June 6, 2023 - 5:00pm
Conservative activists have recently gone on the war path against woke corporations. In just the past few weeks, they’ve called for boycotts of Bud Light, Nike, Ford, Target, North Face, Chick-fil-A and the LA Dodgers. But are the boycotts working?
When Bud Light announced that it was partnering with the transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney back in April, it seemed like conservatives had finally had enough. Calls to boycott the beer quickly multiplied and Bud Light’s sales began falling.
Other brands have been targeted for similar reasons. Nike also partnered with Mulvaney. Ford ran a “Very Gay Raptor” commercial. Target sold children’s books and clothes featuring trans-friendly slogans. North Face ran a “Summer of Pride” commercial. Chick-Fil-A hired a VP of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion. And the LA Dodgers invited an anti-Christian group to join the team’s annual “Pride Night”.
One way to gauge the scale of these boycotts is by using Google search interest. As the chart below indicates, only the Bud Light and Target boycotts have really gained momentum. None of the others is associated with a spike in search interest.
Two boycotts have gained mass appeal, but have they actually hurt the companies’ bottom lines? The answer is emphatically yes — as the chart below shows:
Since 6 April (the date corresponding to the first spike in search interest for “boycott bud light”) Anheuser-Busch’s stock price has fallen by a massive 18%, while Target’s has fallen by an even greater 21%. Over the course of only two months, these companies have lost around a fifth of their value.
Another indication of the Target boycott’s success is that the company has withdrawn some of the offending merchandise from its stores and website, citing “volatile circumstances”. On the other hand, neither Target nor Anheuser-Busch have apologised for the decisions that originally prompted the boycotts. Indeed, they now find themselves in a catch-22: if they do apologise, liberals might boycott them for throwing LGBT people under the bus.
What’s more, early signs suggest that other companies are dialling down their activism in response to the recent backlash. As various Twitter users have noted, fewer large corporations seem to have changed their logos for Pride Month this year — and among those that did, several switched them back after a couple of days. This evidence is somewhat anecdotal, but the timing makes sense.
It’s too early to say that the peak of woke corporate activism has passed. Yet after several years on the back foot, conservatives now know what it feels like to teach pandering corporations a lesson. And thanks to new leadership at Twitter, their boycotts are less likely to be thwarted by censors, so many more can be expected in the future.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI wonder to what extent changing logos and advertising content and working to gain the seal of approval from minority groups is the result of a protection racket run by organised minorities. “Nice little business you’ve built up here. Be a shame if anything happened to it in the way of bad publicity…”
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
Eric Hoffer
BLM fast-tracked that progression.
BLM fast-tracked that progression.
Al Sharpton used to do this. He would approach a corporation for donations, with the implicit threat that there would be an organized campaign to boycott them if they did not comply.
The so-called palestinians are renowned for this.
The so-called palestinians are renowned for this.
A new mafia?
That’s exactly what it is, you nailed it
“At stake is their Corporate Equality Index — or CEI — score, which is overseen by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ+ political lobbying group in the world.” https://nypost.com/2023/04/07/inside-the-woke-scoring-system-guiding-american-companies/
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
Eric Hoffer
Al Sharpton used to do this. He would approach a corporation for donations, with the implicit threat that there would be an organized campaign to boycott them if they did not comply.
A new mafia?
That’s exactly what it is, you nailed it
“At stake is their Corporate Equality Index — or CEI — score, which is overseen by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ+ political lobbying group in the world.” https://nypost.com/2023/04/07/inside-the-woke-scoring-system-guiding-american-companies/
I wonder to what extent changing logos and advertising content and working to gain the seal of approval from minority groups is the result of a protection racket run by organised minorities. “Nice little business you’ve built up here. Be a shame if anything happened to it in the way of bad publicity…”
To categorise anyone who objects to the woke posturing of these companies as “conservative” or “right wing” is a stretch. Would “normal” or “sensible” be nearer the mark?
To categorise anyone who objects to the woke posturing of these companies as “conservative” or “right wing” is a stretch. Would “normal” or “sensible” be nearer the mark?
Good news. Why are the boycotts working against certain corporations and not others? Is there a central organizing effort for these boycotts? I’d certainly like to read a longer article about how to organize a successful anti-woke boycott. Perhaps such an article is already out there on the net.
They worked against Bud Light because the regulars buyers were mostly right wing on the Mulvaney issue and because alternatives were readily available. The pro-Mulvaney crowd aren’t really Bud Light’s customer base (the marketing ploy was a misfired attempt to broaden Bud Light’s base, partly into this group). It was relatively easy to do.
As for Target, the boycott gathered steam on the back of the successful boycotting of Bud Light. There had been attempts to boycott them in the past – see the bathroom issue, and these had I believe shown some temporary success. The Target boycott may not last as long as the Bud Light boycott as the alternative to Target is Walmart, which is seen as down market, or shopping around or buying a membership at Costco where most of the produce is in bulk.
As for Chick Fil A, it is generally seen a pro-Christian brand, but has built up loyal following of customers because it is very good at what it does. I just don’t see the rage against this company as hiring a DEI exec is more of a disappointment than an outrage along the lines of stocking tucking swimwear and promoting a brand owned by a Satanist as with Target or having a lightning rod of a figure such as Mulvaney on a beer can.
As for Northface, it is doubtful enough of the customer base are of the group most likely to boycott the product for it to make an effect.
And the LA Dodgers, well, if you are a sports team fan, you will probably stick with that team but make your objections heard rather than outright boycott it.
Thanks for the informative reply. I did wonder if the successful boycott of Bud Light was due to the conservative-leaning customer base. Still, it does show that an intelligent boycott strategy can at least start to encourage corporate America to reconsider its blatant political pandering.
As Matt Walsh says on his Daily Wire show, w Bud Light it was not a great product anyway and all you have to do to boycott is open the next fridge along in the Supermarket and grab cans of Coors instead. Easy peasy
as a relatively often visitor to the US. After the first and only budd light, that I didn’t finish.
I have avoided it for the dish water it is.
All those formally loyal Budd Light drinkers. Who change now are likely to stay changed after trying one of the numerous better beers
as a relatively often visitor to the US. After the first and only budd light, that I didn’t finish.
I have avoided it for the dish water it is.
All those formally loyal Budd Light drinkers. Who change now are likely to stay changed after trying one of the numerous better beers
As Matt Walsh says on his Daily Wire show, w Bud Light it was not a great product anyway and all you have to do to boycott is open the next fridge along in the Supermarket and grab cans of Coors instead. Easy peasy
The Bud Light VP’s interview opened the floodgates. An activist openly disparaging her paying customer base and putting a spotlight on an highly objectionable issue that most people had been ignoring. Target and Chick-fil-A got swept in those waters. This isn’t a fad or boycott. It’s toxic warpaint that may permanently impair those brands. Bud Light is most definitely toast.
Thanks for the informative reply. I did wonder if the successful boycott of Bud Light was due to the conservative-leaning customer base. Still, it does show that an intelligent boycott strategy can at least start to encourage corporate America to reconsider its blatant political pandering.
The Bud Light VP’s interview opened the floodgates. An activist openly disparaging her paying customer base and putting a spotlight on an highly objectionable issue that most people had been ignoring. Target and Chick-fil-A got swept in those waters. This isn’t a fad or boycott. It’s toxic warpaint that may permanently impair those brands. Bud Light is most definitely toast.
I get the sense that top-down organized boycotts are not as effective. The Bud Light boycott was very grassroots. Target a little less so, but really driven by shoppers themselves.
The Bud Lite boycott is working because it puts people in the same bind most social Justice intimidation tactics do. If some activist at work starts demanding everyone put pronouns in their email signature line it is effective because the risk of refusing is more dangerous than the cost of doing it. So people do it even if it really bugs them. If you buy a Bud Lite at a bar anywhere in the US there is a significant chance someone is going to get in your face about it. This is the conservative version of the woke activist. You went to the bar to relax – not have an angry standoff – so you buy a Coors even if you prefer Bud Lite. Target is a different issue. Parents are getting very concerned about the deranged gender theories being pushed on to their little kids in schools. Often by creepy counsellors or activists brought into the schools push this agenda. Many parents I know have expressed this concern to me. So when they go to Target and see gay or trans slogans on toddler clothes,
or ‘tuckable’ woman’s swimsuits – it just becomes a lightening rod for their frustration and rage. For the record I have no sympathy for these companies. I hope Bud Lite is pummelled into bankruptcy. People will say ‘but they are just celebrating trans people’ – what is the big deal. Well if Coke tried to celebrate Christianity or gun owners we’d never hear the end of the screaming. Even Mothers Day is now being cancelled. I think we have reached peak woke and the backlash that I think they really want (victim status!!!!) is coming.
Ha, yeah, you reminded of one of the first articles I read about this. A reader left a comment saying he knew it was working. He had been into a store to buy alcohol and another guy had gone up to the checkout with Bud Light. The cashier made a quip about his purchase and the guy had had no clue, so the others enlightened him. He immediately picked up the Bud Light and switched it out for Coors or Miller Lite. Peer pressure is going to work here.
Can only hope.
Ha, yeah, you reminded of one of the first articles I read about this. A reader left a comment saying he knew it was working. He had been into a store to buy alcohol and another guy had gone up to the checkout with Bud Light. The cashier made a quip about his purchase and the guy had had no clue, so the others enlightened him. He immediately picked up the Bud Light and switched it out for Coors or Miller Lite. Peer pressure is going to work here.
Can only hope.
1
1
They worked against Bud Light because the regulars buyers were mostly right wing on the Mulvaney issue and because alternatives were readily available. The pro-Mulvaney crowd aren’t really Bud Light’s customer base (the marketing ploy was a misfired attempt to broaden Bud Light’s base, partly into this group). It was relatively easy to do.
As for Target, the boycott gathered steam on the back of the successful boycotting of Bud Light. There had been attempts to boycott them in the past – see the bathroom issue, and these had I believe shown some temporary success. The Target boycott may not last as long as the Bud Light boycott as the alternative to Target is Walmart, which is seen as down market, or shopping around or buying a membership at Costco where most of the produce is in bulk.
As for Chick Fil A, it is generally seen a pro-Christian brand, but has built up loyal following of customers because it is very good at what it does. I just don’t see the rage against this company as hiring a DEI exec is more of a disappointment than an outrage along the lines of stocking tucking swimwear and promoting a brand owned by a Satanist as with Target or having a lightning rod of a figure such as Mulvaney on a beer can.
As for Northface, it is doubtful enough of the customer base are of the group most likely to boycott the product for it to make an effect.
And the LA Dodgers, well, if you are a sports team fan, you will probably stick with that team but make your objections heard rather than outright boycott it.
I get the sense that top-down organized boycotts are not as effective. The Bud Light boycott was very grassroots. Target a little less so, but really driven by shoppers themselves.
The Bud Lite boycott is working because it puts people in the same bind most social Justice intimidation tactics do. If some activist at work starts demanding everyone put pronouns in their email signature line it is effective because the risk of refusing is more dangerous than the cost of doing it. So people do it even if it really bugs them. If you buy a Bud Lite at a bar anywhere in the US there is a significant chance someone is going to get in your face about it. This is the conservative version of the woke activist. You went to the bar to relax – not have an angry standoff – so you buy a Coors even if you prefer Bud Lite. Target is a different issue. Parents are getting very concerned about the deranged gender theories being pushed on to their little kids in schools. Often by creepy counsellors or activists brought into the schools push this agenda. Many parents I know have expressed this concern to me. So when they go to Target and see gay or trans slogans on toddler clothes,
or ‘tuckable’ woman’s swimsuits – it just becomes a lightening rod for their frustration and rage. For the record I have no sympathy for these companies. I hope Bud Lite is pummelled into bankruptcy. People will say ‘but they are just celebrating trans people’ – what is the big deal. Well if Coke tried to celebrate Christianity or gun owners we’d never hear the end of the screaming. Even Mothers Day is now being cancelled. I think we have reached peak woke and the backlash that I think they really want (victim status!!!!) is coming.
1
1
Good news. Why are the boycotts working against certain corporations and not others? Is there a central organizing effort for these boycotts? I’d certainly like to read a longer article about how to organize a successful anti-woke boycott. Perhaps such an article is already out there on the net.
And what about the most pernicious of the woke corporations – Disney? A wolf in sheep’s clothing. Americans cannot seem to shed their addiction to this entertainment empire… regardless of how it is warping children’s minds.
They lost a lot of subscriptions to mini boycotts due to their more egregious woke moments. Don’t forget the pummelling that De Santis has given them as well for their completely irrational foray into Florida politics.
They lost a lot of subscriptions to mini boycotts due to their more egregious woke moments. Don’t forget the pummelling that De Santis has given them as well for their completely irrational foray into Florida politics.
And what about the most pernicious of the woke corporations – Disney? A wolf in sheep’s clothing. Americans cannot seem to shed their addiction to this entertainment empire… regardless of how it is warping children’s minds.
Charities are just as bad at buying into this evil cult. Have cancelled my Oxfam and NSPCC monthly donations. Have noticed on ComicReliefs website that they have a ghastly flag on their home page and they like to support with our money various dubious ‘trans’ charities.
Their J K Rowlings cartoon was just disgusting – of course they denied it represented her, however that cartoon looked an awful lot like her, complete with TERF badge.
Their J K Rowlings cartoon was just disgusting – of course they denied it represented her, however that cartoon looked an awful lot like her, complete with TERF badge.
Charities are just as bad at buying into this evil cult. Have cancelled my Oxfam and NSPCC monthly donations. Have noticed on ComicReliefs website that they have a ghastly flag on their home page and they like to support with our money various dubious ‘trans’ charities.
What about Adidas? Can’t leave them off the list, given they unapologetically had a male in a woman’s swimsuit. I think the reason only a couple of businesses have been targeted is because it has to be focussed and will build momentum from these two.
What about Adidas? Can’t leave them off the list, given they unapologetically had a male in a woman’s swimsuit. I think the reason only a couple of businesses have been targeted is because it has to be focussed and will build momentum from these two.
For Bud Light, another factor must surely be that it’s a terrible beer.
Yes, I think that is probably the biggest factor. It is extremely easy to permanently switch to another brand. The only thing Bud Light had going for it was the brand recognition and customer loyalty. Now, people don’t even want to be seen drinking Bud Light, let alone buying it because it is the “gay” beer. The frat boy crowd will likely never go back, except for buying it as a gag.
Its not beer – nothing that Americans call beer is actual beer, its barely lager. Bud Light is pisswater, not to put too fine a point on it, wouldn’t drink it if you paid me.
Yes, I think that is probably the biggest factor. It is extremely easy to permanently switch to another brand. The only thing Bud Light had going for it was the brand recognition and customer loyalty. Now, people don’t even want to be seen drinking Bud Light, let alone buying it because it is the “gay” beer. The frat boy crowd will likely never go back, except for buying it as a gag.
Its not beer – nothing that Americans call beer is actual beer, its barely lager. Bud Light is pisswater, not to put too fine a point on it, wouldn’t drink it if you paid me.
For Bud Light, another factor must surely be that it’s a terrible beer.
The best thing that could come of this is if corporations recognize that the buying public has no interest in having political and social issues arbitrarily imposed upon products and services that they are considering purchasing. When brewers, retail stores, sports teams, fast food franchises, and others begin to appreciate that there is little to be gained and much to be lost by weighing in on social issues that are both controversial and irrelevant to their product or service, everyone will be better off. If course, that means resisting the pressures generated by extortionist ‘activist’ groups and the intellectually fashionable insights of recent college graduates who are hoping to launch their careers.
The best thing that could come of this is if corporations recognize that the buying public has no interest in having political and social issues arbitrarily imposed upon products and services that they are considering purchasing. When brewers, retail stores, sports teams, fast food franchises, and others begin to appreciate that there is little to be gained and much to be lost by weighing in on social issues that are both controversial and irrelevant to their product or service, everyone will be better off. If course, that means resisting the pressures generated by extortionist ‘activist’ groups and the intellectually fashionable insights of recent college graduates who are hoping to launch their careers.
My list: paypal (free speech union), h&m and m&s (changing rooms), wickes (brighton pride week offensive advertising), starbucks (cashless), nike (women can run even if mulvaney can’t), adidas (swimsuit ads). I am now thirsty, skint, my house is falling down and my clothes are worn. But hey, whatever it takes. I will mpt support any business which supports trans women or.cashless society.
My list: paypal (free speech union), h&m and m&s (changing rooms), wickes (brighton pride week offensive advertising), starbucks (cashless), nike (women can run even if mulvaney can’t), adidas (swimsuit ads). I am now thirsty, skint, my house is falling down and my clothes are worn. But hey, whatever it takes. I will mpt support any business which supports trans women or.cashless society.
Let’s take the good with the bad: wokery, with its CRT, trans-ideology,suppression of free speech, were imported from the US. Now it is time to import their conservative eco-activism.
Reaction there finally has been swift and successful.
Let us learn and act.
Let’s take the good with the bad: wokery, with its CRT, trans-ideology,suppression of free speech, were imported from the US. Now it is time to import their conservative eco-activism.
Reaction there finally has been swift and successful.
Let us learn and act.
I don’t understand why objecting to “woman face” makes you conservative.
I don’t understand why objecting to “woman face” makes you conservative.
These are not boycotts by Conservatives triggered by activists. These are permanently impaired brands to average people of any political persuasion who have said, “enough is enough”. Most are still compassionate to folks genuinely challenged by gender dysmorphia. They are simply standing up for their mothers’, sisters’, and daughters’ safety, ability to compete athletically, and need to navigate puberty without being chemically or surgically sterilized.
These are not boycotts by Conservatives triggered by activists. These are permanently impaired brands to average people of any political persuasion who have said, “enough is enough”. Most are still compassionate to folks genuinely challenged by gender dysmorphia. They are simply standing up for their mothers’, sisters’, and daughters’ safety, ability to compete athletically, and need to navigate puberty without being chemically or surgically sterilized.
A fall in their share prices does not prove that boycotts have hurt those companies’ bottom lines – only reduced sales and lower earnings would do that. These companies haven’t apologised and haven’t backed down – in fact they tried to depict complaining customers as being a physical danger to their staff.
I believe Bud Light’s sales are down. They have been giving away beer and buying back out of date beer that hasn’t sold. They have a real problem on their hands.
Agreed. Many US stockists reported that they couldn’t move pallets of it.
The bars didn’t need it since no-one was drinking it anymore.
As the use-by date neared, some started trying to give it away, since it was taking up space. I am not sure even that worked.
And as another commenter noted, it’s extremely indifferent beer, hence very easy to substitute.
Since almost anything else would be either the same, or better.
Agreed. Many US stockists reported that they couldn’t move pallets of it.
The bars didn’t need it since no-one was drinking it anymore.
As the use-by date neared, some started trying to give it away, since it was taking up space. I am not sure even that worked.
And as another commenter noted, it’s extremely indifferent beer, hence very easy to substitute.
Since almost anything else would be either the same, or better.
A fall in the share price can be effective anyway. Firstly it’s not a good look for senior executives to preside over a fall in value of the company; and secondly their annual bonus schemes are often linked to increasing shareholder value, so their bonuses will be less. Both of these will make them think twice about doing similar things next time.
Do you think the big money managers are dumb? If sales and earnings weren’t effected, then the stock price wouldn’t be down. Bernstein is pricing in a permanent 15% decline in Bud Light Sales (though they think the stock is over-sold and a good buy). Sales are currently down more like 25%.
I know someone in management who works at one of the largest breweries that makes Bud Light and he says it has been devastating. It has impacted their production cycles and caused massive losses at the plant. Beer is perishable, so when planned production of one brand gets cut significantly, there is no other option but to make other brands or shut down production.
I believe Bud Light’s sales are down. They have been giving away beer and buying back out of date beer that hasn’t sold. They have a real problem on their hands.
A fall in the share price can be effective anyway. Firstly it’s not a good look for senior executives to preside over a fall in value of the company; and secondly their annual bonus schemes are often linked to increasing shareholder value, so their bonuses will be less. Both of these will make them think twice about doing similar things next time.
Do you think the big money managers are dumb? If sales and earnings weren’t effected, then the stock price wouldn’t be down. Bernstein is pricing in a permanent 15% decline in Bud Light Sales (though they think the stock is over-sold and a good buy). Sales are currently down more like 25%.
I know someone in management who works at one of the largest breweries that makes Bud Light and he says it has been devastating. It has impacted their production cycles and caused massive losses at the plant. Beer is perishable, so when planned production of one brand gets cut significantly, there is no other option but to make other brands or shut down production.
A fall in their share prices does not prove that boycotts have hurt those companies’ bottom lines – only reduced sales and lower earnings would do that. These companies haven’t apologised and haven’t backed down – in fact they tried to depict complaining customers as being a physical danger to their staff.
I remember a situation some years ago when equity markets analysts were prevented from explaining why Nike suffered from the loss of a large part of their US ” mom” client base buying trainers etc for their kids because of their ” black dude” image, as it was deemed as racist!
I remember a situation some years ago when equity markets analysts were prevented from explaining why Nike suffered from the loss of a large part of their US ” mom” client base buying trainers etc for their kids because of their ” black dude” image, as it was deemed as racist!
I was on medication where I was not supposed to drink any alcohol.
So, out of curiosity, I opted to try a Bud Light the other day. Since in the UK it’s 3.5% ABV.
Bloody awful.
It resembles the flavor of cat urine.
It resembles the flavor of cat urine.
I was on medication where I was not supposed to drink any alcohol.
So, out of curiosity, I opted to try a Bud Light the other day. Since in the UK it’s 3.5% ABV.
Bloody awful.
Bud is owned by the highly secretive Belgian billionaire Van der Straten and Van Damme families, who I would have thought dont give a tinkers cuss about supporting anything woke?
Don’t think the decision was made at that level and the owners probably didn’t have oversight of it.
They may wish they had, in retrospect, but I am sure they have a portfolio where a failure in one is cushioned by other assets that perform better.
They are a phenomenally successful business empire, and do keep a close eye on their interests, but fair point!
I think two at A-B in the USA who were close to the collaboration with Mulvaney, were encouraged to take leave of absence. Don’t know what that means but it doesn’t sound good.
Whether the owners fire anyone closer to home, I don’t know.
But at some point you would’ve expected someone higher-up to know something about the demographic that drinks the beer, and if they heard about the collaboration, they should at least have asked for clarification.
I think two at A-B in the USA who were close to the collaboration with Mulvaney, were encouraged to take leave of absence. Don’t know what that means but it doesn’t sound good.
Whether the owners fire anyone closer to home, I don’t know.
But at some point you would’ve expected someone higher-up to know something about the demographic that drinks the beer, and if they heard about the collaboration, they should at least have asked for clarification.
They are a phenomenally successful business empire, and do keep a close eye on their interests, but fair point!
Don’t think the decision was made at that level and the owners probably didn’t have oversight of it.
They may wish they had, in retrospect, but I am sure they have a portfolio where a failure in one is cushioned by other assets that perform better.
Bud is owned by the highly secretive Belgian billionaire Van der Straten and Van Damme families, who I would have thought dont give a tinkers cuss about supporting anything woke?
Well, as the saying goes, go woke go broke!
Well, as the saying goes, go woke go broke!
Pay attention, Republican candidates. The public has had enough and will support fighting back against Woke indoctrination campaigns.
One of life’s adages is “Piss me off and suffer the consequences” this is happening to Budd and Target in spades. What were they thinking. Taking a social stand that is offensive to most of their customers Was always going to end badly for them.
the respective boards need to be reminded they are in the main stream retail business. Not supporting fringe area social movements.
It would be nice to see some effort made to isolate the cause for the drop in share price rather than just cherry picking the reason we might want.
It would be nice to see some effort made to isolate the cause for the drop in share price rather than just cherry picking the reason we might want.
The people boycotting Bud shite, just switched to drinking a beer sold by the same massive company, and they think its some kind of victory
Sent a powerful message though I suspect. Lots of companies are going to be far more careful about hiring wokey ambassadors and stuff.
I agree. It showed the total bubble upper middle class university graduates live in that they didn’t recognize that this could be the reaction. They have been brought up to be so dismissive of the ‘deplorables’ that they don’t think they matter – even when they are customers. Hopefully more sensible voices will be heard in the board room going forward.
I agree. It showed the total bubble upper middle class university graduates live in that they didn’t recognize that this could be the reaction. They have been brought up to be so dismissive of the ‘deplorables’ that they don’t think they matter – even when they are customers. Hopefully more sensible voices will be heard in the board room going forward.
Nope. If that was so, then the stock price wouldn’t be down.
Correlation is not causation. What was the general market doing?
If a boycott coincides with a index-wide trend, then a boycott can take credit of an individual stock crash like a barking dog takes responsibility for barking at the postman.
April 6th is when the boycott began.
ANH: $66.34
NYA (NYSE): $15,379
Today?
ANH: $55.16 (Down about the 18% claimed)
NYA (NYSE): $15,502 (up <+1%)
Arguably, there is reason to think Bud Light might be at fault.
The boycott coincides closely with teh google search spike.
Assuming the same for TGT, we assume teh boycott begins perhaps over the weekend of May19-22nd
May 22nd
NYA (NYSE): $15,319
TGT: $152
NYA (NYSE): $15,502 (up 1%)
TGT: $127 (Down about 16%)
Hm. Target bucked the trend too.
These boycotts may well have had an effect for investors. Question is, will either stock rebound?
Will these indulgences towards small customer bases benefit them, long-term, like Subaru?
I might buy a little stock to play the contrarian but both companies are badly saddled with debt which makes me nervous in the higher interest environment we’re in.
Correlation is not causation. What was the general market doing?
If a boycott coincides with a index-wide trend, then a boycott can take credit of an individual stock crash like a barking dog takes responsibility for barking at the postman.
April 6th is when the boycott began.
ANH: $66.34
NYA (NYSE): $15,379
Today?
ANH: $55.16 (Down about the 18% claimed)
NYA (NYSE): $15,502 (up <+1%)
Arguably, there is reason to think Bud Light might be at fault.
The boycott coincides closely with teh google search spike.
Assuming the same for TGT, we assume teh boycott begins perhaps over the weekend of May19-22nd
May 22nd
NYA (NYSE): $15,319
TGT: $152
NYA (NYSE): $15,502 (up 1%)
TGT: $127 (Down about 16%)
Hm. Target bucked the trend too.
These boycotts may well have had an effect for investors. Question is, will either stock rebound?
Will these indulgences towards small customer bases benefit them, long-term, like Subaru?
I might buy a little stock to play the contrarian but both companies are badly saddled with debt which makes me nervous in the higher interest environment we’re in.
Sent a powerful message though I suspect. Lots of companies are going to be far more careful about hiring wokey ambassadors and stuff.
Nope. If that was so, then the stock price wouldn’t be down.
The people boycotting Bud shite, just switched to drinking a beer sold by the same massive company, and they think its some kind of victory