Bud, Target and now Chick-fil-a

[funkymonkey1111]

https://babylonbee.com/news/chick-fi...y-my-privilege

"my privilege!"

[def90]

I said they were weird colors, not LGBT colors. I was questioning their business decision of selling CLOTHES as well as their new DEI mission and interest in commie social credit scores.

Question a company's marketing strategy as something that doesn't follow their own best practices and somehow that translates to boycott?

Try looking at this a little deeper than typical outrage/boycott/triggered/hurt feeling nonsense. Looking for actual conversations about the fact that so many companies continue to make these decisions regardless of the fact everyone knows they're not good for business. If these companies aren't interested in the health of the business, what are they interested in? If they do think they are good for business, what dipshits convinced them?

Chick-fil-A consumers simply don't care about social credit scores. Chick-fil-A customers don't care if the company's mission is DEI. They care about decent food and friendly service. Why are companies so interested in focusing on DEI and commie scoring when their customers don't give a shit about that stuff?

I don't think it's unusual at all (nor a bad business decision) for a company to sell swag that promotes their business. What does selling Tshirts have to do with building motorcycles yet Harley Davidson probably makes more money off of their merch than their bikes.

[hollohas]

Their clothing sales were so successful they completely shut it down already. Didn't even make it 1 month.

[Oscar77]

I said they were weird colors, not LGBT colors. I was questioning their business decision of selling CLOTHES as well as their new DEI mission and interest in commie social credit scores.

Question a company's marketing strategy as something that doesn't follow their own best practices and somehow that translates to boycott?

Try looking at this a little deeper than typical outrage/boycott/triggered/hurt feeling nonsense. Looking for actual conversations about the fact that so many companies continue to make these decisions regardless of the fact everyone knows they're not good for business. If these companies aren't interested in the health of the business, what are they interested in? If they do think they are good for business, what dipshits convinced them?

Chick-fil-A consumers simply don't care about social credit scores. Chick-fil-A customers don't care if the company's mission is DEI. They care about decent food and friendly service. Why are companies so interested in focusing on DEI and commie scoring when their customers don't give a shit about that stuff?

Sir:
I'll be honest, I'm not sure what your point is in this thread........... you're bouncing around alot in your allegations.

But be that as it may:

-If you want I can link endless companies that sell CLOTHES, despite the fact that they aren't clothing companies. So what.

-I read the DEI links you provided and they are lame in the scale of controversial positions, in fact the worst is they use the word "GOD." So what.

-If you want I can link endless companies that have discontinued products for one reason or another. So what.

I was in one of their stores yesterday and I got "decent food and friendly service," which is what, I guess, you want too.
So you made the mistake of jumping on their website and read some things you don't like.
Is that, in a nut shell, what this all about?

Because, again, their website is LAME on the controversy scale, you could really find ones that are FAR more exciting than Chicks.

PS:
Here.......... want to get upset about a company being too political?
Here:
Issues We Care About | Ben & Jerry’s (benjerry.com)

THEY ARE and want to be controversial and political.
Boycott them.

[RblDiver]

Calling out companies for their advertising when your feelings are hurt is a tactic of the left.

Stop it.

Well, given that it's a tactic of the left, and given that many corporations are moving in that direction, it seems like it's working. Thus, the logical thing is to adopt the same tactics. What you're saying is like "The left is using both hands, but we don't want to stoop to their level, we must continue fighting with both our hands tied behind our back!" Just not effective. As Matt Walsh described it, we're collecting scalps from one company at a time, starting with Bud Light, as a warning to others. If they persist, then we collect the next scalp, and so on.

[rondog]

I just some of you investing fellers were able to take a righteous short position on BUD stock and are on your way to a killer profit.....

[eddiememphis]

Well, given that it's a tactic of the left, and given that many corporations are moving in that direction, it seems like it's working. Thus, the logical thing is to adopt the same tactics. What you're saying is like "The left is using both hands, but we don't want to stoop to their level, we must continue fighting with both our hands tied behind our back!" Just not effective. As Matt Walsh described it, we're collecting scalps from one company at a time, starting with Bud Light, as a warning to others. If they persist, then we collect the next scalp, and so on.

That is not what I was saying.

Calling for a boycott of companies (which Hollohas did not) because of an advertising campaign that offends one's delicate sensibilities is close minded and anticapitalist. Both are descriptions of leftists.

You are equating advertising with corporate influence.

If Chick-fil-A wants to spend money advertising to one-legged black midget trannys, good for them. Not my thing but I am not going to sit around, stewing about it.

When a company dabbles in politics through spending, trying to change laws to favor whatever their particular cause is, I certainly have a problem with that and it warrants more scrutiny.

Trying to sell some shitty, made in China shirts in rainbow colors through a third party vendor is capitalism. I applaud it.

[hollohas]

Responding to an earlier comment that non clothing companies sell clothes all the time, the example being Harley, so it must be a valid business model...

Harley is a motorcycle company, but they are selling a lifestyle more than just motorcycles. They are selling a BRAND.

How many people who don't own a Harley have a Harley t-shirt or mug? TONS of people. You can buy Harley branded EVERYTHING. A HUGE portion of their business comes from all the swag they sell. Swag IS their business.

So it's not a motorcycle company selling clothes. It's a lifestyle company selling motorcycles. Very bad comparison to Chick-fil-A selling clothes.

Here's the test:

Do people who don't buy your main product love your brand?

If yes, sell other shit too.
If no, sell what you do best.

Harley = yes
Chick-fil-A = no

Chick-fil-A is attempting to market to a demographic who is not interested in their sandwiches or their clothes but are interested in DEI. And people who are interested in their sandwiches are turned off by corporate DEI bullshit. Justified or not, that's a fact.

Their 3rd party clothing line company was selected 100% because of their social credit message. And that's why I tied in the clothing piece. Not because of the bright colors, but because it's obvious they were quietly trying to change their image. Chick-fil-A was trying to promote a new image using clothes and lifestyle stuff as the mechanism, to a customer base who liked their old image.

If they wanted to create brand recognition with a new lifestyle line, why not pick a clothing company that also promotes the tried and true Chick-fil-A image? There are plenty out there. But nope.

They purposely picked a commie clothing company, promoted that fact and proudly expanded their DEI mission at the same time. They have literally zero business to win by doing either.

They did it despite the easily seen fact it wouldn't increase their sales. They did it only to show they will play the social credit game.

[eddiememphis]

And people who are interested in their sandwiches are turned off by corporate DEI bullshit. Justified or not, that's a fact.

That is an assumption, not a fact. Everyone buying a chicken sandwich is not monolithic in their thinking.

There are plenty of people that support DEI nonsense that also enjoy tasty chicken.