Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just read the CEO only makes $1M per year. If they want to cheap out on exec pay, they will get bargain basement results.
That said, I'm conservative and truly do not understand what is "woke" about the rebrand.
Plenty of us would do the job for a million donate a year, and much better than she is. They should have started by picking someone who actually understood (and was a customer of) the brand, not just blindly picking someone because they help to achieve some DEI goal.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Go woke, go broke. Sometimes it really is that simple. Another example of how to alienate your customer base, without having a new target customer base.
They should start giving out annual “Bud Light” awards to companies that have large marketing blunders like this.
These companies are run by people who do not use the product and loathe the people who do. They are brainstorming about how to make the brand attractive to the type of people they would socialize with. If they destroy the brand in the process, oh well...there's always a golden parachute and a new C-suite job handed to them on a platter.
100% this.
They’d be better off just creating a different company.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Go woke, go broke. Sometimes it really is that simple. Another example of how to alienate your customer base, without having a new target customer base.
They should start giving out annual “Bud Light” awards to companies that have large marketing blunders like this.
These companies are run by people who do not use the product and loathe the people who do. They are brainstorming about how to make the brand attractive to the type of people they would socialize with. If they destroy the brand in the process, oh well...there's always a golden parachute and a new C-suite job handed to them on a platter.
Anonymous wrote:I just read the CEO only makes $1M per year. If they want to cheap out on exec pay, they will get bargain basement results.
That said, I'm conservative and truly do not understand what is "woke" about the rebrand.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just read the CEO only makes $1M per year. If they want to cheap out on exec pay, they will get bargain basement results.
That said, I'm conservative and truly do not understand what is "woke" about the rebrand.
It's not woke, but I do think utterly boring and bland.
Anonymous wrote:I just read the CEO only makes $1M per year. If they want to cheap out on exec pay, they will get bargain basement results.
That said, I'm conservative and truly do not understand what is "woke" about the rebrand.
Anonymous wrote:I thought this was the new conservative approach, scrubbing people out of history and logos and removing words like “black” and “female” from DoD websites so we can pretend that everyone has an equal shake and all the “isms” are solved. Now suddenly when the old white guy is erased, it’s a problem?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the party that never cancels anything wants to cancel Cracker Barrel why?
because of the design? I don't understand it. I thought they never got offended.
DISTRACTION FROM EPSTEIN FILES!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:sorry meant CB-Zone
CB-Zone sounds like it’s meant to appeal to truckers, although most millenials probably haven’t ever heard of CB radios. Are they even still used by truckers?
10-4 Good Buddy, over and out
Anonymous wrote:Christ, people. I know change is hard but, dang. IT'S a crappy restaurant's logo and there is nothing "woke" about it-before or after.
Get over it.
Anonymous wrote:sorry meant CB-Zone