bud mulvaney
Capital_Room
rather dementor-like
6mo ago
Representation does matter, but those making the decisions are so ideologically committed that they’re willing to hurt their own bottom line in order to “do the right thing.” They’re so committed to their ideals that they’re willing to depress their own effectiveness by more than 30%.
Except it's not this straightforward, for two reasons. First, try proving that these decisions are actually hurting the bottom line. As the old quote attributed to various famous businessmen goes: "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half." Advertising is anything but an exact science, and business outcomes are subject to many hard-to-disentangle factors. So how would one convince bosses or coworkers that this isn't the way to get more business?
Secondly, the interests and incentives of an institution are not the interests and incentives of the people within it. As I've seen it put elsewhere (particularly in discussions of the police, but also other fields), the first and highest job duty of any employee is not what it says on their job description, it's to make the boss happy. Of course, the usual way one does so is by performing the specific tasks for which one was hired, but those are ultimately just means to that end. If your boss insists on something being done a particular way, a particular way that's stupid and costs the business money, and instead you do it a different way that saves the business money, how do you suppose it will impact your continued employment if the boss finds out?
I've seen multiple people point out with respect to the whole Bud Light thing, that while going with Mulvaney may not have been a good choice for the business as a whole, it was probably the best choice for the advertising people who originally recommended that course with regards to their future employment opportunities elsewhere within the advertising industry, particularly as compared to the opposite strategy. "Nobody gets fired for buying IBM" and all that.
So nobody need actually go "I'm doing this no matter how much money it costs me!" They need only have uncertainty as to what will or won't cost the business more customers, combined with a solid understanding of what best suits their own personal, long-term job interests independent of a particular company's interests.
KingOfTheBailey
7mo ago
John Carter: The Bud Light Military
(Or, to use the better title from the comments: "Achilles Shrugged")
I'm not familiar with the author, who seems to be yet another online right substackker. He asserts that America's military capabilities are being stretched increasingly thin (Ukraine, possibly Israel, potentially Taiwan) while the armed forces are missing their recruiting targets. This is the background to his main claim: that the core demographics of America's fighting force ("the Scots-Irish of the Appalachian regions, the good ol’ boys of the South, and the farm boys of the Midwest. Hillbillies and rednecks") have become so sick of the sneering racist abuse that they aren't signing up to fight any more, and while the US Army has tried to go back to a more "traditional" style of ad where white men parachute out of a helicopter, it's failed to bring back the volunteers. Carter compares a previous ad for the US Army ("Emma", the girl with two moms who operates Patriot missile defense systems, roundly mocked at the time by comparisons to a Russian recruiting ad) to the new ad that dropped on 11/6, "Jump" (Twitter, YouTube). Carter parallels it with the attempt at brand rehabilitation like the one Bud Light tried after the Dylan Mulvaney boycott, and if the comment sections of Twitter, YouTube, and his article are anything to go by, it's not going to work either.
Personal opinion is I think you are wrong on this. It’s not just frat boys and looking down on your consumers.
It’s promoting something I view as a known evil. I don’t see much of a difference between promoting Mulvaney and well being literally Hitler. I mean Hitler at a minimum wanted more land for Germans to grow their civilization. The Mulvaney message is cut off your dick and commit suicide of your people.
Would a WW2 vet in 1953 look at the Mulvaney message and see one as worse than the other? Convincing your kids to permenently castrate themselves? If you told them a lot of the major corporations were mass marketing castration to society? I don’t think my Catholic faith would see much of a difference.
But I’ve been canceling brands long before Bud.
The way out for Bud is to fire the entire executive staff. Promote that hard in the media . Then run national tv ads denouncing LGBT.
Of course my plan would also get Bud banned from every sporting event because a lot of their tv contracts have people who buy into this stuff.
Meanwhile I continue to be bemused by liberals' apparent inability/unwillingness to believe that publicly insulting your core customers might be bad for business.
As others and I keep pointing out. The issue was never Mulvaney per se, it was what came next. If InBev had released some boiler-plate statement about "People being free to be whatever they want because 'Murica" or simply kept their corporate yaps shut, I think the controversy would've blown over in a week and Bud Light would still be comfortably in the top slot instead of having to fight it out with Modelo.
What they did instead was have their head of marketing, Alissa Heinerscheid, go on national TV to talk about how they didn't want the brand to be associated with frat-boys and truckers anymore. Turns out the frat-boys and truckers were listening.
firmamenti
7mo ago
I have a theory that this Bud Light backlash isn't just because Dylan Mulvaney is trans, it's because he's hideous. If Bud Light had partnered with Blair White (https://instagram.com/p/CpIx5-lJFCX/) for instance, would the backlash have been the same? Somehow I doubt it.
I mean seriously look at this: https://tiktok.com/@dylanmulvaney/video/7102974306036010282?lang=en
Or this: https://tiktok.com/@dylanmulvaney/video/7285860156548795694?lang=en
hydroacetylene
7mo ago
If I were in charge of bud light’s marketing, I would sponsor Screenings of What is a woman at rented out theaters which came with a free bud light at admission, and make sure to get fined by the state of California for facilitating underaged drinking or some other alcohol related charge to plug into the conservative persecution complex. Or issue trump cans.
As is, there’s really no way out. The only way they can even hold on to current market share is with massive rebates supported by heavy Spanish-language advertising(Mexicans don’t know about Dylan mulvaney).
I am curious to know if this will work. I haven't been following the fortunes of Bud Light recently, so it could be that the people who switched will stick with the new beer brands and not move back. They already tried a poorly-received 'going back to our roots' ad that only served to have everyone go "how dumb do they think we are?" so this may blow up in their faces the same way. Some opinion also seems to be that the brand tanked just because it's terrible beer that has been doing poorly for years (hence the ill-advised attempt to make it relevant and appeal to young drinkers):
CEO Brendan Whitworth’s June apology was widely panned as insincere. By that month, Bud Light’s parent company Anheuser-Busch InBev lost $27 billion in market value. In July, the company announced it would lay off 350 employees. Frustrated, Billy Busch, heir to the Busch Family offered to buy back the Bud Light brand from InBev. By August, Bud Light’s sales had declined 26.8 percent while rival Modelo’s sales grew 15.9 percent. On Oct. 9, Bud Light’s stock closed at its lowest since the April triggering event.
Research shows that advertising only helps brands with above-average quality. Advertising cannot compensate for mediocre or sub-par quality to build customer loyalty, as was the case with Bud Light.
Because of this perception of its quality, Bud Light’s outsized advertising only garnered higher awareness but not necessarily higher customer loyalty. In 2022, more customers were aware of Bud Light than Modelo (88 percent versus 78 percent). Yet, both brands had identical customer loyalty (78 percent) among users.
Bud Light’s management conflated high customer awareness with high customer loyalty. Yet, its below-average product provided no meaningful differentiation from competitors and eroded customer loyalty. Customers switched when Bud Light transgressed.
Because of the mediocre quality, it's easy to switch to another brand, and the lost customers might not be coaxed back:
In the four weeks to September 9, Bud Light sales declined by around 30 percent in both volume and dollar value, compared to the same period a year ago. The statistics were compiled by Bump Williams Consulting.
Speaking to Fox News Digital, Harry Schuhmacher, the Beer Business Daily publisher, said that the latest figures show that the decline in Bud Light sales has become "quasi permanent."
Schuhmacher added: "You see Bud Light still just stubbornly down around 30 percent in volume compared to last year, which is where it's been since May or June.
"That tells me that this is quasi-permanent, meaning those consumers are just lost forever," he said.
Nielson data released in August showed that Bud Light sales fell by 26.5 percent for the week ending August 5, compared to the previous year. This was a higher decline than the 25.9 percent year-on-year fall recorded in the week ending June 17.
I also wonder how poor, poor Dylan is doing; they were so traumatised that they couldn't even step outside their front door (apart from that trip to Peru because they needed to feel safe. So they went to Peru. Yeah, I believe that was the exact reason and not trying to scrape last crumb of publicity out of it). So, so scared to leave the house that they had to fly three thousand miles away and record every step on TikTok. Such is the horror of the transphobic backlash! Such horror that a trip to France immediately afterwards was necessary. And onwards to the UK. And then back to New York for fashion week. And then popping off to London to receive a Woman Of The Year award.
It really is awful how this poor person has been terrorised into being unable to leave the safety of their own home!
Bud Light/Anheuser-Busch just penned a large advertising partnership deal with the UFC. The unconfirmed reports I've read are suggesting the 7-year deal totals about $100 million or so.
Dana White, President of the UFC, suggests its 'not determined by the money' and while this is an eyeroll-worthy statement, in a sense it must be correct, because the obvious benefit to Bud Light is that partnering with one of the few remaining bastions of 'toxic' masculinity left to Western Culture offers a promising route to rehabilitate their image and customer base after the Dylan Mulvaney Kerfuffle tarnished their red-blooded, blue-collared reputation.
Which of course means it is still about the money, since Bud Light sales remain in the tank and thus regaining customers would mean a return to their former glory and profitability.
Will it work? I'm personally skeptical. The move is actually a pretty good, and costly, way to show that they're returning to their roots as a beer for the hard-working and rough-handed everyman, since the UFC is honestly synonymous with uncouth, politically incorrect athletes beating the snot out of each other, and features sexy ring girls at every fight with the Machisimo levels simply off the charts. Trump himself is known to attend events and get standing ovations. Tying themselves to THAT brand is actually likely to hurt their 'cred' (such as it exists) with any liberals who might have been swayed by their moves towards increased inclusion. I'm honestly looking forward to the next Sean Strickland (the current UFC middleweight champion) fight, just to see how he might mouth off in a way that will lead to controversy against Bud Light pushing in the other direction. EDIT: It has already begun LMAO
That said, it's not like anyone expects the "beefy men beating each other to death" league to try to conform with polite norms anyway.
Still. It isn't anything resembling an acknowledgement of the mistake, and even if the logo is plastered all over the Octagon and fighter's shorts, all that has to happen for this to backfire is for people to just... not buy the beer. The UFC pockets the money and the needle doesn't budge otherwise. It sure didn't work for Crypto.com or Vechain, both of whom forked over a ton of money for UFC sponsorship.
There's also the insidious take that this is an attempt to try to bring the UFC itself to heel, by exerting enough influence over it to cause it to clamp down on its athletes and 'clean up' its image (read: bring in line with progressive values) rather than allow it to exist as a potential rogue cultural element resisting the leftward swim of Cthulhu.
Given that I hold the position that martial arts/combat sports are probably the last remaining healthy outlet for positive masculinity, if THAT is the goal I'd be extremely alarmed. Not saying it is, but when that much money is getting thrown around, you expect strings to be attached.
I had 'jokingly' suggested to friends a while back that the single best way to bring male customers back to Bud Light was to simply hire a cadre of busty women who would stand in the beer aisle at the grocery store wearing an American Flag bikini and offering to fellate anyone who bought a case. Boom. Apology accepted.
And considering how many buxom ladies with relatively lax morals you could afford to hire for $100 million, I am wondering if that might have been a better plan overall.
MaiqTheTrue
Zensunni Wanderer
11mo ago
I think it’s because they’re useful in several ways to the regime.
As symbols, they can serve as useful tools of the elite trying to convince other people to join the Atlantic Empire. After all, if we can tolerate transpeople, accepting Muslims, Buddhists and so on isn’t an issue. You can be free to do anything, and we aren’t going to stop you. Hell, we’ll force it including forcing companies to hire you and cater to you.
As a bloc, they are fanatic defenders of the elite, because the elite are allowing them to punch far above their weight. If the Atlantic Empire falls, they’re toast, as no other potential elites (MAGA, BRIC, Islamic, or Christian National) will give them the same deal. In fact, absent a strong champion, they probably can’t gain enough power to defend themselves, and aren’t good workers in most situations.
As a distraction, they allow the regime to do as it pleases in other spheres of control. As long as we’re talking about trans people reading books to kids, Dylan Mulvaney, and pro-trans propaganda in schools, the ability for the government to quietly sneak in and change other things, to take control over privacy and so on is high.
Quantumfreakonomics
1yr ago
I guarantee (especially given that the Budweiser part of InBev is in the midwestern largely Catholic city of St. Louis) that someone in that room knew the Mulvaney cans were a terrible idea that would cause backlash. They said nothing because being anti-trans is dangerous to their career.
I'll tell you what they were thinking. They were thinking, "we need to sell beer to children without getting in trouble." The Beer Institute (the beer industry self-regulatory organization) has a rule that beer advertising can only appear in media where 73.6% of the audience is 21 years of age or older. Do you think that Dylan Mulvaney's Instagram following is more or less than 26.4% under 21? They were hoping that they'd be able to get away with it because no organization wants to be seen as transphobic.
I guarantee (especially given that the Budweiser part of InBev is in the midwestern largely Catholic city of St. Louis) that someone in that room knew the Mulvaney cans were a terrible idea that would cause backlash.
I honestly think the Mulvaney promotional can was the genius idea of the marketing lady - or rather the ad/marketing agency she hired - who had been put in charge of revitalising the brand, and that there wasn't much oversight. I don't know who her immediate boss was/is, but she was given the task "get the brand selling again" and that means "get young people drinking it" and she thought "where are the kids today hanging out? oh yeah TikTok and Instagram" and she went for "who's the big influencer name?" and here we go.
If there had been "people in the room" I do hope somebody would have gone "but what about our existing client base?" but I don't think there was even a room. She was going on in the interview about how she had been handed the task and I do think it was her and a couple others and she had the last say on what they'd do:
At work, Alissa Heinerscheid is the Vice President of Bud Light, tasked with evolving and elevating an iconic brand that was in decline — and she’s the first woman to lead Bud Light in the brand’s 40 year history.
MaiqTheTrue
Zensunni Wanderer
1yr ago
But it’s something they’ve sort of deliberately created for themselves. Conservatives have known for a long time that success in PMC and white colar work means being rather closeted about things coded conservative. It actually somewhat starts in college where expressing even mild disagreement with the ideas of modern progressive ideology is going to get you shunned and if you’re dumb enough to turn in a paper that expresses a conservative opinion you get worse grades. In the workplace, almost any such expression will be seen as negative and possibly get you reported to HR. As such, modern conservatives in the modern workplace, or at least the modern, urban respectable workplace are as closeted as gays were in the 1990s. You thought long and hard before telling people in your social circle and probably didn’t tell people in your professional circle because even though it’s officially tolerated, it would be risky.
As such, even though there are probably people in their social circles who are conservative, those people have learned to clam up. They were in the room when the “right” — pro-abortion— move was made. They just didn’t want the blowback from being the conservative in the room. I guarantee (especially given that the Budweiser part of InBev is in the midwestern largely Catholic city of St. Louis) that someone in that room knew the Mulvaney cans were a terrible idea that would cause backlash. They said nothing because being anti-trans is dangerous to their career.
FarNearEverywhere
1yr ago
I've drinking this beer since I was sixteen.
Which is why they think the brand is in decline. The older drinkers who've been drinking it for years are sticking with it, but they're not getting the new younger drinkers (for various reasons). That's why the influencer disaster. I've tried to find the demographics of Mulvaney's audience but that seems to be commercial information that isn't readily available. So I'm going to assume it's majorly women in the age range 18-30 (or so).
They want the 18 year girls to start drinking Bud Light, so by extension the association with "I'm a guy who has been drinking this since I was 16 and I'm 30/40/however old now" is unfavourable. Young drinkers are not going to be wooed by a dad beer, so this is why they tried to use Mulvaney to make it hip'n'happening.
Your friend may continue to drink it, but he's not the market they're trying to attract now. The (unfortunate) head of marketing for Bud Light in this interview, from around the 25th minute, about what she wanted to do. Evolve and Elevate. Representation. Inclusivity. The words that came back to haunt her:
"(And) we had this hangover. I mean Bud Light had been kind of a brand of fratty, kind of out-of-touch humour and it was really important that we had another approach".
FarNearEverywhere
1yr ago
Budweiser have made an error here it seems, but there are plenty of past cases of entering into the culture war delivering higher sales, and given that the business of business is business there is no reason why they shouldn't try to exploit those cases.
While that is true, there are ways to switch to the progressive support angle. Every company pretty much swathes itself in rainbows for Pride Month, to the extent that LGBT activists are cynical about woke capitalism.
Dumping your core demographic before you have the new client base in place was a bad idea. I saw one Twitter or Instagram or wherever video where a woman was going on about "do the rednecks not know that thousands of dollars of marketing research went into this, do they really think their little tantrum is going to achieve anything, don't they understand that a huge business like this wouldn't do anything without a plan in place?"
Well, looks like none of that was true. I think it was a test run by the marketing VP to try and get limited exposure using a popular influencer to start switching to the younger, liberal audience, and seeing by the results how this would go (would they all indeed go over to the March Madness Bud website and enter?) but it went badly wrong.
And all the "we never partnered with Mulvaney" isn't much cop, seeing as how Mulvaney's Instagram still has the video up with the hashtag #budlightpartner, oh dear:
Happy March Madness!! Just found out this had to do with sports and not just saying it’s a crazy month! In celebration of this sports thing @budlight is giving you the chance to win $15,000! Share a video with #EasyCarryContest for a chance to win!! Good luck! #budlightpartner
I think the big mistake was the promotional can with Mulvaney's face on it; sure, it might only be one can (or several, how many they sent out was unclear) that were never going to hit the shelves in stores, but there have been so many promotional cans that did hit the shelves, it's easy to see why people assumed this was the same thing.
RococoBasilica
Actually a Quality Retribution
1yr ago
I'll actually admit I don't quite know what they should be apologizing for. Anheuser-Busch tried to make a targeted ad that advertised to a Dylan Mulvaney-adjacent segment of the market, and didn't think other parts of their market would ever see it, let alone care about it. They were wrong.
It was the partnership which triggered the red tribe's "satanic panic" reflexes in conjunction with someone unearthing an interview with the VP of marketing in which she describes her plan to replace the brand's "fratty" image with "inclusivity".
It seems like the red tribe is finally able to smell woke entryism. Took them long enough. And given that bud light is apparently a cornerstone of country culture, this was rightly seen as a broadside in the culture war.
Exactly! If you're trying to reposition the brand as inclusive and evolving and what-not, then get a trans man to be the face of your promotion.
Not whatever Dylan Mulvaney is, I really don't believe he's a trans woman, I think he's a gay guy that started a performance art/drag act during lockdown and now it's blown up into this big thing that is too profitable (up till now) to drop:
Mulvaney came out as a trans woman during the COVID-19 pandemic, while living with her "very conservative family" at her childhood home in San Diego. She began to document her gender transition in a daily series of videos published on TikTok titled "Days of Girlhood" in March 2022, and her videos began to gain in popularity. She said in an interview:
When the pandemic hit, I was doing the Broadway musical Book of Mormon. I found myself jobless and without the creative means to do what I loved. I downloaded TikTok, assuming it was a kids' app. Once I came out as a woman, I made this "day one of being a girl" comedic video. And it blew up. I really don't know another place online like TikTok that can make a creator grow at the rate that it does. Some of these other apps really celebrate perfection and over-editing and flawlessness. I think with TikTok specifically, people love the rawness. They love people just talking to the camera. I try to approach every video like a FaceTime with a friend.
My uninformed view on this is that Mulvaney is a theatre kid turned performer who, like a lot of performers, needs attention and an audience like a plant needs sunshine. Being locked down at home with no job, they tried the online performance and it caught on, and the rest is history.
This seems to be the second controversy over "we're not officially partnered with Mulvaney", Snopes is debunking the story but it does seem that Mulvaney claimed Tampax sent them a box of tampons to share with women who need them (I can't even begin to untangle the logic behind that line of thinking):
Responding to comments on Twitter, Tampax denied the claim about the partnership with Mulvaney. "Thanks for getting in touch, the brand wrote in response. "We can confirm that we do not have a sponsorship agreement with Dylan Mulvaney or Jeffrey Marsh."
Although the TikTok star did not immediately respond to the claim about a partnership with Tampax, in a video of Dec. 7, 2022, Mulvaney denied working with the brand and getting any money from the company. The celebrity added that Tampax sent Mulvaney a box of tampons in April 2022 to give to women who needed them.
Why the hell would Tampax just out of the blue send this person a box of tampons for no reason except "share them round"? One box? Gentlemen, let me assure you that is not a lot of sharing around (though it does depend on the size of the box). And how exactly is Mulvaney meant to give them to women who need tampons? Approaching random women on the street and asking "Hey, honey, need a tampon?" Approaching random women in bathrooms? Yeah, that move is going to go over well.
Somebody is not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And if the Budweiser marketing lady was copying this move with "hey, send a promotional can with Mulvaney's face on it to them", then the decision was even stupider than I thought.
Quantumfreakonomics
1yr ago
Lawsuits from disgruntled employees are only one prong of the assault. If they came out and said “Dylan Mulvaney is a man” in a way that would satisfy Matt Walsh, an Alex Jones level cancellation would be on the table. What if the NFL told InBev to take their ad money and shove it? What if any channel that shows Bud Light commercials gets the Tucker Carlson treatment? What if every company that sells Bud Light has angry mid-level management angry that they have to sell “hate beer”?
If any of these sound unrealistic, you’re right. It would never happen. Corporate leadership would chicken out before any of these things took place.
FarNearEverywhere
1yr ago
The marketing VP is on leave of absence and has been replaced. I think there will be some quiet opportunity to leave of her own accord and move on to better and greater things offered. I don't think they have solid grounds to fire her and it would be a messy lawsuit to fight it out, so just letting it all settle down under the radar (with maybe a fat severance package) is the way to go.
FarNearEverywhere
1yr ago
Budweiser really shot themselves in the foot, and it looks like it was mostly down to the stupid decision by the marketing VP. On the one hand, I can see where she's coming from: the brand is slowly declining, even if it's still the number one, and they need to pivot to a new audience. So if that means appealing to the woke young college kids (never mind what she said about "fratty" associations), so be it.
The problem was twofold, though. Maybe even threefold, gimme a moment to count on my fingers.
(1) The interview with the podcast where she went on about the "fratty" image. Girleen, who do you think drinks your cheap light beer? People who want to be able to drink a lot over a long period of time without getting wasted too fast, and people who want to drink a lot on the cheap. So cheap boozing is college students, like it or lump it
(2) Dylan Mulvaney. Yes, I know all about the cans and that it wasn't a partnership etc. Great, you want to get Dylan's 10 million TikTokkers and the 2 million Instagram followers, and for "who is the hot new name right this minute?", Mulvaney probably comes up. Except.
What is the age range/age group of Mulvaney's followers? Are they legal drinking age in the US?
Mulvaney's other endorsements seem to be for cosmetics, fashion, etc. Do you really think a bunch of young women tuning in to see the latest lipstick shade are all going to decide to start swigging Bud Light?
Just because Mulvaney is Internet famous does not mean they are a good match for your brand; it's like asking the Chief Rabbi to endorse your line of 100% organic pork sausages and bacon. There's ways to appeal to the more liberal, younger set, but this was a bad idea.
(3) Why is the brand declining? Is it because younger people are not drinking beer, but rather spirits and seltzers? And if they are drinking beer, more likely to be the craft beers and micro-breweries? Or indeed, not drinking at all? Was there any research done, because it sure doesn't look like it.
They (or she) tried a marketing stunt and it went viral - in all the wrong ways. If your core demographic for your brand are older, more conservative, more redneck types, then coming out with an interview that basically says "we don't want your custom any more" and this sort of influencer is pretty much telling them "we think you're smelly and icky and we don't want you around anymore".
So then people said "Okay, if you don't want us, we're going" and switched to other cheap, low-quality beer. That was easily done, it's all on the shelves beside your brand, so there was no more effort needed than move three inches to the side and grab that 15-pack instead.
Oops.
And to rub salt into the wound, there wasn't an influx of new young drinkers or LGBT bars stepping up and buying Bud in support. On the contrary.
InBev/Anheuser Busch can rush out all the hokey country music ads and wrap themselves in the flag all they like now, but this is too blatant pandering for even rednecks and hicks to swallow, because they've seen the messaging: we want the rainbow dollar. It's not sincere, and they're not falling for it.
And this could easily have been avoided with just a little more thought about how to pivot and what way to do it. I don't think it's a "trans backlash", despite how they're trying to spin it. I mean, I find Mulvaney highly irritating, and the beer in the bath video was excruciating to watch. But more subtle appeals to the young and LGBT set? That could have been done. Embrace your 'fratty' college roots, but have it be the activist types (not too activist, though) drinking Bud Light and not the frat boys. But no, they went full-on absolute opposite to their core market, and showed contempt for them, and that's what people are reacting to, more than anything.
Now, however, they can't even give it away for free (as the rebate coupled with the mark-downs to get the stuff off the shelves before it hits the expiry date means it's practically free).
FiveHourMarathon
c’è aria di frociaggine
1yr ago
Fresh WSJ Bud Light Delenda Est Update on the front page this morning.
Bud Light sales losses continue, though they have slowed, holding steady around -28%. Coors and Miller's Lite offerings are showing more modest gains of around +16%, two weeks ago it was Bud down 15% and Coors and Miller both up 15%. I don't know what the proportion of sales is between the three light beers, but the change does indicate that some sales have been fully lost from the generic mass light beers to craft offerings or to other brewers (Yuengling! America's Oldest Brewery!) or to other alcohol categories entirely.
AB Inbev is offering hazard pay bonuses of $500 to wholesaler employees and delivery drivers who faced customer abuse for driving a Bud Light branded truck.
AB intends to triple Ad Spend for the rest of the year, a cost of millions, to try to unring the bell.
Numerous ad execs have been axed or shuffled, the whole marketing department is now under sharper observation and approval from the C Suite.
Congress is launching a (kinda bad faith) investigation into whether the Mulvaney ad violated rules about marketing to minors. Which could keep the issue alive for much longer, and lead to fines.
In yet another episode of NEVER EVER APOLOGIZE, AB now faces significant backlash to their efforts to fold to the boycott, with the LGBTQWERTY+ community they originally tried to target feeling abandoned when AB pulled back. It's better to never get involved, but if you do, never ever apologize, ride it out. No one likes a coward.
On balance the boycott seems to have significant teeth, with AB suffering major losses as a result of the boycott, and planning major spending to counter it. How big a loss do we need to see before other corporations start treating the issue as toxic? What's your over/under?
Bud Light Delenda Est, drink Yuengling or local.
MaiqTheTrue
Zensunni Wanderer
1yr ago
It’s also something you order at restaurants and bars where you have a choice and the choice is publicly known. If I’m in a bar in Mississippi and I’m ordering a beer with my buddies, there’s an element of peer pressure. The controversy over Mulvaney means that especially in conservative circles, ordering a Bud Light is going to be something people pay attention to. It’s the tranny beer. You don’t support that do you?
And I think this is why a lot of boycotts fail. If you can privately cross the line, then a lot of people do. All the people who are concerned about Amazon abusing workers still order from them because the social pressure of potentially being seen ordering from Amazon isn’t there.
zeke5123
1yr ago
Culture war refresh. Many people are familiar with the Bud Light and Dylan Mulvaney controversy. About a week afterwards people on this website noted there wasn’t a large impact on the stock price of InBev, Bud’s parent company,
Well, InBev is now down about 10% from when the whole Bud Light - Dylan Mulvaney sponsorship. Bud light revenue is still down materially. At the same time, other major alcohol companies appear flat or up materially. Therefore, it seems the boycott has had real negative impact on InBev.
Does this mark the start of the right finding it’s muscle or is this a dead cat bounce?
"Bud Light is throwing their weight behind the idea that a natural born man can transition into a woman - an idea that is harmful in its consequences, disrespectful to reality, and is quite possibly the most ridiculous development in our political arena in ways I could have never foreseen."
If you believe the above, I think this is a decent enough reason to boycott? This isn't an argument over some sprawling, poorly-understood topic like the pros/cons of taxes or immigration policy. This is more like a company telling you that the color green is no different from red, without a trace of winking, Millenial irony attached, except worse given the subject matter.
Some hack writer burning a Trump effigy in his show is dumb, but mostly just eyeroll-inducing. The psychology behind such a person and their behavior is completely legible to me, even if it's idiotic. But for trans issues, it does feel like many on the left are downloading their views from a heretofore undiscovered alien planet. I can break bread with or let bygones be bygones to some extent with somebody who really likes socialism. It is increasingly difficult to do so with people who are being absurd on an even more fundamental level - if not the most.
The Bud/Mulvaney controversy was likely sprung from a critical mass of people already predisposed towards being unfavorable having an "Oh, come the fuck on" moment, particularly attenuated by having this come from Bud Light of all brands.
HalloweenSnarry
1yr ago
I'm going to join the (small) chorus saying that I genuinely don't think the Nashville shooting was on anyone's mind when Mulvaneygate started, the Bud Light controversy was definitely its own vein of outrage and wasn't tapping that prior thing. Maybe for some, it was indeed another straw on the herniated camel's back, but I will say that it definitely feels like its own thing.
The way a free market works is that consumers get to choose, for whatever bespoke reasons they so desire, which products they will purchase and consume. Producers would much prefer that they themselves got to choose which products consumers had to purchase. Corporate PR gets a lot of flak for being simple and predictable, but it is glaringly apparent when these simple predictable rules are violated. The fact that companies wish that their customers were pigs who they could shovel slop to every day and come home with an easy profit should be apparent from first economic principles, but consumers understandably take offense to that. Imagine if the CEO of InBev posted a tweet publicly asking Elon Musk to shut down all Dylan Mulvaney/Bud Light trending topics and ban Kid Rock. I’m sure that’s exactly what they wanted, but InBev has enough sense and tact to understand how condescending and contemptuous that would come off as.
More options
Context Copy link