August 4, 2019
Gillette CEO and president Gary Coombe
Because losing billions to defend dick-chopping and soy is just their values and who they are.
Gillette CEO and president Gary Coombe is defending the $8 billion write-down Procter & Gamble experienced last quarter related to his brand, saying in a recent interview that it was “worth paying” and that he doesn’t mind alienating some customers.
Coombe told Marketing Week that the loss was “a price worth paying” as the 188-year-old maker of razors, blades and other grooming products contends with dwindling sales.
“It was pretty stark. We were losing share, we were losing awareness and penetration, and something had to be done,” Coombe said. He said Gillette decided to “take a chance in an emotionally-charged way.”
Gillette debuted a commercial in January that not only spotlighted the #MeToo movement but attacked traditional masculinity. In a series of scenes, the commercial depicted men and boys engaging in sexual harassment, bullying and workplace condescension towards women.
“Is this the best a man can get?” the commercial asked, inverting Gillette’s famous tagline “the best a man can get.”
Another ad debuted in May showing a transgender male youth learning how to shave. Gillette also attacked traditional feminine beauty in ads for its Venus razors for women, featuring obese and transexual models.
The commercials received widespread pushback on social media. Coombe told Marketing Week that the backlash was more intense than he expected, but that he doesn’t regret running them.
“I don’t enjoy that some people were offended by the film and upset at the brand as a consequence. That’s not nice and goes against every ounce of training I’ve had in this industry over a third of a century,” he said.
“But I am absolutely of the view now that for the majority of people to fall more deeply in love with today’s brands you have to risk upsetting a small minority and that’s what we’ve done.”
No “small minority” would be responsible for $8 billion in losses. But I guess that loss is just a coincidence.
Anyone with any sense of business or plain common sense would have told them that attacking their biggest audience while glorifying a tiny fraction of freaks would be bad for business.
Trannies and faggots and feminists are very vocal but just don’t have the numbers to out-pay “traditionally feminine” women and “traditionally masculine” men. They can out-scream them though, which may result in people getting the impression that everyone’s a tranny.
But that’s not what happened here. Companies research this stuff, they make informed decisions. Gillette just didn’t care about profits.
The goal is not to make the most profit. It never was. That was just how the Jews sold Jewish Capitalism to the masses.
Why would their goal be to earn the most magic paper if they are the ones behind the creation of the magic paper in the first place?
Banks can push some computer buttons and add zeroes to any account. The goal is not to add more zeroes, the goal is always manipulation, brainwashing, control and genocide.
Money is just a tool mostly aimed at keeping the goyim distracted and subservient.
The meme is real.
Bonus Anglin Comment
In a recent piece about Disney’s upcoming round of totally woke Marvel movies, I mused about how it is not clear whether getting woke actually does make you go broke, given that Black Panther and Captain Marvel both did very well in the theaters.
But this Gillette situation is a strike in the “yes, getting woke does make you go broke” column. It’s not the end of the discussion, but it’s a pretty important data point.
I’m honestly a little bit shocked by this. It’s a significant loss for Gillette.
A lot of people were calling for boycotts of the company, but a lot of people were also saying that boycotts don’t do anything and not enough people would do it for it to matter. Well, clearly enough people did it and it did matter. $8 billion is a lot of money.
I personally did it. It was easy enough. I don’t use shitty modern disposable razors, I use an old fashioned safety razor, but I did use Gillette shaving cream. And the last time I bought cream, I just bought Nivea instead. It’s the same thing and it’s sitting right next to the Gillette one, so it was not a hard choice to not support this evil company (getting rid of my favorite Nike running shoes was much harder, but I did it). I just did this on principle, not because I thought it would make a difference. But apparently it does make a difference.
As the man said, he’s not going to stop attacking men and promoting trannies simply because it is costing his company billions of dollars. Because that’s capitalism – a closed market where businesses with enlightened self-interests make decisions based on what is worst for society, no matter how much it costs them.
But it is very likely that not all companies think this way, and that fewer of them will be promoting these things now that it is known to cost them money.