Bud light sales are cratering...along with other A/B beers

That's actually the motive for a very small number of transexual homicides. The majority of transexuals are murdered by domestic partners(who were certainly aware of the trans status of the victims), and during street crime incidences, because trans people tend to be involved in risky lifestyles that expose them to dangerous situations (i.e.- prostitution, drug dealing, etc...)

Despite what the rainbow cult would have you believe, actual "hate crime" homicides of trans people are actually quite rare.

 

I tell that to heterosexual twerking too, no one should be twerking in front of children, and it should not be allowed at school dances

 

Be sure to tell that to your twerking-tranny-loving Democrat leaders.

 

It's still down $17B, or 170 times that.

And I see you too reflexively responded by insulting the former customers. I have no idea who taught you folks about marketing, but you should ask for a refund.

 

And you should ask for a refund from all of your English teachers, or rather, from whoever taught you to express your thoughts, in a logical way-- because what you just wrote, makes no sense. First, I would probably contest your assessment, that I "reflexively responded by insulting the former customers," if you were to explain to what, by that, you are referring. However, regardless, why would you assume that I work for Anheuser Busch marketing? That seems to be your implication: that because I supposedly insult A.-B. customers, I don't know about marketing... As if I am involved with that company's marketing effort. FYI, I am not.

If your post's comments make sense to you, as as a paragraph, would you please explain it to me, by filling in the unvoiced connections, between the ideas which you'd actually written?

 

Looks like the boycott tactics of the butthurt snowflakes is working. I'm a bourbon drinker so makes no difference to me what happens to Bud Light. Although I feel for the working-stiff sales people being hurt by this boycott.

 

Fake news. My thoughts were expressed beautifully the problem here, isn't me.

You inferred from nothing that they were weak willed.

I made no such assumption.

Fake news, that's your faulty inference, I implied no such thing.

I voiced it fine. These folks did something that you don't like, so you insulted them.
This all started with them insulting their customers and, rather than apologizing, they insulted them so more. They have made it clear that they don't really like their former customers, and their former customers have responded rationally, by ending the customer relationship.

Such a reflex is not uncommon on the Left.
Insulting customers is a terrible sales technique.

 

Do you really think Anheuser-Busch cares? They can reap loyalty sales from the other side and put out swill under a new name for MAGA beer bellies.

 

Save money by injecting alcohol. Bud Lite is swill.

 

LOL-- "expressed beautifully;" just like Trump expresses things. BTW, this appears to mean that you are not going to take a stab at explaining how your "beautifully" expressed thoughts, were logically connected?


My view had not been "inferred from nothing:" my statement had been that people who choose what beer to drink, or to stop drinking, based on advertising, are clearly very pliable. The only implication, is that one who knows & trusts his own mind, and does not need to have his every small decision validated, drinks the beer that he likes. Would you care to debate this point?

My taking issue with your mischaracterization, was not with the word "insulting," but with your saying that I had done so "reflexively." To the contrary, that was my considered, clearly thought out, and explained, opinion. Nothing "reflexive," about it-- or did you merely reflexively insert the word "reflexively," to make it sound as if I was taking sides, which my post did not do. I think anyone who lets ads (other than informational ones) control their preferences & actions, is pliable-- whether Democrat or Republican, and regardless of the issue. Do you, by the way, know the meaning of the word "reflexively?"


DEFinning said: ↑
...why would you assume that I work for Anheuser Busch marketing?

Then why would your beautifully expressed reply criticize my marketing skills, if it is not assuming that I am trying to market something. IOW, if you do not assume that I am involved w/ the marketing of Bud Light:

1) You would have no basis upon which to judge my marketing understanding, to be deserving of a refund, from my teachers; and
2) there would be no reason for you to mention anything about "marketing," at least in relation to me, personally, as you had:

Zorro said: ↑
And I see you too reflexively responded by insulting the former customers. I have no idea who taught you folks about marketing, but you should ask for a refund.
<End Quote>


I guess you don't find logic, to be a "beautiful" thing.

 

So, this is how you folks spend your time? Worked up over a truly lousy brew?

 

Is this where you decide which women's rights you'll suspend? You decide when women will give birth?

What trans people need is a matter of opinion. You would force them into treatment?

 

No1 biology does that not me.
No2 I would think that any rational person would think that someone who wants to maim themselves should get counseling.

 

All trans people don't want to harm themselves.

 

I've said my piece.

 

Thise who don;t aren't trans they are pretenders insistant that the rest of us play their stupid games with them which isn't a whole lot better.

 

False. That was your baseless and so, unsurprisingly, completely wrong assumption. I gave my honest opinion on this phenomenon, which I have already explained, and offered you the opportunity to debate (which you declined to accept), if you did not find mine, to be a completely logical view.

While it is very debatable, that who the company chose to sign an endorsement deal with, was their "insulting their customers"-- at least I know what you refer to, by saying that. How, though, are you claiming that Bud Light "insulted them some more?" Your comment had been that you'd felt that I was insulting them. That is why it seemed as if you were mistaking me for a Bud employee.

Again, how has Bud Light "made it clear that they don't really like their former customers?"

As your post shows, "reflexive" assumptions are quite common, coming from the Right, as well. However, there is something wrong with your premise, if you see me as an indiscriminate part, of the single-minded body of "the Left." I was presenting no opinion, other than my own. And you cannot find any evidence, to suggest that this opinion, was in any way a "reflexive" reaction, much less that the reflex was stimulated by some inner necessity of mine, to defend "Leftist" principle or position. The only thing reflexive here, was your accusation against me.

As, I guess I need repeat, I was not attempting to sell Bud Light, to anyone-- indicated, by my saying that I am unimpressed with their product, perhaps? Therefore, the seeming confusion in your statement, about insult being a poor sales technique. This is obvious. Equally obvious, though, is that Bud Light did not intend to insult their customers. So what the hell are you talking about, here? One more time, in case you've already forgotten-- I do not work, for Bud Light.


Just for clarification: my contributing this news item, about Bill Gates' making a bet on Budweiser's recovery, by buying a million shares of Anheuser Busch stock, investing close to $100 million (which was not intended to make the company's losses whole, which you'd pointed out it would not do-- apparently investing is not something you well understand), was only because I thought it was an interesting new wrinkle to the story (which is not an overall story, I find worthy of all the attention that is being paid to it, by the Right).

All, I think, would consider Gates to be an extremely successful businessman. That does not, by any means, imply that he is an expert investor. Personally, I find this a risky gamble of Gates's. I made no prediction, of how it would work out-- hence the ending line of my post, "Only time...will tell." I presume you are familiar with the expression, and that it is used, when an outcome is uncertain?

 

Fake news. You made up a bunch of crap about how they were weak minded, only liked Bud Light because of advertising, and that insulting them meant that they required validations, and you are going to lecture me on baselessness? That like being lectured on how to stay upright by Bribed Joe.

No it didn't. This may come as shock to you, but, you aren't a participant in every story.

More fake news. My premise is flawless. If you insult your customers, they will leave.

 

As your attempts at communication are very muddled, I will leave it at this. From what you actually write, one can only get the impression, that you are counting my own "insulting" of Bud Light drinkers, as my insulting my customers. You fail to supply, as requested, a justification for your statement, that Bud Light had insulted these former customers, "some more." Therefore, since the only, additional insults-- after Bud's contracting with a spokesperson, which is a highly questionable thing to regard as an "insult" to its customers, in the first place-- that you cite, are mine, it only leaves one the conclusion, that you think that I am speaking for the beer maker, even though you claim I have no basis for that assumption.

If you have other reasons, which you have not written, though I should not need explain this to you, we cannot read your mind. We can only go by what you write. So, what were the further insults of Budweiser, against its former customers? (Reminder: if you begin talking about my insulting them, again, this will only reinforce the idea that you take me to be a mouthpiece for Bud Light).

I "made up" nothing. Nor did I state my feelings in the absolutist way you are inaccurately reiterating them. I had said that if any were changing their beer brand, due to advertising, this could be seen as advertising having an undue effect on those people's behavior. This is a rational assessment, not an insult, per se, though people whom I was describing, I don't doubt, might take it as an insult. Nevertheless, as stated many times to you: I am not trying to sell Bud Light, to anyone. So you are conflating your two arguments:
1. against Budweiser, and
2. against me.

As for your claim of my "insulting" attitude: I will re-issue my offer to you, to debate whether my opinion about the pliability of the wills of consumers, who are more concerned with a beer's advertising than its taste, is or is not, a logical conclusion.

Yet again:
1. I, personally, have no beer customers.
2. How, other than Bud Light's initial contracting with Mulvaney-- which was obviosly not intended as an insult-- has the company shown that they "don't like their former customers.

Zorro said: ↑
They have made it clear that they don't really like their former customers, and their former customers have responded rationally, by ending the customer relationship.


Zorro said: ↑
This all started with them insulting their customers and, rather than apologizing, they insulted them so more


Your continued failure to back up your charges, given numerous opportunities to do so, would only prove the bogus nature of your accusations.

 

You have a search bar, the same as I do. If you are actually interested, look it up.

Your attempts at reductionism need a lot more work.

 

LOL. Translation: you can't back up your own argument. That's not the way it works. I don't say, for example "the U.S. has always been a racist nation," and then, if you challenge me to defend that statement, respond, "you have a search bar...look it up."

It seems that I have reduced you, to just one B.S. excuse, after another.

 

So, you can't be trans if you're not suicidal?

 

Fake news. If you want further information, look it up, same as I did.

 

Congratulations! You are this year's recipient of the "lame argument," award!

 

Fake news. I'm not the topic.

Bud Light is the winner for how to lose your customers and not get them back.