/biz/ - Business & Finance

Other than Nike, what companies can you think of who have seem markedly reduced performance and declining stock prices upon alignment with political positions contradicting their customer base?

You're playing right into their hands. These types of ads are specifically designed to get a rise out of you.
>muh social engineering
You're letting a brand have power over you.

>>12444069
Facebook and Twitter (although it's political opposition perceived by both lefties and righties based on the companies letting the other side exist on the platform)

>>12444104
A) I am asking a business question regarding stock trading. I'd like to discuss a trading strategy that revolves around short selling companies that adopt political positions contradictory to their main customer demographic.

B) If their strategy was to get a rise out of me but lose a lifelong customer for good, it means that idiots are behind the wheel and it is all the more reason to assume they will continue to make stupid decisions going forward.

I'm not here to debate the ins and outs of Gillette's campaign here. I am here to discuss the merits of short selling based upon indications of an executive team that is catastrophically out of touch with their core market.

>>12444124
They have taken up leftist causes, but are they in contradiction with their major demographic? Likely not. Gillette is even further out of touch with their target market than Nike as many minorities lean left wing. Gillette's market is overwhelmingly made up of white middle class males. Why they would choose this course of action is beyond reason, which leads me to believe that their business will suffer in the short to medium term.

>>12444138
But they aren't "out of touch." No one cares about one stupid ad. It's all just pandering. Gilette's sales aren't going to drop in the long-run. If I'm correct, Nike's stock (which with the whole Kaepernick thing isn't even comparable) reached an ATH after their campaign.

>>12444124
Here is a better example (https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2018/06/02/nfl-sale-prices-being-hurt-by-leagues-declining-popularity/#20dc7f3d7e94))

>>12444153
People thought "Facebook did Blumpf-Russia" and it tanked their price. Twitter tanked for being "full of Nazis". Yes, they are actually leftist companies, but lefties are so retarded they think they are right wing. Details don't matter, their prices dropped for political reasons. That's the point

>>12444217
https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-brags-ratings-19-since-fired-jemele-mike-sportscenter/

Left wing politics - really any strong politics - are business cancer because they alienate 50% of people. It is especially stupid when their market tends to hold contradictory political alignments.

Yes, this ad campaign was decidedly out of touch.

>>12444234
This is exactly what I am talking about. If we can establish a correlation between left wing marketing campaigns and short- to medium-term stock price dropping, it would make sense to short sell share prices.

>>12444242
You don't understand how advertising works.
If you're so sure, short Gillette. But don't expect a billion-dollar corporation to go down just because you don't agree with the politics of their ad.

>>12444314
>just because you don't agree with the politics of their ad.
it's not my agreement that's the issue. it's the agreement or disagreement of their white middle class male customers that's the issue.

Besides, I am discussing this on the /biz/ instead of /pol/ because I am not interested in political discussion. I am interested in seeing if anyone else has noticed a correlation between a company's political alignment against their target demographic and a decline in business performance and stock price. Are you saying that you don't think political alignment contributes to stock price movement? Or are you saying that Procter & Gamble (the publicly traded conglomerate that owns Gillette) is insulated from harm by its size?

I don't think you know very much at all and are rather unsophisticated, so I don't see much reason to listen to you.

I mean this could probably work but idk if you can time it. You’d have to know how long negative effects are going to last or if they will even see sales drop

>>12444674
no one cares about your poltard incel memes, nike stock reached record heights the moment they took a shit all over you.
face it, you don't matter and you never will you pathetic class cuck.
the only reason anyone even remotely in power pays lip service to your bullshit is to keep you docile while they fuck you over and grind down any rights you had left to feed their corporate buddies.

>gillette 'sides with the left'
>jews laugh and buy tons of stock
>gillette gets added to several mutual funds
>anon shorts and loses his meager savings

>>12444058
the reason you people cant understand whats going on in the world is because you think american liberalism and socialism are the same thing. they aren't. liberalism is an arm of capitalism. its essentially what you get when rich homo/trans lbgtq weirdos from san fran larp as commies through their teens then hit their 20s and realize they ar actually the bourgeoisie. so they basically just parlay their leftist views into a more business friendly method. for example: liberals are not concerned with equal pay for all just equal pay for everyone that isn't white and male. its basically what you get when queers run capitalism.

>>12444069

have fun shorting one of top companies in the world

btw nike went up after the commercial, scroll out. Youre just going to get fucked putting politics in your trades

>>12444314
actually, you dont understand how advertisement works. pissing off your core customer base is how you destroy your business. thats logic

>>12445712
nike went up for a brief period, then tanked and is still feeling the effects. you would understand this if you actually read the news, but you dont cause youre stupid and are probably a faggot crypto shill. the blm happened around september of last year, see image.

retard

>>12444058
meritocratic hiring practices will come back after the bust cycle kicks as a corporate bond crisis is expected. all of the useless diversity hires will be unemployed.

>>12445821
As someone who uses Gillette body soap, deodorant, antiperspirant spray, razors, and shaving cream, I will no longer be purchasing any of those products after seeing that ad. I guarantee I’m not alone. Gillette wIll be BTFO.

>>12445847
yikes man you seem angry.

Can you not see that Nike was simply following the Dow? (Its one of the dow 30)
and actually outperformed it by a good margin.

Also look: Starbux near all time highs. I was just trying to help you understand that politics dont matter and youre going to lose all your money shorting

>>12444058
So, I get that pol incels are triggered by this, but real talk, whats so bad about that advert?
Inb4 muh virtue signalling.

Is it that it doesnt fit an ideology? Ads were always exploiting this and this hypocricy should not be suprising

>>12444058
Bringing /poltard opinions into investing is a sure way to not make any money

>>12445890
How did the ad offend you? It was just asking men not to be dicks.

>incels defending toxic alpha males
Literally why?

>>12444104
Except that's retarded. Alienating their core customer base doesn't lead to increased sales. Unless they're shorting their own stock it's a dumb play. Nice try leftard, but leave the Capitalism to those that believe in it.

>>12445935
>>12445953
>>12445978
>>12446007

The reddit & low-tier /leftypol/ raids continue I see. Look fuckers, the only Leftist we tolerate here is "gommie" since he's actually bothered to understand our position (and I find actual well educated ML tankies far more tolerable than you bourgeoisie libtards) as well as his own, and we can have a decent tete a tete on economics & politics with him. Many actual good threads in fact, with as close to respect and mutual understanding as you could hope for in this place. The rest of you go back until you've at least read more than the back cover of "The communist manifesto", OK?

>>12444153
Short them then, shouting in the sidelines doesn't mean anything.

>>12446215
I think that beta incels should unite with women against toxic alpha males, you defending them is not in YOUR interests

>>12444058
(((they))) are probably inside-trading the shit out of this
I'm thinking 100 leverage before the campaign was even out the door

>>12444058
one event is probably not enough, but sustained shit like this can destroy the brand.
It's a new phenomenon and there's not enough data, but it's a sign that the management is rotten and the company is going to suffer in the future.

>>12445935
Simplest way to answer the question is flip the genders and flip the races and see what you get.

> Women need to step being so feminine and gossiping, back stabbing and complaining all the time. In a tone where all women should be expected to collectively police each other of toxic femininity.

It would actually be a pretty funny ad. But it would be sexist as fuck. The ad would also display white people telling black people to chill out and "that's not cool".

It would be hilariously racist actually. Just flip the gender and races and watch it again lol

>>12444058
>Is this reflected over time in their stock price? Does it make sense to short sell companies that stand on a political soapbox and anger 50% or more of their consumer base?

It might m,atter more at a company that does something that involves some degree of skill. Making razors and shaving cream is kinda Walmart tier. A shit company like this can operate on a pretty low IQ...

>>12446495
yep, this is something that happens very slowly. For example when Mozilla fired their CEO, it seemed obvious that this company was rotten to the core but on the outside nothing seemed to be so different. This was in 2013. Only now 6 years later do we see that they consistently made stupid, bad decisions and it cannot possibly be a coincidence.

>>12446007
>Literally why?

Because everyone male is a toxic male and we all have the responsibility to collectively police each other.

Its now my job to police guys that girls are actually attracted to? Like, go fuck yourselves. I cant even do that anyway kek

>>12446007
manwhores are not "alpha" you brainwashed loser

>>12447215
>manwhores are not "alpha" you brainwashed loser

Cant be a manwhore if you arent getting fucked by every stacey you meet. In a way this entire ad is a shit test.

>>12444058
Modern economy is characterized by the attention economy. There are all these brands and options for the consumer, and the companies are competing against each other for the attention of the consumers.

Gillette is getting a lot of attention because of the commercial..

I think gillette is too small for p&g to drop.
They have oral-b, pampers, swiffer, always, etc.

>>12446215
Shhh they think saying incel or virgin effects us, not knowing how useless the insult is if it doesn't apply to you.

>>12444104
Wrong. These type of ads were created because someone with an agenda wormed their way into a seat of power and then used their power over the product they represent to push a propaganda piece.

>>12447222
sex doesnt make you an alpha beyond getting it from 1 woman. Who is more alpha, the guy who fucked 200 women and has 1 kid at age 80 or the guy who fucked 1 woman and has 10 kids and stayed married to her for his entire life.
What is alpha and what isnt is a moral decision on what is right and correct behavior. If you think being a worthless manwhore that wastes his time to ruin random women is alpha then that shows what your morality is.

>>12447349
>sex doesnt make you an alpha beyond getting it from 1 woman.

Women are only going to have sex with guys who have alpha traits. Betas are consistently unattractive. You can argue about this all you want but if you disagree with the above statement you are either uneducated or dishonest.

So which is it? Uneducated or dishonest?

> Who is more alpha, the guy who fucked 200 women and has 1 kid at age 80 or the guy who fucked 1 woman and has 10 kids and stayed married to her for his entire life.

Irrelevant, only talking about who is most attractive. OBVIOUSLY its the guy who sleeps with 200 girls. How he uses that power is up to him as an individual.

> What is alpha and what isnt is a moral decision on what is right and correct behavior. If you think being a worthless manwhore that wastes his time to ruin random women is alpha then that shows what your morality is.

Alpha traits vs what you believe an alpha should be is two different arguments. The guy fucking 200 women has some alpha traits. If you say otherwise you are uneducated or dishonest.

So which is it? Uneducated or dishonest?

>>12447349
>Who is more alpha, the guy who fucked 200 women and has 1 kid at age 80 or the guy who fucked 1 woman and has 10 kids and stayed married to her for his entire life.

To throw you a bone I agree with this sentiment entirely. But it does not match with reality. The guys who the ad is intending to police are the males that usually get more women.

>>12444058

OY VEY! TAKE THIS DOWN!

>>12447349
On that note the best people to police men is unironically women. And the way to do this is to make it clear the more pushy and aggressive guys are less attractive.

Good luck with that though. IMO beta males have to lose on this front. Its important for society that weak men are flushed out. If your society is filled with weak men then another society will crush them and take everything for themselves.

>>12447429
>>12447394
>>12447385
you are all talking from a point of view that the world endorses. All your words are defined as the world defines it for you and you just keep using them. Attractive to women is whatever a man tells them and forces on them.
The only reason we have a society at all is because real, actual alphas decided to force women to mate with physically lower quality males that are intellectually higher quality.
You talk only from a physical point of view and as if women are the arbiters of absolute truth. Spoken like a true beta, ironically.

>>12447532
>All your words are defined as the world defines it for you and you just keep using them.

Western society as a whole

> Attractive to women is whatever a man tells them and forces on them.

Objectively false
So which is it? Uneducated or dishonest?

> The only reason we have a society at all is because real, actual alphas decided to force women to mate with physically lower quality males that are intellectually higher quality.

Nope its because men who worked harder got more money and resources and attracted the best mates.

> You talk only from a physical point of view and as if women are the arbiters of absolute truth. Spoken like a true beta, ironically.

I can see why you needed to lash out at me like that because someone suffering from your form of mental illness is desperately in need of confidence behind your thoughts. Due to the fact that even you don't ACTUALLY believe the bullshit you are spewing your only option is to try and explain how I am a beta. The only reason you would attempt this is to try and scorn me from talking further.

The actual reality is that women are the gate keepers of sex. Men have to be aggressive to both attract women and force other men out of the dating pool. If women changed what they found attractive it would instantly disarm aggressive men. Unfortunately this would be a net bad for society.

People like you think that everyone is your friends and the only reason for competition is the evil patriarchy. In reality very few people care about you and many of them would gut you like a fish just to get your credit card information or identity for a quick buck. Ultimately speaking.

We don't celebrate humanity enough during these trying times. And the only way to modify the playing field is trans humanism and genetic engineering. Your idea to modify the playing field through lies and deceit simply bolsters my point further. You are a cancerous growth who is pushing anti human rhetoric based on a false promise.

>>12447397

shocker

>>12447532
I strongely view you and people of your cloth to be the most hateful and destructive people alive. You are pushing bad ideas for bad reasons with the hope that things can be better. In reality we need strong men, we need strong women, we need strong ideas and we need to push technology and advancement further and further with very little focus on those who wish to do anything else.

Everything you want to change cannot be changed through conventional methods. Post modernism can only be properly achieved through high technological lense. I expect people like you to be flushed out as you spent too much time examining the past with little regard to the future.

Cryptocurrency is going to crush your stupid fucking short sighted ideology for example. AI and robotics will crush your stupid fucking short sighted ideology as well. 3d printing will crush your stupid fucking short sighted ideology. A decentralized technocracy can take root without even the slightest permission of the bourgeoisie bringing unfettered meritocracy and immutable truths.

Its nice to be on the winning side though. Maybe you need to stop being such a loser and advance to a higher plain. Its already over.

>>12445847

It tanked because of the market conditions. Nike had a great fourth quarter. Its simple:

>niggers buy $300 sneakers and whites dont
>niggers love being pandered to with Kapernick and wewuzzing

Its the same exact strategy disney did with black panther and it works.

>>12444248
Seems like a dumb idea. How about the correlation between Gillette and online razor companies? One look at that and you see the brand fucked itself a long time ago. How about taking a look at p&gs massive brand portfolio and understanding that this isn't some dumb social media platform? Get out of here with your sjw bullshit. Yall are just as bad as the pussies on the left.

Fucking idiots. This isn’t a conversation about the underlying politics. This is s conversation about whether corporate activist ad campaigns signify enough alienation from market share to make a revenue difference or a management team who is making OTHER foolish decisions.

I don’t think P&G’s stock price is sufficiently exposed to gillette’s revenue to make a large enough price difference to short. In this instance it’s a bad idea. Corporate activism, however, is likely a strong indicator of other poor business decisions being made in the medium to long term.

>>12447905
>>12447710
>>12447654
>>12447532
>>12447429
>>12447394
>>12447385
>>12447349
>>12447260
Take this garbage to /pol/ or r9k. This is not a conversation about trading.

>>12447238
>>12447285
This is where I land as well. It’s indicative of business decisions focused on reasons other than business. It also likely won’t have a huge effect on P&G since they own so many brands.

>>12444138
>hurr durr I will never buy from them again
Just fuck off with this marketing campaign to somewhere else. God I wish advertising got outlawed.

>>12447905
If you think this "controversy" was not intentional you 100% drank the koolaid.

>>12447397
wrong company dumbass

>>12444218
>muh NFL is dying narrative
kek
https://theeagleswire.usatoday.com/2019/01/07/eagles-bears-highest-rated-wild-card-game-on-nbc-in-25-years/

>>12444069
In vidya game industry: EA, Ubisoft and Blizzard/Activision all suffered enormously.

>>12444104
Cuck.

>>12448632
Only after they put a stop to protests for long enough did they recover.

>>12448339
>This is s conversation about whether corporate activist ad campaigns signify enough alienation from market share to make a revenue difference or a management team who is making OTHER foolish decisions.

The answer is obviously yes. It moved on from there awhile back.