3 ms·

From their VP of marketing... > Bud Light had been kind of a brand of fratty, kind of out-of-touch humor, and it was really important that we had another appro

From their VP of marketing... > Bud Light had been kind of a brand of fratty, kind of out-of-touch humor, and it was really important that we had another approach Two things: frats buy a lot of beer, so sneering at frats is essentially sneering at the customer. Also, there's a good chance the average person who buys a lot of beer skews a certain political way. Or at least, if that wasn't the case this fiasco wouldn't have put such a dent in their market share

afavour 2y ago
> there's a good chance the average person who buys a lot of beer skews a certain political way There really isn’t! In fact I can think of few drinks more universal among men than beer. You note in the quote provided the VP said “another”, not “a replacement”. They were trying to appeal to a new market alongside their existing one. They underestimated the culture war outrage that would provoke but that outrage wasn’t actually based on anything real. The product remains the same, the price remains the same. Unlike in the article we’re discussing.
- matrix87 2y ago
  > but that outrage wasn’t actually based on anything real What? This is marketing, if the customer stops buying, nobody gives a flying fuck if it's "real". You think the VP's boss or the shareholders cared if it was "real"? If your job is to sell beer, and you're selling less beer, that's about as real as it gets in this context
  - afavour 2y ago
    I was saying “real” as a comparison to the article this thread inspired. If you change the price of your product there is a “real” difference: your product now hits your customers wallet differently. It’ll change your position in the market when compared to your competitors. Same when a product starts using cheaper ingredients, you ruin the taste, yadda yadda. The difference here is that the Bud Light product hasn’t changed one iota. You’re right that the sales figures are real but the outrage was an entirely manufactured thing.
    - kelipso 2y ago
      The feeling you get when you drink a particular beer is very real I would say. All of those light beers are basically the same and the reason advertising exists is to make you like that particular brand. You wouldn't have all this advertising competition between bud light, coors, pbr whatever without that difference in how the brand is perceived.
    - matrix87 2y ago
      The thing with bud light though, the beer is so bad that they have to compensate for it with some kind of marketing. Pretty sure someone mentioned nike above, the same people boycotting bud light are probably still buying nike. Even though nike is clearly a more socially progressive company (or at least, tries to come off that way). Why? Maybe because their products aren't as mediocre or replaceable

afavour 2y ago

> there's a good chance the average person who buys a lot of beer skews a certain political way There really isn’t! In fact I can think of few drinks more universal among men than beer. You note in the quote provided the VP said “another”, not “a replacement”. They were trying to appeal to a new market alongside their existing one. They underestimated the culture war outrage that would provoke but that outrage wasn’t actually based on anything real. The product remains the same, the price remains the same. Unlike in the article we’re discussing.

matrix87 2y ago
> but that outrage wasn’t actually based on anything real What? This is marketing, if the customer stops buying, nobody gives a flying fuck if it's "real". You think the VP's boss or the shareholders cared if it was "real"? If your job is to sell beer, and you're selling less beer, that's about as real as it gets in this context
- afavour 2y ago
  I was saying “real” as a comparison to the article this thread inspired. If you change the price of your product there is a “real” difference: your product now hits your customers wallet differently. It’ll change your position in the market when compared to your competitors. Same when a product starts using cheaper ingredients, you ruin the taste, yadda yadda. The difference here is that the Bud Light product hasn’t changed one iota. You’re right that the sales figures are real but the outrage was an entirely manufactured thing.
  - kelipso 2y ago
    The feeling you get when you drink a particular beer is very real I would say. All of those light beers are basically the same and the reason advertising exists is to make you like that particular brand. You wouldn't have all this advertising competition between bud light, coors, pbr whatever without that difference in how the brand is perceived.
  - matrix87 2y ago
    The thing with bud light though, the beer is so bad that they have to compensate for it with some kind of marketing. Pretty sure someone mentioned nike above, the same people boycotting bud light are probably still buying nike. Even though nike is clearly a more socially progressive company (or at least, tries to come off that way). Why? Maybe because their products aren't as mediocre or replaceable