

[CrakHoBarbie]

29 minutes ago, West said:

Well they lost 8 billion overnight

And now their stock has rebounded. To assume this was anything more than a blip for a corporation as large as InBev would be foolish. This is evident as they didn't even fire Ms. Mulvaney. She is still their spokesperson and their stock is right back up. 

Funny how so many rightwingers are so concerned for the health of Bud light p_ss water.

[CdnFox]

29 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

And now their stock has rebounded.

Nope, it's only come about half way back. And it should have been going up the whole time as it was previously

So - they are still WAY behind. Even when they catch up to where they were they'll be way behind.

This has been a VERY expensive lesson.

29 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

 

To assume this was anything more than a blip for a corporation as large as InBev would be foolish.

To assume a corporation like that can see their value plummet by billions and call it a blip is far more foolish.

It's not going to bankrupt them but if you're trying to pretend muti billion dollar losses don't concern shareholders and execs - you have much to learn about business.

29 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

This is evident as they didn't even fire Ms. Mulvaney. She is still their spokesperson and their stock is right back up. 

their stock isn't back up and in fact they won't be working with her any more. They didn't "hire" her in the first place, they just sent her some stuff. So no - she's not their official 'spokesperson' anymore or the like. That was an error on your part.

29 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Funny how so many rightwingers are so concerned for the health of Bud light p_ss water.

So here's a  common trick of the left wing. And it's not a very good look:

When something happens that doesn't jive with their echo chamber tribalist ideology, they do the following:

Insist nothing has happened and whatever has happened is so small it might as well not have occurred.

Insist that it doesn't mean anything and nobody cares and everybody actually thinks it's great really if asked, but there's absolutely no meaning in what happened at all and if there is some nobody cares about it,

And;

Conservatives are terrible people for even bringing it up? So petty - why would they even mention it? They're clearly bad people, good people woudln't have even noticed this.

Yeah - that is ALL pretty much bullshit.

So here's the facts:

1 - multi billion dollar loses are a huge deal and bud will be VERY unhappy about this. So much so that THEY ARE NOW CALLING DONALD TRUMP TO BEG WITH CONSERVATIVES TO FORGIVE THEM.  This is a serious loss for them.

2 - THey care. And it's clear that a lot of people who really aren't conservatives care. Which tells me that it's not really about transgenderism - its' about shoving identity politics down people's throats when you should have been pouring beer down it.

3 - EVERYONE - not just conservatives but EVERYONE is getting sick of this crap. Even people who agree with transgender issues are sick of having to hear about it breakfast lunch and dinner. People are FED UP of 'woke', of identity politics, and the lefts culture war.  And it IS a big deal, and they are NOT bad people for thinking so and your attempt to cast them as such would just honk them off more and make for a bigger backlash.

Bud tried to have a 'woke ' moment and paid a severe financial penalty for it. You can bet they'll treat the 'woke agendal' much much more carefully moving forward. And other companies will as well.

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Honestly i don' t think it's the fact that they "went woke".  Bud has supported LGBT groups many times in the past and as i somewhat jokingly noted 'spuds mckenzie' was a girl.

I think the public is sick of woke and woke politics and this was seen as being a very in your face woke political move and people have snapped, and their annoyance is being taken out on bud.

As i noted, the reaction and affect on their stock is too big for just a hadful of conservative die hards.  I think it crosses the spectrum a fair bit and EVERYONE except the far left is just done with it.  It was fine when trans did their thing and bios did their thing and everyone accepted each other but now people have to live with daily does of trans in the news, trans demanding this or that. trans shooting up churches, trans in their kids schools with unreasonable bra sizes, trans wanting to "educate" their children during "Story Time", and now they can't even just sit back and have a beer without dealing with Trans drama.

I don't think most of these people care about trans people one way or another - they're just sick of hearing about it.

The Stock blip will bounce back,at the end of the day investors only care about the financial fundamentals of a company and dumb things like this are not relevant. When there’s a bitnof bad press the stock dips briefly ans day traders  try to cash in just like when a ceo has an affair or gets caught on camera kicking a puppy. 
 

How did this one-time social media promo prevent you from sitting back and enjoying a beer?  If you don’t follow trans social media types you wouldn’t have even seen it. That’s hardly “rubbing your nose in it”Seriously the only reason you heard about it all was because conservatives are trying to make a big deal out of it. 

And so what is your advice to companies going forward?  All companies must blacklist and exclude all trans people in order to avoid offending conservatives’ delicate sensibilities? Seriously 

[sharkman]

2 hours ago, West said:

Well they lost 8 billion overnight

They are going to become a much smaller company.  Anybody that is shrugging their shoulders at this does not understand what a large cut in product sales means to a company that sells products.

[CdnFox]

Just now, BeaverFever said:

The Stock blip will bounce back,at the end of the day investors only care about the financial fundamentals of a company

It'll bounce back to less than what it would have  been.  And investors worry a great deal about businesses that make bad decisions that cost billions of dollars. Meanwhile that revenue loss that's driving the stock crash is gone forever.

Like i said the first thing that the lefties do when faced with something that collides with their ideology is insist that really nothing happened and it's super small anyway. Sorry - this IS a big deal for the company and investors and they are busting major ass right now trying to mitigate the damage.

Pretending otherwise kinda just makes you look uninformed and petty.  Billions of dollars lost is a big deal.

Quote

How did this one-time social media promo prevent you from sitting back and enjoying a beer?

I love how you always try to make it personal   - when did -I- say -I- Couldn't enjoy a beer? Did i say that? No? Never? Then why claim i did?

Oh that's right - you can't address the points i DID make so you HAVE to lie to create something you can argue about  
Cheezy dude.

In any case what i actually said is that people get fed up when they can't enjoy a beer without thinking about trans issues or other identity politics.  And that's the case - if they want to buy some bud light and sit back and drink it then they now pretty much have to think about trans issues because bud has made that a thing. And that makes people angry and they consider other brands instead.

7 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

And so what is your advice to companies going forward?

Identity politics is a losing game for companies to play in the end. Many have found that out. Don't do it. If you make beer then sell beer.

You can still successfully market to and support communities like the letter people but don't make it a political issue. I mean they have for years successfully, this was just stupid.

Get woke go broke. Don't do it.  Be honest in your genuine support and don't virtue signal and let people enjoy their products and their lives.

 

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Nope, it's only come about half way back. And it should have been going up the whole time as it was previously

So - they are still WAY behind. Even when they catch up to where they were they'll be way behind.

This has been a VERY expensive lesson.

To assume a corporation like that can see their value plummet by billions and call it a blip is far more foolish.

It's not going to bankrupt them but if you're trying to pretend muti billion dollar losses don't concern shareholders and execs - you have much to learn about business.

their stock isn't back up and in fact they won't be working with her any more. They didn't "hire" her in the first place, they just sent her some stuff. So no - she's not their official 'spokesperson' anymore or the like. That was an error on your part.

So here's a  common trick of the left wing. And it's not a very good look:

When something happens that doesn't jive with their echo chamber tribalist ideology, they do the following:

Insist nothing has happened and whatever has happened is so small it might as well not have occurred.

Insist that it doesn't mean anything and nobody cares and everybody actually thinks it's great really if asked, but there's absolutely no meaning in what happened at all and if there is some nobody cares about it,

And;

Conservatives are terrible people for even bringing it up? So petty - why would they even mention it? They're clearly bad people, good people woudln't have even noticed this.

Yeah - that is ALL pretty much bullshit.

So here's the facts:

1 - multi billion dollar loses are a huge deal and bud will be VERY unhappy about this. So much so that THEY ARE NOW CALLING DONALD TRUMP TO BEG WITH CONSERVATIVES TO FORGIVE THEM.  This is a serious loss for them.

2 - THey care. And it's clear that a lot of people who really aren't conservatives care. Which tells me that it's not really about transgenderism - its' about shoving identity politics down people's throats when you should have been pouring beer down it.

3 - EVERYONE - not just conservatives but EVERYONE is getting sick of this crap. Even people who agree with transgender issues are sick of having to hear about it breakfast lunch and dinner. People are FED UP of 'woke', of identity politics, and the lefts culture war.  And it IS a big deal, and they are NOT bad people for thinking so and your attempt to cast them as such would just honk them off more and make for a bigger backlash.

Bud tried to have a 'woke ' moment and paid a severe financial penalty for it. You can bet they'll treat the 'woke agendal' much much more carefully moving forward. And other companies will as well.

Wow... Big post... You just stew as long as needed. It's what your good at.

InBevs not worried in the least.

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/anheuser-busch-stock-loses-over-195046945.html

?

Edited April 16, 2023 by CrakHoBarbie

[herbie]

IF you actually stopped drinking Bud Light because they used a tranny in an ad then please cut out your tongue, it didn't work anyway and we don't want to hear your opinion.

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

They are going to become a much smaller company.  Anybody that is shrugging their shoulders at this does not understand what a large cut in product sales means to a company that sells products.

What large cut in product sales? No sales numbers have been announced for the period after she was hired. There was probably some but we don't know how much. The fact the company hasn't backed off means they aren't panicking.

[CdnFox]

35 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Wow... Big post... You just stew as long as needed. It's what your good at.

LOL - did you need me to use smaller words and more pictures for you?  

Only the left would say something that wouldn't take up half a page printed is a "really long read" LOLOL

35 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

InBevs not worried in the least.

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/anheuser-busch-stock-loses-over-195046945.html

?

Oh imagine that - SOMEHOW a bunch of paid people are coming forth to say this is terrible sure but you should still buy the stock I wonder who put them up to that ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

If they weren't worried there would be no stories at all.  And they wouldn't have called trump and begged him to tell conservatives to let them off the hook

They're in full on damage control and they're VERY concerned. Anyone they've ever spent an ad dollar with is going to get a call teling them if they ever want another cent they better spin this positively. 

I'm sorry that the facts don't suit your personal agenda but as a person on the right of the spectrum I tend to listen to the facts and the science a little more - you keep going with "Muh feels" if you like.  But I bet bud won't

Others will pay attention too. Nobody wants to lose that kind of revenue. Or have their stock take that kind of hit.

That's just life. Feel free to stick your fingers in your hears and humm if it helps you sleep at night.

[Aristides]

The stock is recovering, 1st quarter numbers won't be out until July. Revenue loss estimates are just opinions.

[CdnFox]

51 minutes ago, Aristides said:

The stock is recovering, 1st quarter numbers won't be out until July. Revenue loss estimates are just opinions.

Dude - could you be in denial harder?  This is starting to get sad.

The stock going down hurts them. That's a very serious problem for them. It should have been going up. So even if it recovers it will take much much longer for it to recover to where it should have been.  That's why they're freaking.

The revenues have taken a serious hit. It really doesn't matter if it's 2 billion or 3 billion or 10 billion per se - they're losing revenue. In case you were unaware businesses are only profitable when they MAKE money and the purpose of advertising is to MAKE money - not to hopefully not lose TOO much money

This is an unmitigated failure for them. And they know darn well that there are so many beer choices that if people switch from their product even for a little while they may get used to the new product and simply not switch back even when they're not angry any more.

While i appreciate the mental gymnastics - sorry to burst your bubble but this is bad for bud.

[dialamah]

On 4/15/2023 at 2:37 PM, CdnFox said:

That does not appear to be the case here. They appear to be reacting to the company deliberately putting the person forward because they are trans.

If these people were actually accepting of Trans people, they'd react the same as they do when beer companies feature scantily clad women and "manly" men - that is to say, not at all.  The objectors make it political because they object to trans people and don't want to see them.

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, dialamah said:

f these people were actually accepting of Trans people, they'd react the same as they do when beer companies feature scantily clad women and "manly" men - that is to say, not at all. 

Well that's not true in the slightest.  One puts women on because you're appealing directly to the target markets.  Women who drink beer want to be seen as pretty and men who drink beer want to believe the activity is directly associated with pretty women. That's normal advertising. 

But - imagine like i said earlier they put up a woman in a swimsuit, but the swimsuit features swastikas. And the caption is "at bud we support everyone's right to free speech".

Now - the person watching may believe in free speech but he's still going to be pissed and very likely will say 'i don't support this, and i wont' buy that product". 

[dialamah]

9 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well that's not true in the slightest.  One puts women on because you're appealing directly to the target markets.  Women who drink beer want to be seen as pretty and men who drink beer want to believe the activity is directly associated with pretty women. That's normal advertising. 

But - imagine like i said earlier they put up a woman in a swimsuit, but the swimsuit features swastikas. And the caption is "at bud we support everyone's right to free speech".

Now - the person watching may believe in free speech but he's still going to be pissed and very likely will say 'i don't support this, and i wont' buy that product". 

You make my point for me - swastikas are not acceptable in any context - trans people are, in theory at least.   If sending some cans of Bud lite to a person in a swimsuit is unremarkable, so should be sending some cans to a trans person.

It remains the people who object that makes it political.  They object because they don't like, don't want to see and don't want to be reminded that trans people exist, so they pressure anyone who brings trans people to their attention to STFU.

 

 

[CdnFox]

13 minutes ago, dialamah said:

You make my point for me - swastikas are not acceptable in any context - trans people are, in theory at least. 

You miss the point entirely. Free speech is acceptable in any context (in theory at least). The fact that it's being used in a manner you might not entirely approve of yourself is not relevant. If someone wishes to wear a swastika bikini they can.

So - the fact that you don't disapprove of free speech does not mean you're not going to find that particular advert annoying. You've turned the product into a controversy.

Likewise - just because you don't disapprove of trans doesn't mean you're not going to find an ad politicizing them to be annoying.

13 minutes ago, dialamah said:

 If sending some cans of Bud lite to a person in a swimsuit is unremarkable, so should be sending some cans to a trans person.

Well lets test that with my example - if sending some cans of bud lite to a person in a swimsuit is unremarkable so should be sending some cans to a person in a swimsuit with a swastika.

Ummm - nope, turns out there's a difference  

You can pretend otherwise but you'd be being dishonest at this point - sending it to the trans person to celebrate their one year anniversary of being trans'd is a political statement. The person doesn't even drink beer.

13 minutes ago, dialamah said:

It remains the people who object that makes it political.

That's not true at all - and bud wouldn't be taking the hit that it is if it were JUST harder conservatives who don't like trans people that were the issue. It's clear that it's stepping beyond that.

People eat breathe and sleep trans issues right now. Every day it's in the papers - trans issues in our schools, trans issues wiht teachers with fake gigantic breasts, trans issues with them shooting up churches, trans issues with bathrooms, trans issues with trans people demanding to tell stories to underage children, trans issues with every single thing under the sun and now we can't have a beer without thinking about trans issues.  And if you have ANY concerns with ANY of it - you're a terrible evil nazi.

I don't care WHAT the topic is - eventually people get sick of it constantly in their face and being told if they don't agree 100percent with all of it then they're scum. And this is the predictable result. At some point people were going to snap and bud is paying billions for holding the potato when that happened.

Lie to yourself if you must, but the fact is that the backlash means that companies will realize that it's not sate to be supportive of those groups in the same way any more. Which is too bad for those groups. But it was predictable.