Threatening to not buy something you're already not buying is not a boycott.
If you're not a customer already, then refusing to become one has nearly zero effect on a company's bottom line.
My "boycott" of the NFL had no effect on them because I boycotted them before the kneeling bullshit.
Hogg's boycott of S&W will have the same effect.
He wasn't going to be buying anything S&W makes, ever, so who cares?
The big difference between my boycott and his? I know what effect I'm having.
26 August 2018
2 comments:
You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.
Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.
If you're trying to comment anonymously: You can't. Log into your Google account.
If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Out of all the gun companies in the US, they choose S&W, the ones that paid dearly for sucking up to Gun Control.
ReplyDeleteThe boy is not burdened with an overabundance of schooling, is he?
This is actually a good thing. Remember, the purpose of punishment is correction. Smith & Wesson caved to the gun grabbers and were punished for it, now they have a chance to show they've learned from the experience.
ReplyDelete