Gillette | Toxic masculinity advert.

Silentcorner

meeeeh wrote: »

No their growth is in decline... Now you are misreading the titles of articles.

You are correct...my apologies...why I posted is that if it's growth has slowed it's hardly affecting hollywood in the same way it was last year.

meeeeh

Silentcorner wrote: »

You are correct...my apologies...why I posted is that if it's growth has slowed it's hardly affecting hollywood in the same way it was last year.

This is too stupid to argue. You didn't even read the article you posted as a proof and you would realise it's negating just about any conclusion you made. There is no point to continue.

Silentcorner

meeeeh wrote: »

This is too stupid to argue. You didn't even read the article you posted as a proof and you would realise it's negating just about any conclusion you made. There is no point to continue.

You're quiet the charmer...Hollywood is down this year by over a billion dollars, it is difficult to see how it can reverse the trend, it has had a few tough years (apart from last year)...it ain't because of Netflix, which has been around now for some time...it is a lack of origional blockbusters, it has abandoned creativity...it is depending on rehashing old movies and dragging the life out of comic book hero movies.

It seems that the complete lack of creativity is affecting a number of industries, it has just cost Gillette the bones of $8 billion dollars.

Calhoun

Silentcorner wrote: »

Well...it turns out, that may not be strictly true.

Proctor and Gamble have written down the value of Gillette to the tune of €8 billion dollars.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gillette-ceo-8-billion-loss-is-price-worth-paying-over-metoo-campaign

Now, it would be remiss to blame the advert released last January...they have been losing market share over the last number of years, but it is clear the battle is now well and truly lost...like was predicted back in January, this will go down as one of the biggest marketing f##k ups of all time!

I'd say this write down is only the beginning of the pain, sales have clearly decreased and will not be won back, Gillette are looking at massive job losses and huge drop in revenue.

What is incredible is that according to the CEO, the ad was the least provocative than other versions of the ad....they must have filmed footage of a man raping a woman or some such!!!

The Feminism/Diversity agenda is not proving to be the profitable avenue to increased revenue it was thought to be...quiet the opposite in fact!

What i find very funny is he is all like "its a price worth paying", meanwhile the investors are like :mad::mad::mad::mad:.

I can guarantee you that Gillette are not actually happy about losing this value

The woke agenda where it is basically a cynical play for profits and offends majority of their customer base fails. There is a market for diversity its just Gillette got greedy and assumed that all of their customers felt the same way.

Additionally when you are going for the diversity play, celebrating strengths in other demographics rather than attacking is the better way to do it. All this ad was saying was white men = bad, non-white men & women = good.

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote: »

The woke agenda where it is basically a cynical play for profits

You mean capitalist advertising? Crikey, next thing you’re going to tell me that everyone in the McDonalds ad isn’t, in fact, ba-da-ba-da-ba, loving it.

Look, it was an ad that didn’t flatter you and you didn’t like it. It’s not half as big a deal as all that.

As you said, it was miscalculated and it may have contributed to the already declining market share. Not that big a deal.

Silentcorner

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

You mean capitalist advertising? Crikey, next thing you’re going to tell me that everyone in the McDonalds ad isn’t, in fact, ba-da-ba-da-ba, loving it.

Look, it was an ad that didn’t flatter you and you didn’t like it. It’s not half as big a deal as all that.

As you said, it was miscalculated and it may have contributed to the already declining market share. Not that big a deal.

Ha ha haaaa..no big deal...for some reason this Simpsons episode springs to mind

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMleW92DsA8

The ad had the creativity and subtly you'd expect from a first year gender studies student....you know, the type of person you would't trust with a $57 billion dollar global master brand!!!...sorry...a €49 billion dollar brand!

Do you honestly think this will go unnoticed by industry figures/CEO's?

Calhoun

It's no big deal to us the consumer, did I stop purchasing Gillette? Yes but was i super annoyed ? Not really no, all this ad did was have me relook at my purchasing habits.

I just switched vendor because I didn't want to spend money on a company that showed such disdain for it's customer base but then I found out that there are allot better alternatives out there.

It is as you say a big deal to the board as duderino rightfully calls out this is a capitalist play and it backfired spectacularly for them.

El_Duderino 09

Silentcorner wrote: »

Ha ha haaaa..no big deal...for some reason this Simpsons episode springs to mind

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMleW92DsA8

The ad had the creativity and subtly you'd expect from a first year gender studies student....you know, the type of person you would't trust with a $57 billion dollar global master brand!!!...sorry...a €49 billion dollar brand!

Do you honestly think this will go unnoticed by industry figures/CEO's?

I’m not an industry figure/CEO and it’s not a big deal to me. Are you?

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote: »

It's no big deal to us the consumer, did I stop purchasing Gillette? Yes but was i super annoyed ? Not really no, all this ad did was have me relook at my purchasing habits.

I just switched vendor because I didn't want to spend money on a company that showed such disdain for it's customer base but then I found out that there are allot better alternatives out there.

It is as you say a big deal to the board as duderino rightfully calls out this is a capitalist play and it backfired spectacularly for them.

Exactly. I don’t expect VW, or Oral-B or or Next or Apple or Tesco to care about me or anyone else. The mere suggestion that someone would be disappointed to find out that a company is really only interested in profits, suggests that they didn’t know the companies were only interested in themselves.

Do some people think companies like Gillette or Wilkinson sword are actually worried about the people they sell to rather than the money they make?

Silentcorner

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’m not an industry figure/CEO and it’s not a big deal to me. Are you?

.....right....we don't need to be Industry figure's or CEOs to recognise that a potential loss of approx $15 billion dollars is a major major big deal.

Unless you think these kinds of things happen all the time...in which case you'd have examples!

take everything

Not a big deal?
Surely an 8 billion loss is a big deal.
To shareholders.
To all the people who are inevitably going to lose their jobs.
As a salutary example that getting woke (at least done clumsily) is something that needs to be done discerningly, not insultingly or you will go broke.
And a big deal to the huge number of customers who were Insulted and left them.

How in any way is it not a big deal.

ILoveYourVibes

Its nothing to do with the ad. Beards and particularly unkept beards are in.


Gilette invested in the wrong campaign.

They should have invested in the fashion industry and driving the image in magazines towards a more clean cut elegant shaven image.

They should have thrown money at vogue male celebs etc.



Funnily enough the beardies tend to support metoo. They are not the ones buying razors though.

You have to know your market.

El_Duderino 09

Silentcorner wrote: »

.....right....we don't need to be Industry figure's or CEOs to recognise that a potential loss of approx $15 billion dollars is a major major big deal.

Unless you think these kinds of things happen all the time...in which case you'd have examples!

Oh from a business point of view, sure. It's a big deal. But businesses rise and fall all the time without you or I passing much comment.

Anyway, I was referring to the advert.

py2006

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Funnily enough the beardies tend to support metoo.

What an odd thing to say.

givyjoe

py2006 wrote: »

What an odd thing to say.

Par for the course to be fair.

Augme

Calhoun wrote: »

Do you honestly think this will go unnoticed by industry figures/CEO's?

If you are a good CEO then you shouldn't really be paying attention to this. Or if anything it should just reinforce the importance of knowing who buys your products.

Autecher

Calhoun wrote: »

It's no big deal to us the consumer, did I stop purchasing Gillette? Yes but was i super annoyed ? Not really no, all this ad did was have me relook at my purchasing habits.

I just switched vendor because I didn't want to spend money on a company that showed such disdain for it's customer base but then I found out that there are allot better alternatives out there.

It is as you say a big deal to the board as duderino rightfully calls out this is a capitalist play and it backfired spectacularly for them.

Off topic I know but what brand did you switch to Calhoun? Every now and then I try a new brand but they are never as good even though I don’t think Gillette are that good either.

TimeToShine

Autecher wrote: »

Off topic I know but what brand did you switch to Calhoun? Every now and then I try a new brand but they are never as good even though I don’t think Gillette are that good either.

Hate to be "that guy" but a 30 quid safety razor and 100 blades for under a tenner will have you sorted for a year or more. I switched about 6 months ago and I'd never go back.

Wibbs

Jez Quigly wrote: »

Gillette ceo: 'ok you stupid incels, you've had your fun, now STOP BOYCOTTING US!!'

I thought incels don't need to shave yet?

Silentcorner

TimeToShine wrote: »

Hate to be "that guy" but a 30 quid safety razor and 100 blades for under a tenner will have you sorted for a year or more. I switched about 6 months ago and I'd never go back.

I did the same...it takes a little bit longer in the mornings but you get a far superior shave I should have done it years ago it's a nice relaxing little ritual!

Autecher

TimeToShine wrote: »

Hate to be "that guy" but a 30 quid safety razor and 100 blades for under a tenner will have you sorted for a year or more. I switched about 6 months ago and I'd never go back.

I just had a look there and they have a great reputation, I'll order one tomorrow.
I don't know what you meant by "that guy" but I am a grateful guy.


Thanks TimeToShine!

Sharp MZ700

Silentcorner wrote: »

I did the same...it takes a little bit longer in the mornings but you get a far superior shave I should have done it years ago it's a nice relaxing little ritual!

Ditto, changed from a Mach 3 man to wet shave. Like you say, far more relaxing and rewarding and a real saving. Delighted to see them suffer.

Calhoun

Augme wrote: »

If you are a good CEO then you shouldn't really be paying attention to this. Or if anything it should just reinforce the importance of knowing who buys your products.

What is a good CEO? What we may think it is and what it actually is are two different things.

First and foremost the company needs to be making money but not just healthy profits but all the money. Look at the CEO of activision blizzard, last year they had one of their best years ever but they **** canned allot of good people to be seen to be keeping the company on the straight and narrow but also because they knew this year would be a big decline and wanted to be seen to doing something.

Generally i believe that Gillette was in free fall anyway due to the price point they come in at. The tried to dial into the diversity play, maybe as a last ditch effort to boost numbers but it has further alienated them from their customers.

The article above where he says he is ok with the backlash is a smokescreen and trying to gain positive PR but i think he forgets the market nor investors look on things like this favorably.

I would now expect restructuring of its business and more than likely some big layoffs.

Calhoun

Autecher wrote: »

Off topic I know but what brand did you switch to Calhoun? Every now and then I try a new brand but they are never as good even though I don’t think Gillette are that good either.

Pretty much the below, however i would check out the gentlemens club forum there are allot of recommendations.

I shave differently from allot i assume as i dont grow facial hair too fast.

TimeToShine wrote: »

Hate to be "that guy" but a 30 quid safety razor and 100 blades for under a tenner will have you sorted for a year or more. I switched about 6 months ago and I'd never go back.

Augme

Calhoun wrote: »

Augme wrote: »

If you are a good CEO then you shouldn't really be paying attention to this. Or if anything it should just reinforce the importance of knowing who buys your products.

What is a good CEO? What we may think it is and what it actually is are two different things.

First and foremost the company needs to be making money but not just healthy profits but all the money. Look at the CEO of activision blizzard, last year they had one of their best years ever but they **** canned allot of good people to be seen to be keeping the company on the straight and narrow but also because they knew this year would be a big decline and wanted to be seen to doing something.

Generally i believe that Gillette was in free fall anyway due to the price point they come in at. The tried to dial into the diversity play, maybe as a last ditch effort to boost numbers but it has further alienated them from their customers.

The article above where he says he is ok with the backlash is a smokescreen and trying to gain positive PR but i think he forgets the market nor investors look on things like this favorably.

I would now expect restructuring of its business and more than likely some big layoffs.

As you say a good CEO needs to be making money. Ultimately thats what makes a good CEO in the eyes of investors.

I agree it was a last ditch effort but they went the wrong way. They should have done the opposite and buck the trend. Played on the importance of masculinity and being a man because those are the people who buy their products. There are lots of CEOs and business were an ad like the one gillet did would be work perfectly and fit with target market.

CEO would be foolish to take this as a sign that they shouldn't play the diversity angle. It's still very much an important and essential marketing tool for a lot of companies.

Calhoun

Augme wrote: »

As you say a good CEO needs to be making money. Ultimately thats what makes a good CEO in the eyes of investors.

I agree it was a last ditch effort but they went the wrong way. They should have done the opposite and buck the trend. Played on the importance of masculinity and being a man because those are the people who buy their products. There are lots of CEOs and business were an ad like the one gillet did would be work perfectly and fit with target market.

CEO would be foolish to take this as a sign that they shouldn't play the diversity angle. It's still very much an important and essential marketing tool for a lot of companies.

Agreed with you completely and as as Duderino was saying quite rightly people need to understand that companies and CEO's don't care about them.

The lesson for any CEO is that you need to be very nuanced in how you do it, a company like P&G who have a fairly bad track record dont just turn into people concerned about doing the right thing.

Zorya

This is a beautiful advertisement.
https://youtu.be/KT-QiMZkAn8

(Cant embed, on phone.)

Maybe peak preaching has been reached?

El_Duderino 09

Zorya wrote: »

This is a beautiful advertisement.
https://youtu.be/KT-QiMZkAn8

(Cant embed, on phone.)

Maybe peak preaching has been reached?

At this stage when the big brave bucks posting in all these threads get so easily upset, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

I saw this ad on TV the other night and thought it was good. Great advertisement for such an serious issue.

Have you been upset by this ad or not? Is this the standard of flattery that needs to be achieved to balm the bruised ego of some men?

Calhoun

I think its an excellent ad and done right, looks to build people up and focus on the positive traits we want people to display.

El_Duderino 09

Calhoun wrote: »

I think its an excellent ad and done right, looks to build people up and focus on the positive traits we want people to display.

Just to make sure you know, this was an ad for a men's health charity. It wasn't an ad for masculinity.