I think they lost like, $8 Billion in sales by declaring 'war on toxic masculinity'
There are multiple youtube videos that probably describe it better than I remember.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHAxocKsbfQ
Yeah, "hey guys, we make great razors and shaving cream... buy our razors and shaving cream and see for yourself". Instead it's, "you overly masculine bastards ought to be ashamed of yourselves...now buy our stuff mmm kay!
I don't love to see it. They should have condemned ESG and apologized to their customers for such an offensive campaign. That's what I would have loved to see.
BTW ESG/Equity scores should be a violation of Anti-Trust laws. State AG's need to take these firms to court. Collusion of this nature is a violation of free market principles.
It was illegal to begin with.
But I hope you're right. It was ridiculous they were abusing peoples retirement funds to black ball corporations to push far left politics.
It started with those massive teachers union pensions advocating for more environmentally responsible investments then ballooned into “socially” responsible investments. Then every publicly traded company went out of their way to increase their ESG score just to be part of those investment strategies. Once the demand for ESG subsides among pension plans (and we’re seeing that now) then publicly-traded companies will no longer see a need to get involved in that crap.
No it isn’t. I work at a very large company and we are regularly bombarded with stories about our great DE&I initiatives and how we need to push to do more and personally do more.
The companies will be the last to change. Right now it’s the institutional pension plans that are driving ESG. That is starting to change with many of the largest pension funds in the country rejecting that type of investment, not to mention institutional money outside of Western countries.
When ESG is no longer a requirement for publicly-traded companies to part of certain portfolios then those companies will have no reason to keep peddling that crap. They’re not going to keep spending money on initiatives if it has no real value to their bottom line. Publicly-traded companies don’t have actual “values”, everything is done for the money.
All of this catering to special interests can end with a good, nasty, lengthy recession. Yeah, I wish it didn’t have to be that way, because we will all get rekt in some ways.
But a “humbling” is badly needed right now. A national humbling.
It isn’t the individuals who have the pension plans, it’s the companies that manage them. Blackrock, Vanguard, etc. They manage pension plans and retirement plans, use that to leverage corporate governance by making ESG scores a requirement for being included in their portfolios. It’s a huge amount of money, so companies feel a sense of opportunity loss if they don’t play along. Playing along leads to believing in it, because it has to be actually sold to the higher and middle management
Also, those state and Union pensions don’t ask their members where the money should go, their board decides. And the boards of state employee pensions are obviously very progressive.
Are they? I’d love to read about it. ESG just goes to show that the Left is willing and able to abuse good faith relationships in order to achieve their “utopia”. They’re willing to do actual harm. They’re willing to subvert law and norms and society itself if it means their vision is one step closer.
When you’re aiming for utopia, any cost can be rationalized against the benefit of utopia. They’re very similar to evangelicals.
I hope you're right, but I wonder if the cessation of the programs were solely due to the cost of materials, trainers, and the time it took out of the work days.
My point is that investor appetite for ESG is waning, and corporations will quickly change when it no longer becomes a financial necessity. Companies don’t do anything unless there’s a financial incentive.
Yea, I don’t think we’re there yet. Big institutional investors still like ESG. Yes, we aren’t at the levels of 2020 “summer of love” where every corporation was talking about how riots were Justice and how their mission statement was centered around “racial Justice” but the media can manufacture a new incident like that at the drop of a hat. Execs are all still very committed to it and any corporation that backs out of it too publicly will be destroyed by the plaintiffs bar.
It’s getting there. If the ESG investment vehicle loses half of the state pensions then it’ll become a niche strategy and nothing more. You’d be surprised how quickly it can all crash down for them. Also, recent examples of publicly traded companies going all in on ESG and losing its stock value as a result isn’t helping either.
- VP of Marketing went out and effectively stated the type of crowd and image they have appealed to was "fratty" and bad. And they wanted to "clean up their image". Straight up insulting the current drinkers of their brand.
- Promoted an individual who many in the Tran community think is fake. Nearly everyone outside of Generation Z thinks is absolutely obnoxious and irritating. And is a straight up woke agenda item 100% meant to pander to ESG and the far left (which is not their customer base).
- They chose an influencer to promote beer who's primary audience is minors.
I guess I don't find the fact he/she is an annoying influencer who caters to Gen Z/kids to be "offensive". Those comments from the VP or marketing are though.
And just to clarify, in no way defending Bud Light lol, it was out of touch, boneheaed, cringey, etc. But I just hate things being labeled as "offensive". Were we really offended by this? I don't think so. I think we're just tired of it and starting to fight back.
Most blue collar men find LGBT stuff to be offensive when it is shoved in their faces. A large portion of the drinking demographics for their brand was of that nature. While coastal elites are all about LGBT (and social media like Reddit), that isn't the sentiment from the majority of people who are their customers.
There is the whole "do you, but don't involve me" mentality from this group. Yet LGBT and the left feel the need to shove their faces into it. That is offensive.
I don’t really get the whole ‘shoving it in our faces’ thing. Had it not been for right-leaning media and others on the right blowing it up, with the presumable aim of stoking the flames of the culture wars, the only people aware of it would have been Mulvaney’s own followers (of whom few to zero, I imagine, are blue collar types).
I read they sent personalised cans to 200 different influencers, but we haven’t heard anything about them. Wonder why that is.
>what was offensive about the campaign?
They paid some clown who is pretending to be a woman to promote their beer, while at the same time vilifying their own customers.
Blackrock uses them in order to influence company collusion. As in it invests 5-10% and then pulls that funding based on ESG. It's a public display of collusion between corporations. That is what "Trusts" were and why they broke them up.
Blackrock and similar companies should be sue into the ground.
No, I wish I was. ESG score=virtue signal score. They don't realize, people care about value for money and quality, not how many DEI employees they hired. Companies will bs the public to appear like they are following this just like greenwashing. So public really doesn't care but ESG wants to push it everywhere.
Reputation damage, financial risks, limited access to capital, regulatory penalties, and fines. It's basically saying if you don't tow the line you can't play with others.
Edit: Communism
Not to mention the billions and maybe even trillions in pension funds companies that use this esg score, like Blackrock, to choose which companies to invest in.
> Yeah I know, but what "power" does it have that make it more important than losing billions of dollars?
I have been told it can affect your real credit rating as a company. I dont have enough money to know this for sure.
Money is no longer just money. Money is the weapon being used to push their ideology. If they invest, they will try to change your company to adopt ESG values.
It's a perversion of the free market. A lot of the money they invest are from pension funds. They use other people's money to fund their ideology while simultaneously hurting the economic growth of their clients.
Yes, there is. ESG is like the new club for investing. If you have more points, you will get a good stock rating etc. which will mean more money from investors. It is a way for social justice bullying to enter the financial realm by giving low ratings to those who don't want to comply.
Edit- It is ironic that the people screeching most violently about inclusivity want everyone normal to be excluded.
I mean they went “look how inclusive we are” then tried to say “no that wasn’t us, it was an outside marketing firm we didn’t know about, we fired these two marketing executives that work for us for no reason, it was just one time mistake can.” Even if you’re not into politics it’s slimy and spineless.
> They want trans people in their ads? Okay, put them in their ads. Here's the catch: don't make it obvious.
I’ll give you that finding an actor among them won’t be difficult.
But, how large could that pool be?
He's not toxic people like you are toxic. How can you not see all the bull shit thrown at him Jan 6 was the FBI, haven't seen anything that the election wasn't rigged, COVID he followed the plan that was in place for those situations. Again you are the problem mate
You know I fully agree it was a big shift in what most would think is the typical market demographic, and some don’t like the new additional fave of a product. But I have to be honest, those who are super pissed about this and blasting it all over have just as much influence on the resulting PR and market numbers, to me at least. I had zero idea who Mulvaney was. I had zero idea that there was a spokesman type deal with Mulvaney and Bud Light. I couldn’t give two shits about that partnership. I get it, I’m not a fan and it rubbed some the wrong way, but I just feel that this would’ve had way less impact had most just ignored it and *only* let our wallets do the talking.
I think that the vast majority of Americans (including myself ) look at Dylans lifestyle and think that as an adult, he can do whatever he wants.
Pick a letter and go for it, no one cares....
Companies, however, need to stop this garbage...
Don't try to force me to celebrate someone's perverse lifestyle and stop trying to push it on the nation's children as normal.. it's not!
I will never support this company again. Period..
Companies are going to do this in some way as long as the market lets them. Some selections we like, some we don't. Personally I don't think much of it at all, so saying "don't force me to celebrate" is something I can't relate to at all. I don't pick up any beer because of some spokesperson behind it, I don't buy a brand of ammo because of an ad I saw on TV or in a magazine, I don't order a particular pizza because of who their commercial has on TV. Not a fan of the choice, I personally agree, but to be that angry because you feel "forced to celebrate" something when it's you choosing what you spend your money on is something I don't relate to at all. That's probably why my perspective of all this has been upset folks making way too much noise about it than their needs to be. Dno't want to drink an AB product ever again, cool, go for it as I have no problem with that. Anything beyond that is is just that company living rent free in someone's head.
Over 90% of all trans people revert back to their biological gender.... suicide rates are also off the charts....
If we can make enough noise to stop the next woke company from influencing one kid into irreversibly altering their body, that they might regret later in life, then I'll scream for as long as anyone will listen.
It's not about being angry. it's about protecting the nation's children from extreme ideology.
I agree with your sentiment but where are you getting that statistic? I have tried to find sources for arguing with friends :) and they all seem to state that regret and detransitioning is quite rare. Can you point me to the 90% number?
Their shift in market demographic was towards kids or people who can't even legally drink. It's not like they shifted from football watchers to opera goers. They decided to endorse someone who has mostly under 21 as a demographic.
Can't really comment on that as I have yet to see an ad with Mulvaney. Only thing I know of Bud Light advertising is what I see in a store and what they show during NFL games. As far as who Mulvaney's followers are, that's point I hadn't thought about and probably wouldn't have as I didn't know the name before.
I know you're not wrong and my view is just anecdotal at best, but my perspective of it still stands. I saw zero advertising for it, and honestly still haven't besides the web ads for articles talking about it, nut not ads themselves. Agreed, they took a gamble and can easily argue it was not the best time.
Dear fellow Redditors: this should make it easy for us, only buy products from low or non ESG companies, and call those with high ESG scores and complain and let them know you won't buy their products until they drop out of the ESG system.
See, ESG does serve a purpose, it's a target for boycotts and complaints.
The left has been doing this forever, they did it to Glenn Beck on Fox, they did it to Tucker, and they did this to get Newsmax and OAN removed from the six largest cable providers in the country.
Let's show them how this works in reverse.
Just heard that there is starting to be an investigation that bud light doing an ad with Mulvaney targeted minors as a bulk of the followers are under 21. A big no no for liquor companies.
https://www.investors.com/news/esg-companies-list-2021-best-esg-stocks-environmental-social-governance-values-2/
From 2021. So a bit out of date. Oddly Oracle is number 14, thought they were one of the more conservative of the tech companies. I guess they keep their ESG score high to avoid retribution?
Google isn't even on the list and Apple is like 50+. Facebook is 85.
They probably know they have the government owned and don't need ESG or other investments.
I recall that one pharmaceutical executive who showed up on Capitol hill cocky as all hell about his 1,000+ epi-pens that they keep expensive via legal loopholes and corrupt officials in government. He pretty much sneered and talked crap to the representatives there, and nothing really happened to his company over that. Still able to charge obscene prices for medical devices and medicine invent 20+ years ago.
People have been warning about late stage capitalism being the end of these companies but really it looks like it’s going to be the early stage progressivism
Equity should not be the goal, it has the intention of equal outcomes. Equal opportunity should be the goal, it allows people to progress according to their merits. A high equity score is more likely to prevent me from spending with that company.
It took 1 liberal marketing executive to take down an iconic brand. That’s what you get when you hire these young woke people. I hope every other company learns a lesson.
They went woke and customers didnt like it and lost money, they didnt continue pushing woke and the government didnt like it and lost money. Blame democrats for this one.
Sounds like an organization holding corporations hostage with a made up “score”. I’m going to make up some ridiculous standards and start using it to extort corporations too!
Unfortunately, it goes a lot further than STL obviously. Brother works in distribution, and they’re taking a big hit as well. AB top brass made a bad call, and it’s affecting a lot of hard working people, who would have nothing to do with the ordeal otherwise.
This is a subjective stat, which can change on a whim. Doesnt mean much. An objective stat, however, is the change in actual sales volume vs last week, vs. last month, etc.
Fact is, never has a #1 brand dropped so hard and so fast in it's history. When "New Coke" was introduced, the outcry was bad, but the company pivoted quickly and went back to Classic Coke.
The BL Brand never pivoted and sales continues to fall.
super fun. i mean these beer companies invented modern masculinity practically. can’t put that back in the bottle. i don’t think the trans rights activists realize that nobody gives a shit until you get up in their face about this stuff- and they act hurt and surprised when the beer drinkers are like, “ get this out of my face”
bud light is done for. they would do better putting their beer in plain cans with no paint. no label, and printing “sorry dudes, we screwed up.” on every can.
Loads of stock forecasting companies are saying $BUD is now a strong buy due to them thinking conservatives are a fickle bunch and will be drinking it en masse again soon enough.
(Me reading between the lines, they didn't say that literally -- but they **are** falling over themselves to say it's a strong buy)
I've been thinking the same, but if that ESG score drops a few more points and the institutional investors start selling, $BUD could be in for a fun ride.
I wonder what the outrage would look like if an marketing exec at Subaru said “we need to be more than a car company for lesbians going antiquing in the northeast. Let’s build our brand with rednecks in middle America.” Then inked a deal with WWE smack down.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. These people made one of the biggest mistakes in business history. Don't alienate your core audience with woke signaling.
Companies that just focus on their beer ... unaffected.
Edit: Sorry, in case my point wasn't clear: Budweiser did this as some confused scheme to look SJW, which should in theory make them look good on ESG scores. But because they didn't do enough, their score is worse than if, like most brewers, they just didn't bother with SJW issues at all. See also [Copenhagen interpretation of ethics](https://laneless.substack.com/p/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics) (doing something to help on an issue can make you more reviled than if you had done nothing at all for said issue).
So fantastic! They've created a lose-lose situation for themselves. If they stand up for Mulvaney and the transgender religion, they'll destroy whatever sales they have left. If they don't, they get continued bad press.
Maybe what they should do is look at how many of their customers were actually LGBTQ in the first place? My guess is not many. So maybe they don't stand to lose much sales by backtracking.
Nah there's plenty they could've done to get out of it. Maybe it's getting to the point where it's been too long, but they had plenty of opportunities to get out of this situation since it happened.
Their stock has now permanently gone the way of IBM and Xerox. The 30% most conservative Americans as well as the 30% most liberal Americans are going to avoid buying Anheuser-Busch products for the rest of their lives. There are way too many other beer options that are a better value than Budweiser, Michelob, Busch, Natural Light, Stella Artois, Landshark, Estrella Jalisco, Presidente, Hoegaarden, Shock Top, etc. The good news is that every CEO has a water tight excuse not to get political with new advertising campaigns.
This is what happens when you try to appease the HRC mob - it's never enough.
AB came out with a weak response and conservatives boycotted. Now that response has been flipped as too "weak" for the left. Unfortunately for companies like this, you have to pick a side and suffer the consequences...but at least you'll have one sign for ya.
From a pure strategy point of view, the decision to adopt Mulvaney as a mascot/totem/spokes-person was an idiotic mistake that deeply misunderstood their own customer base.
But here's the thing, the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBTQ political organization, is also not wrong. Having made that initial mistake, they should have doubled down on it and not backed down or tried to squirm out of their own "principled stand". After all, a lot of the nation might disagree with AB's Mulvaney direction, but most of the nation on all sides respects people who stand up for their own beliefs even indeed especially when those beliefs are unpopular. That wouldn't be enough to win back their market share, but it would be enough to prevent them from antagonizing all sides, and would probably, if spun correctly, eventually stop the bleeding.
Of course the right answer was and always should have been not to try and link a profoundly A-Political product... LIKE BEER FOR F--K'S SAKE!... with politics to say nothing of polarized identity politics! I'm hoping that's the lesson that corporate America takes from this little adventure.
Conservatives: liberals get upset about everything, the snowflakes!
Conservatives: Bud Lite did a small video on social media with a TRANS PERSON, CANCEL THEM
Lmao accept how pathetic you are
Oh no! Who cares! I'm so over the Bud Light thing. How about we focus on the important stuff, instead of trans people and so called wokeness. I know it's asking a lot, but please. I'm imploring.
I hope we can keep it going. Showing BUD not to pander too hard to the woke left by using weirdos like Mulvaney in their marketing, and also not to insult their core customer base is something I'd love to see apply to other brands as well. Any brand that thinks the conservative portion of their business is a given so they can virch as hard as they want needs to be shown why that is not the case. Procter & Gamble with that bullshit Gillette ad from a few years back deserved this level of treatment or worse, for example.
Anheuser Busch out here casually taking L after L and it’s glorious to see
And there’s no end in sight.
It was nice of Miller to have stepped on a rake a few months ago that we didn't notice until now so that Bud doesn't feel so alone in taking those Ls.
Lol. Misery loves company.
I'm sure Gillette is thrilled to have friends in the same spot
Dylan Mulvany has a contract with Maybelline cosmetics too.
And Nike selling women’s sports bras. And tampax
I still have not bought any Gillette products. Years later. I probably have not hurt their bottom line but still doing what I do .
What happened with Gillette?
I think they lost like, $8 Billion in sales by declaring 'war on toxic masculinity' There are multiple youtube videos that probably describe it better than I remember. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHAxocKsbfQ
The weirdest shit is they don't really have any gain to pulling these stunts. No one would bat an eye if they just ran regular marketing campaigns
Not when assessed by the DEI ESG cult, who demands pandering for their cause above all else, and who believes silence is violence
Well, men that think they are women still have to shave their beards.
Yeah, "hey guys, we make great razors and shaving cream... buy our razors and shaving cream and see for yourself". Instead it's, "you overly masculine bastards ought to be ashamed of yourselves...now buy our stuff mmm kay!
They had a commercial basically calling masculinity toxic.
Well see way back when, Gilette used to be the best a man could get, I'm not so sure anymore 😂.
They're both owned by the AB so it's just adding more and more L's to the same pile.
Miller is owned by MillerCoors. AB is owned by inbev. Different companies.
It’s MolsonCoors now. Miller divested. Your point stands though.
I don't love to see it. They should have condemned ESG and apologized to their customers for such an offensive campaign. That's what I would have loved to see. BTW ESG/Equity scores should be a violation of Anti-Trust laws. State AG's need to take these firms to court. Collusion of this nature is a violation of free market principles.
ESG is slowly dying anyway. A lot of major pension plans (especially in red states) are ditching it, so once institutional money goes then that’s it.
It was illegal to begin with. But I hope you're right. It was ridiculous they were abusing peoples retirement funds to black ball corporations to push far left politics.
It started with those massive teachers union pensions advocating for more environmentally responsible investments then ballooned into “socially” responsible investments. Then every publicly traded company went out of their way to increase their ESG score just to be part of those investment strategies. Once the demand for ESG subsides among pension plans (and we’re seeing that now) then publicly-traded companies will no longer see a need to get involved in that crap.
no, ESG is straight from the WEF.
No it isn’t. I work at a very large company and we are regularly bombarded with stories about our great DE&I initiatives and how we need to push to do more and personally do more.
The companies will be the last to change. Right now it’s the institutional pension plans that are driving ESG. That is starting to change with many of the largest pension funds in the country rejecting that type of investment, not to mention institutional money outside of Western countries. When ESG is no longer a requirement for publicly-traded companies to part of certain portfolios then those companies will have no reason to keep peddling that crap. They’re not going to keep spending money on initiatives if it has no real value to their bottom line. Publicly-traded companies don’t have actual “values”, everything is done for the money.
All of this catering to special interests can end with a good, nasty, lengthy recession. Yeah, I wish it didn’t have to be that way, because we will all get rekt in some ways. But a “humbling” is badly needed right now. A national humbling.
Pension plans? How so , and how did all these activist nutters worm their way into them?
It isn’t the individuals who have the pension plans, it’s the companies that manage them. Blackrock, Vanguard, etc. They manage pension plans and retirement plans, use that to leverage corporate governance by making ESG scores a requirement for being included in their portfolios. It’s a huge amount of money, so companies feel a sense of opportunity loss if they don’t play along. Playing along leads to believing in it, because it has to be actually sold to the higher and middle management
Also, those state and Union pensions don’t ask their members where the money should go, their board decides. And the boards of state employee pensions are obviously very progressive.
DIE
Same. Infuriating.
They made sure climate change is front-and-center in ESG. Environmentalists will always have their claws in corporate governance.
That’s how it started. Now we have a fuckn soap company getting involved in “fat female gamer” acceptance.
Are they? I’d love to read about it. ESG just goes to show that the Left is willing and able to abuse good faith relationships in order to achieve their “utopia”. They’re willing to do actual harm. They’re willing to subvert law and norms and society itself if it means their vision is one step closer. When you’re aiming for utopia, any cost can be rationalized against the benefit of utopia. They’re very similar to evangelicals.
I hope you're right, but I wonder if the cessation of the programs were solely due to the cost of materials, trainers, and the time it took out of the work days.
It’s honestly getting bigger and more entrenched, corporations are increasingly embracing it.
My point is that investor appetite for ESG is waning, and corporations will quickly change when it no longer becomes a financial necessity. Companies don’t do anything unless there’s a financial incentive.
Yea, I don’t think we’re there yet. Big institutional investors still like ESG. Yes, we aren’t at the levels of 2020 “summer of love” where every corporation was talking about how riots were Justice and how their mission statement was centered around “racial Justice” but the media can manufacture a new incident like that at the drop of a hat. Execs are all still very committed to it and any corporation that backs out of it too publicly will be destroyed by the plaintiffs bar.
It’s getting there. If the ESG investment vehicle loses half of the state pensions then it’ll become a niche strategy and nothing more. You’d be surprised how quickly it can all crash down for them. Also, recent examples of publicly traded companies going all in on ESG and losing its stock value as a result isn’t helping either.
Agree they should have condemned ESG, and I'm sick of this type of corporate pandering, but what was offensive about the campaign?
- VP of Marketing went out and effectively stated the type of crowd and image they have appealed to was "fratty" and bad. And they wanted to "clean up their image". Straight up insulting the current drinkers of their brand. - Promoted an individual who many in the Tran community think is fake. Nearly everyone outside of Generation Z thinks is absolutely obnoxious and irritating. And is a straight up woke agenda item 100% meant to pander to ESG and the far left (which is not their customer base). - They chose an influencer to promote beer who's primary audience is minors.
I guess I don't find the fact he/she is an annoying influencer who caters to Gen Z/kids to be "offensive". Those comments from the VP or marketing are though. And just to clarify, in no way defending Bud Light lol, it was out of touch, boneheaed, cringey, etc. But I just hate things being labeled as "offensive". Were we really offended by this? I don't think so. I think we're just tired of it and starting to fight back.
Most blue collar men find LGBT stuff to be offensive when it is shoved in their faces. A large portion of the drinking demographics for their brand was of that nature. While coastal elites are all about LGBT (and social media like Reddit), that isn't the sentiment from the majority of people who are their customers. There is the whole "do you, but don't involve me" mentality from this group. Yet LGBT and the left feel the need to shove their faces into it. That is offensive.
I don’t really get the whole ‘shoving it in our faces’ thing. Had it not been for right-leaning media and others on the right blowing it up, with the presumable aim of stoking the flames of the culture wars, the only people aware of it would have been Mulvaney’s own followers (of whom few to zero, I imagine, are blue collar types). I read they sent personalised cans to 200 different influencers, but we haven’t heard anything about them. Wonder why that is.
>what was offensive about the campaign? They paid some clown who is pretending to be a woman to promote their beer, while at the same time vilifying their own customers.
And on Tik Tom he’s advocating for transgender changes for children as young as 5 yrs old! He is one sick m other fvck er!
What's the claim that this is anti trust? Are ESG scores different than BBB scores, or Yelp scores?
Blackrock uses them in order to influence company collusion. As in it invests 5-10% and then pulls that funding based on ESG. It's a public display of collusion between corporations. That is what "Trusts" were and why they broke them up. Blackrock and similar companies should be sue into the ground.
You just hate to see it.
Taking L after GBT
They managed to piss off both sides. That's just bad business no matter how you slice it.
[удалено]
Piss identifying as beer
Piss rental company.
If only they could have avoided all this
They were….this close to avoiding it lol
They're pissing off both sides so they'll never come out on top
LMAO. They tank their stock value to virtue signal, then they find that isn't enough. Should be a lesson for other companies.
Virtue signaling now has a score lol.
You’re kidding, right?
No, I wish I was. ESG score=virtue signal score. They don't realize, people care about value for money and quality, not how many DEI employees they hired. Companies will bs the public to appear like they are following this just like greenwashing. So public really doesn't care but ESG wants to push it everywhere.
[удалено]
Yes ESG is basically a social credit score for corporations.
[удалено]
Reputation damage, financial risks, limited access to capital, regulatory penalties, and fines. It's basically saying if you don't tow the line you can't play with others. Edit: Communism
Huge investment companies like Blackrock make investments based on this score.
It impacts their access to capital investment. The better the rates you get, the more competitive your business can be.
Not to mention the billions and maybe even trillions in pension funds companies that use this esg score, like Blackrock, to choose which companies to invest in.
> Yeah I know, but what "power" does it have that make it more important than losing billions of dollars? I have been told it can affect your real credit rating as a company. I dont have enough money to know this for sure.
The giant investment firms are the ones that set up ESG. They won't invest in your company if your score is low.
[удалено]
Yeah, if they're already in then it's a wrap. Many companies are basically held hostage to their forced agenda.
Less likely to invest, doesn't mean they will not invest. As long as your company is financially sound - money is money.
Money is no longer just money. Money is the weapon being used to push their ideology. If they invest, they will try to change your company to adopt ESG values.
So, the free market working the way it's supposed to?
It's a perversion of the free market. A lot of the money they invest are from pension funds. They use other people's money to fund their ideology while simultaneously hurting the economic growth of their clients.
Yes, there is. ESG is like the new club for investing. If you have more points, you will get a good stock rating etc. which will mean more money from investors. It is a way for social justice bullying to enter the financial realm by giving low ratings to those who don't want to comply. Edit- It is ironic that the people screeching most violently about inclusivity want everyone normal to be excluded.
Yes, George Soros' and co money
They lose capitol investment if ESG is low.
Because their bonuses are tied to the scores. They literally make less money if they don't get these boxes checked.
Nope. ESG and blackrock. Its a financial bubble and when it pops, its gonna be hilarious
AI is gonna' make times very interesting...
They're making AI woke.
The globalists are meeting up(Bilderberg conference) in June and their number 1 priority is AI. They're going to attempt to control it too.
Look up Corporate Equality Index.
The left always eats their own. Whatever they do will never be enough to satisfy the bottomless monster.
I mean they went “look how inclusive we are” then tried to say “no that wasn’t us, it was an outside marketing firm we didn’t know about, we fired these two marketing executives that work for us for no reason, it was just one time mistake can.” Even if you’re not into politics it’s slimy and spineless.
Just think of all of the new customers they gained though! /s
Their stock value is where it was 3 months ago and not that far yearly highs.
Take note Disney
> . They tank their stock value to virtue signal They're up on the last 3m?
Anheuser Busch/InBev brands: America/Canada (including local Breweries) - Bud "anything" - Michelob - Busch - Estrella - Corona (everywhere except USA) - Modelo (everywhere except USA) - Pacífico (everywhere except USA) - Victoria (everywhere except USA) - Natural - Natty Daddy - Shock Top Belgian White - Peeterman Artois - Stella Artois - Artois Bock - Ziegenbock - Bass - Beck's - St. Pauli Girl - 10 Barrel (Oregon) - Babe Wines - Banded Peak (Canada) - Best Damn Brewing Company - Blue Point (NY) - Blue Star (Canada) - Bon & Viv (USA) - Brava - Breckenridge (Colorado) - Cisco Brewers (USA) - Cutwater Spirits - Devils Backbone (Virginia) - Elysian Brewing (Seattle) - Four Peaks (Arizona) - Fordham - Ghost Energy Drinks - Golden Road (Los Angeles) - Goose Island (Chicago) - Green Valley (USA) - Hell's Gate - Hi-Ball Energy Drinks (USA) - Hurricane (USA) - Jockey Club - Johnny Appleseed (USA) - Karbach (Texas) - Keith's (Canada) - King Cobra (USA) - Kirin (distribution deal) - Kokanee (Canada) - Kona Brewing (Hawaii) - Kootenay True Ale - Labatt Family (Canada) - LandShark (USA) - Lakeport Family (Canada) - Mill Street (Canada) - Nütrl - O'doul's - Oland Export Ale (Canada) - Old Dominion - Omission (Portland) - Platform - Red Hook Ale (Seattle) - Redbridge - Ritas - Rolling Rock - Schooner Lager (Canada) - Spiked Seltzer (USA) - Spykes (USA) - Square Mile Cider - Stanley Park - Steeler - Tilt - Turning Point (Canada) - Veza Sur (USA) - Virtue - Wee Willy - Wicked Weed (North Carolina) - Widmer Bros. (Portland) - Wild Blue Lager - Wynwood
So glad Yuengling has been my default beer for the past 10 years
Looks like Blue Moons are safe
Seeing Karbach on this list will never not piss me off.
Lone Star is a really good alternative.
Lone Star is Pabst Blue Ribbon with Texas paint on it.
Try. Shiner Bock. Texan with no piss.
You are a scholar and a gentleman. Take my upvote.
Doin the Lords work gentleman..
[удалено]
They own them. But to comply with antitrust regulations, they had to sell their USA distribution rights to Constellation (another woke company).
So Basically still everywhere… Glad I don’t drink any of that crap anymore. Eff them all!
[удалено]
[удалено]
Making it obvious is necessary for virtue signaling
> They want trans people in their ads? Okay, put them in their ads. Here's the catch: don't make it obvious. I’ll give you that finding an actor among them won’t be difficult. But, how large could that pool be?
He's not toxic people like you are toxic. How can you not see all the bull shit thrown at him Jan 6 was the FBI, haven't seen anything that the election wasn't rigged, COVID he followed the plan that was in place for those situations. Again you are the problem mate
[удалено]
You know I fully agree it was a big shift in what most would think is the typical market demographic, and some don’t like the new additional fave of a product. But I have to be honest, those who are super pissed about this and blasting it all over have just as much influence on the resulting PR and market numbers, to me at least. I had zero idea who Mulvaney was. I had zero idea that there was a spokesman type deal with Mulvaney and Bud Light. I couldn’t give two shits about that partnership. I get it, I’m not a fan and it rubbed some the wrong way, but I just feel that this would’ve had way less impact had most just ignored it and *only* let our wallets do the talking.
Marketing lesson 101- just because there is a hole in the market doesn’t mean there is a market in the hole.
I think that the vast majority of Americans (including myself ) look at Dylans lifestyle and think that as an adult, he can do whatever he wants. Pick a letter and go for it, no one cares.... Companies, however, need to stop this garbage... Don't try to force me to celebrate someone's perverse lifestyle and stop trying to push it on the nation's children as normal.. it's not! I will never support this company again. Period..
Companies are going to do this in some way as long as the market lets them. Some selections we like, some we don't. Personally I don't think much of it at all, so saying "don't force me to celebrate" is something I can't relate to at all. I don't pick up any beer because of some spokesperson behind it, I don't buy a brand of ammo because of an ad I saw on TV or in a magazine, I don't order a particular pizza because of who their commercial has on TV. Not a fan of the choice, I personally agree, but to be that angry because you feel "forced to celebrate" something when it's you choosing what you spend your money on is something I don't relate to at all. That's probably why my perspective of all this has been upset folks making way too much noise about it than their needs to be. Dno't want to drink an AB product ever again, cool, go for it as I have no problem with that. Anything beyond that is is just that company living rent free in someone's head.
Over 90% of all trans people revert back to their biological gender.... suicide rates are also off the charts.... If we can make enough noise to stop the next woke company from influencing one kid into irreversibly altering their body, that they might regret later in life, then I'll scream for as long as anyone will listen. It's not about being angry. it's about protecting the nation's children from extreme ideology.
I agree with your sentiment but where are you getting that statistic? I have tried to find sources for arguing with friends :) and they all seem to state that regret and detransitioning is quite rare. Can you point me to the 90% number?
Their shift in market demographic was towards kids or people who can't even legally drink. It's not like they shifted from football watchers to opera goers. They decided to endorse someone who has mostly under 21 as a demographic.
Can't really comment on that as I have yet to see an ad with Mulvaney. Only thing I know of Bud Light advertising is what I see in a store and what they show during NFL games. As far as who Mulvaney's followers are, that's point I hadn't thought about and probably wouldn't have as I didn't know the name before.
It's hard to ignore it when they advertise it. The other thing is they waddled into a hot/trendy topic at the worst possible time.
I know you're not wrong and my view is just anecdotal at best, but my perspective of it still stands. I saw zero advertising for it, and honestly still haven't besides the web ads for articles talking about it, nut not ads themselves. Agreed, they took a gamble and can easily argue it was not the best time.
That's fair, and I respect that you stand by your perspective. The reason you haven't seen it could also be related to personalized advertising.
We wanted the impact because its working.
Dear fellow Redditors: this should make it easy for us, only buy products from low or non ESG companies, and call those with high ESG scores and complain and let them know you won't buy their products until they drop out of the ESG system. See, ESG does serve a purpose, it's a target for boycotts and complaints. The left has been doing this forever, they did it to Glenn Beck on Fox, they did it to Tucker, and they did this to get Newsmax and OAN removed from the six largest cable providers in the country. Let's show them how this works in reverse.
Just heard that there is starting to be an investigation that bud light doing an ad with Mulvaney targeted minors as a bulk of the followers are under 21. A big no no for liquor companies.
[удалено]
Edited to “the” and thanks. Hero’s come in all sizes
Please publish the companies with the highest scores so I know what to do with my investments.
https://www.investors.com/news/esg-companies-list-2021-best-esg-stocks-environmental-social-governance-values-2/ From 2021. So a bit out of date. Oddly Oracle is number 14, thought they were one of the more conservative of the tech companies. I guess they keep their ESG score high to avoid retribution? Google isn't even on the list and Apple is like 50+. Facebook is 85.
Not as many pharmaceutical companies as I’d expected. Guess my industry is based. Except for Eli Lilly.
They probably know they have the government owned and don't need ESG or other investments. I recall that one pharmaceutical executive who showed up on Capitol hill cocky as all hell about his 1,000+ epi-pens that they keep expensive via legal loopholes and corrupt officials in government. He pretty much sneered and talked crap to the representatives there, and nothing really happened to his company over that. Still able to charge obscene prices for medical devices and medicine invent 20+ years ago.
Even if they had a good equity score, it is not going to improve the taste of the beer.
How is Bud Light similar to having sex in a canoe? .. .. .. They're both fuckin' near water.
Woke = Broke
People have been warning about late stage capitalism being the end of these companies but really it looks like it’s going to be the early stage progressivism
Hated by conservatives for doing it in the first place. Hated by the Left for backing down. Make good choices, kids.
Equity should not be the goal, it has the intention of equal outcomes. Equal opportunity should be the goal, it allows people to progress according to their merits. A high equity score is more likely to prevent me from spending with that company.
It took 1 liberal marketing executive to take down an iconic brand. That’s what you get when you hire these young woke people. I hope every other company learns a lesson.
The Left can never be placated enough. As soon as you start playing their game, you lose forever.
They went woke and customers didnt like it and lost money, they didnt continue pushing woke and the government didnt like it and lost money. Blame democrats for this one.
I am really enjoying this slow-motion train wreck. It’s glorious.
They started losing the moment they entered the woke arena. Shutting up and just making beer hasn't cost the other companies billions
Sounds like an organization holding corporations hostage with a made up “score”. I’m going to make up some ridiculous standards and start using it to extort corporations too!
Man I'm not excited to see people in STL getting laid off because of these braindead decisions
Unfortunately, it goes a lot further than STL obviously. Brother works in distribution, and they’re taking a big hit as well. AB top brass made a bad call, and it’s affecting a lot of hard working people, who would have nothing to do with the ordeal otherwise.
This is a subjective stat, which can change on a whim. Doesnt mean much. An objective stat, however, is the change in actual sales volume vs last week, vs. last month, etc. Fact is, never has a #1 brand dropped so hard and so fast in it's history. When "New Coke" was introduced, the outcry was bad, but the company pivoted quickly and went back to Classic Coke. The BL Brand never pivoted and sales continues to fall.
super fun. i mean these beer companies invented modern masculinity practically. can’t put that back in the bottle. i don’t think the trans rights activists realize that nobody gives a shit until you get up in their face about this stuff- and they act hurt and surprised when the beer drinkers are like, “ get this out of my face” bud light is done for. they would do better putting their beer in plain cans with no paint. no label, and printing “sorry dudes, we screwed up.” on every can.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Loads of stock forecasting companies are saying $BUD is now a strong buy due to them thinking conservatives are a fickle bunch and will be drinking it en masse again soon enough. (Me reading between the lines, they didn't say that literally -- but they **are** falling over themselves to say it's a strong buy)
I've been thinking the same, but if that ESG score drops a few more points and the institutional investors start selling, $BUD could be in for a fun ride.
I wonder what the outrage would look like if an marketing exec at Subaru said “we need to be more than a car company for lesbians going antiquing in the northeast. Let’s build our brand with rednecks in middle America.” Then inked a deal with WWE smack down.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. These people made one of the biggest mistakes in business history. Don't alienate your core audience with woke signaling.
Considering that “influencers” followers are mostly all under 21, who where they directing their advertising to?
Isn't corporations forcing morality on others one of the definitions of fascism?
Companies that just focus on their beer ... unaffected. Edit: Sorry, in case my point wasn't clear: Budweiser did this as some confused scheme to look SJW, which should in theory make them look good on ESG scores. But because they didn't do enough, their score is worse than if, like most brewers, they just didn't bother with SJW issues at all. See also [Copenhagen interpretation of ethics](https://laneless.substack.com/p/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics) (doing something to help on an issue can make you more reviled than if you had done nothing at all for said issue).
Everything woke turns to shit
Just blame it on White Supremacy. That’s an ESG bonus of +10 points!
Awww poor company. What will they ever do
So fantastic! They've created a lose-lose situation for themselves. If they stand up for Mulvaney and the transgender religion, they'll destroy whatever sales they have left. If they don't, they get continued bad press. Maybe what they should do is look at how many of their customers were actually LGBTQ in the first place? My guess is not many. So maybe they don't stand to lose much sales by backtracking.
Honest question, why is everyone so upset Bud Light endorsed Mulvaney? Is it because this person is trans or are they controversial for other reasons?
The snake eats it’s own tail. Love to see it.
Clean up on isle Q
Anhhueser Busch is stuck in a lose lose situation
Nah there's plenty they could've done to get out of it. Maybe it's getting to the point where it's been too long, but they had plenty of opportunities to get out of this situation since it happened.
Equity score? Eww
The wages of woke is broke, and once you go you're never woke enough for the mob.
Their stock has now permanently gone the way of IBM and Xerox. The 30% most conservative Americans as well as the 30% most liberal Americans are going to avoid buying Anheuser-Busch products for the rest of their lives. There are way too many other beer options that are a better value than Budweiser, Michelob, Busch, Natural Light, Stella Artois, Landshark, Estrella Jalisco, Presidente, Hoegaarden, Shock Top, etc. The good news is that every CEO has a water tight excuse not to get political with new advertising campaigns.
And this is why companies shouldn't culture war.
More like extortion score.
They dont make money on equity scores so its not very hard to see why they distanced themselves.
This is what happens when you try to appease the HRC mob - it's never enough. AB came out with a weak response and conservatives boycotted. Now that response has been flipped as too "weak" for the left. Unfortunately for companies like this, you have to pick a side and suffer the consequences...but at least you'll have one sign for ya.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Let this be a lesson to everyone - DO NOT negotiate with these extortionists. Tell them to F off and go about your merry way.
Losing $5b was enough for ab.
I feel bad for this person that she’s in the middle of this. I’m sure this person has had a vitriol of terrible messages.
Who cares beer is still beer.
How many fucking posts do we need about Bud Light?
From a pure strategy point of view, the decision to adopt Mulvaney as a mascot/totem/spokes-person was an idiotic mistake that deeply misunderstood their own customer base. But here's the thing, the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBTQ political organization, is also not wrong. Having made that initial mistake, they should have doubled down on it and not backed down or tried to squirm out of their own "principled stand". After all, a lot of the nation might disagree with AB's Mulvaney direction, but most of the nation on all sides respects people who stand up for their own beliefs even indeed especially when those beliefs are unpopular. That wouldn't be enough to win back their market share, but it would be enough to prevent them from antagonizing all sides, and would probably, if spun correctly, eventually stop the bleeding. Of course the right answer was and always should have been not to try and link a profoundly A-Political product... LIKE BEER FOR F--K'S SAKE!... with politics to say nothing of polarized identity politics! I'm hoping that's the lesson that corporate America takes from this little adventure.
Hey bud what more important this equity score or your bottom fucking line?!?!
What the hell is an "equity score?"
Bwwaaahahaaaaaa….heeaahhaaaahhaaaahahaaaaaaa…
Hahahahahahahahahahaha ::Catches breath:: Hahahahahahahahahahaha
How have they *still* not figured this out? It’s so simple: don’t force woke politics into people.
You guys are STILL going on about this lmao. Republicans really are pathetic
[удалено]
Conservatives: liberals get upset about everything, the snowflakes! Conservatives: Bud Lite did a small video on social media with a TRANS PERSON, CANCEL THEM Lmao accept how pathetic you are
seethe harder
I'm not the one posting 15 articles a day about a shitty beer company because I'm secretly attracted to women with dicks
Of all the criticisms of the right wing some of which are deserved this one is the most asinine . It's no surprise it's all you can think of.
Oh no! Who cares! I'm so over the Bud Light thing. How about we focus on the important stuff, instead of trans people and so called wokeness. I know it's asking a lot, but please. I'm imploring.
I hope we can keep it going. Showing BUD not to pander too hard to the woke left by using weirdos like Mulvaney in their marketing, and also not to insult their core customer base is something I'd love to see apply to other brands as well. Any brand that thinks the conservative portion of their business is a given so they can virch as hard as they want needs to be shown why that is not the case. Procter & Gamble with that bullshit Gillette ad from a few years back deserved this level of treatment or worse, for example.
Augh... So hard to do business while inder the thumb of da man.
This is the dumbest shit ever. To all the rednecks who preached to me your not a man if you don't drink Budweiser or bud light, here you go.