Anheuser-Busch points the finger
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:15 last edited by
Blames and fires their marketing agency for the Mulvaney stuff.
It’s a little silly since AB would have to approve any ad and any sponsorship agreement.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:19 last edited by
Yep. A controversial campaign like that had to be approved at the highest levels.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:22 last edited by
@Mik said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
A controversial campaign
Maybe, just maybe, they didn't consider it controversial?
And that says a lot.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:36 last edited by
Yep.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:36 last edited by
Now, what message does this send to other businesses?
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:37 last edited by
I will probably never understand what the top level management understands, but what I do understand, the top level management never understands. I can easily believe the top level management never knew of this single beer can created in Mulvaney's image.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:41 last edited by
@Jolly said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
Now, what message does this send to other businesses?
They are all thinking about it heavily, and sending internal memos.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:41 last edited by
If that's the case, it's plausible deniability.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 12:45 last edited by
@Mik said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
If that's the case, it's plausible deniability.
They hired some ideologically captured and culturally relevant people, and trusted them to do their jobs. I can totally see this detail getting missed. It's plausible.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 20:51 last edited by
It's a thing. And it's spreading.
-
wrote on 8 May 2023, 21:26 last edited by
A lifetime ago, I was involved with an organization that decided it was going to take a stand one of those 3rd rail issues. They worded their support in a way that they thought the world at large would accept. I was responsible for membership and was asked what impact I thought it would have on membership. I said, "we'll likely lose between 3,000 and 10,000 members." A 3,000 member loss would be about a million dollars. They went ahead with the policy and immediately lost 3,000 members. I was actually pleased that it was only 3,000 members. BUT - being geniuses, they were SHOCKED!! And consequently, they decided to retract the policy - meaning that they now would lose more members who actually supported the policy.
If you run someone over, have the courtesy not to back over the body.
-
wrote on 9 May 2023, 01:29 last edited by Mik 5 Sept 2023, 12:10
So they had no commitment one way or the other.
-
I will probably never understand what the top level management understands, but what I do understand, the top level management never understands. I can easily believe the top level management never knew of this single beer can created in Mulvaney's image.
wrote on 9 May 2023, 11:16 last edited by taiwan_girl 5 Sept 2023, 11:16@Horace said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
I will probably never understand what the top level management understands, but what I do understand, the top level management never understands.
555 Very wise (and very true) words. I agree.
-
A lifetime ago, I was involved with an organization that decided it was going to take a stand one of those 3rd rail issues. They worded their support in a way that they thought the world at large would accept. I was responsible for membership and was asked what impact I thought it would have on membership. I said, "we'll likely lose between 3,000 and 10,000 members." A 3,000 member loss would be about a million dollars. They went ahead with the policy and immediately lost 3,000 members. I was actually pleased that it was only 3,000 members. BUT - being geniuses, they were SHOCKED!! And consequently, they decided to retract the policy - meaning that they now would lose more members who actually supported the policy.
If you run someone over, have the courtesy not to back over the body.
-
Blames and fires their marketing agency for the Mulvaney stuff.
It’s a little silly since AB would have to approve any ad and any sponsorship agreement.
wrote on 10 May 2023, 12:57 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
Blames and fires their marketing agency for the Mulvaney stuff.
It’s a little silly since AB would have to approve any ad and any sponsorship agreement.
That's the move, though. That's just how they do it.
-
wrote on 10 May 2023, 13:12 last edited by
Well, it’s not working. The sales decline is increasing aaaaaand is spreading to other AB brands…
https://nypost.com/2023/05/09/bud-lights-sales-drop-is-accelerating-amid-dylan-mulvaney-fiasco/
-
Well, it’s not working. The sales decline is increasing aaaaaand is spreading to other AB brands…
https://nypost.com/2023/05/09/bud-lights-sales-drop-is-accelerating-amid-dylan-mulvaney-fiasco/
wrote on 10 May 2023, 13:21 last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
Well, it’s not working.
It's working perfectly. They don't fire the agency to make customers come back. They fire the agency so that C-levels have scapegoats. And agencies know full well that's part of their job, this shit is just how they do things.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
Well, it’s not working.
It's working perfectly. They don't fire the agency to make customers come back. They fire the agency so that C-levels have scapegoats. And agencies know full well that's part of their job, this shit is just how they do things.
wrote on 10 May 2023, 14:24 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
@LuFins-Dad said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
Well, it’s not working.
It's working perfectly. They don't fire the agency to make customers come back. They fire the agency so that C-levels have scapegoats. And agencies know full well that's part of their job, this shit is just how they do things.
At what point do the C-levels start to sweat?
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
@LuFins-Dad said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
Well, it’s not working.
It's working perfectly. They don't fire the agency to make customers come back. They fire the agency so that C-levels have scapegoats. And agencies know full well that's part of their job, this shit is just how they do things.
At what point do the C-levels start to sweat?
wrote on 10 May 2023, 14:27 last edited by@Jolly said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
@LuFins-Dad said in Anheuser-Busch points the finger:
Well, it’s not working.
It's working perfectly. They don't fire the agency to make customers come back. They fire the agency so that C-levels have scapegoats. And agencies know full well that's part of their job, this shit is just how they do things.
At what point do the C-levels start to sweat?
Eh, depends. Some of 'em might just jump ship.
Those folks move around quite a bit.The ones committed, though, are probably sweating plenty. I'm just saying the agency firing is standard practice and I doubt they were expecting it'd turn around their numbers.
-
wrote on 10 May 2023, 16:18 last edited by
And while the stock had recouped the drop a month ago, it’s fallen off a cliff this week.