The marketing campaign they launched in April 2023 also deteriorated their brand position. It earned them woke coins, but the NPV of all those future woke coins flows was negative.
People on HN are, of course, going to pretend that moving from Michael Jordan to Dylan Mulvaney and whoever that overweight "Own The Floor" lady aren't a huge downgrade. Wearing Nike became kind of embarrassing.
Jaguar implemented a fairly radical change to their product line, getting rid of all their existing cars, and announcing, but not actually releasing, a new car. As a result, they do not currently sell cars (which, ah, explains the drop in sales that the person you're replying to is going on about); they'll release a new car next month. This is a fairly extreme tactic, but honestly maybe better than just waiting to die, as they had previously been doing.
They also made an ad which a lot of the likes of Musk got very pissy about, for reasons I'm not entirely clear on. Some right wing internet weirdos have claimed that Jaguar's reduction in sales is due to the ad, as opposed to the fact that, just to reiterate, you cannot buy a new car from Jaguar today, because they no longer manufacture any of the cars that they used to sell. This is obviously an extremely stupid claim, but then "extremely stupid" is kinda the far-right twitterati's _thing_.
I mean, you say "even Jaguar". Jaguar has essentially been a dead brand walking for well over a decade. They're currently trying a fairly radical reorientation, which, well, hard to see it _working_, but probably beats just shutting it down, which is probably where it was otherwise heading.
You mention sales plummeting. This is, ah, unsurprising; Jaguar currently doesn't really sell cars (they stopped making the old ones late last year, and the new one doesn't launch til next month). This is a company with an obsolete product line which nobody wants dispensing with it in favour of a new product which they think people might want.
Wouldn't the fact that a Black man was their most popular face throughout their successful period negate the idea that it has anything to do with wokeness? I wish people as obtuse as you would take the time to pause and think every once in a while.
Black man who was a TOP ATHLETE! Most Americans are not racist. We are against DEI (putting unqualified people in posh schools/jobs because of their skin color or gender).
Exactly, wokism (at least how it's perceived by the non-ideological) is about representation for the sake of representation. Which doesn't apply when you're using the sport's (arguably) greatest athlete to promote a product, regardless of race.
> Wouldn't the fact that a Black man was their most popular face throughout their successful period negate the idea that it has anything to do with wokeness?
What does that have to do with wokeness? Sounds kind of racist to imply that.
There is a world in which weapons are not needed. It’s just not a world that exists where there are humans.
I for one want my country to have the best weapons that kill the most enemy combatants in the most efficient way with the fewer non combatant casualties and with the less collateral damage.
For a world without weapons, I usually go to the fantasy isle of the bookstore.
Authoritarian presidents (e.g. Erdogan, Putin, Xi Jiping) do it. Democratic presidents follow institutional processes and diligence.
Your argumentation is very much like: "If the Mafia kills people why shouldn't I also be allowed to kill people?"
> Why are people fretting over this change?
Because it is a diversion from the things that really matter: inflation, war, the loss of international standing of the US. You know when you admonish a little boy about something wrong he did and he replies: "Look over there!". Yep, your country is governed by an octogenarian with the brain of a 4 year old boy. And the people that venerate him are equally stupid.
reply