LGBT

PG slices another $8bn off Gillette in 4Q

P&G reported stronger earnings overnight but wrote off another $8bn in 4Q on top of the $6bn in 3Q on the Gillette brand in terms of goodwill and intangibles. Of course management brushed this off as significant devaluations over a decade, lower shaving frequency and new entrants at prices lower than the average. Nothing to do with the toxic masculinity campaign 6 months ago? Get real.

Under grooming, most of the results performance came through the sale of real estate in Boston. Other than that the company reported unfavorable channel mix, volume declines, brand communication investments and currency headwinds. The CFO Jon Moeller said with respect to Gillette,

You’ve got here a business with a very broad global footprint, and particularly with the year that we have just been through, that impacts that value assessment,”

Sorry, what does that even mean? No surprises that grooming was the worst performing division in P&G’s quiver.

Get woke, go broke.

Berkeley to drop gender-specific words from city code

Image result for rigel robinson berkeley

Rigel Robinson, a young councillor in Berkeley, California has said that “words matter“. The city will remove gender-specific language like “manhole” and change it to  “maintenance hole.” In his proposal, the words “policemen” and “policewomen” will also be phased out. “He” and “she” will also get the boot in favour of “they”.

Robinson remarked, “Having a male-centric municipal code is inaccurate and not reflective of our reality…Women and non-binary individuals are just as entitled to accurate representation. Our laws are for everyone, and our municipal code should reflect that.

To think of how many non-binary individuals will be able to overcome these deep traumas and get through the day knowing that the metal covers in the road will be renamed. However, what if a maintenance hole identifies as male? Seems unfair that inanimate objects aren’t respected.

Sadly, the only maintenance required is to fill the vacuous space between Robinson’s ears with things that actually matter to residents, even those liberals in California.

Nivea CEO – “we don’t do gay”

LGBTQ Nation has reported that Nivea CEO rejected a campaign from its ad agency – FCB Global – which involved two men holding hands with the words, “we don’t do gay at Nivea.” This has led to a social media backlash showing offended users binning their products in protest. The laugh is that the advertising agency wants to dictate to the client how it runs its business. Nivea just doesn’t wish to promote “woke.” A choice that it should be entitled to make, just as Nike or Gillette are.

Nobody asked in what context “we don’t do gay” were said? Was it in reaction to the disastrous Gillette (note P&G reports Q4 results on July 30th) campaign on toxic masculinity? Did Nivea merely not want to reference specific minorities where it didn’t feel sufficient market gaps or opportunities would be found or was it a venom filled homophobic tirade? CM is willing to bet it was the former. Some corporations don’t wish to mix politics with product.

Nivea got in hot water in 2017 when it promoted a skin lightening cream in Africa. After much success with such products in Asia (where lighter skin is deemed more beautiful and brands make a fortune selling cosmetics based on this) it tested the African market. Unfortunately it got into hot water despite demand. The skin whitening industry was $10bn in 2009 and expected to grow to over $23bn by 2020.

Should Nivea be bashed for supplying products to a market demand that clearly exists? If Africans wish to lighten their skin, shouldn’t that just be a question for that individual? No one is forcing Africans to use their products. Nicole Amartefio is rightly proud of her skin hue so she can choose, like many others, not to buy into the ‘insecurity.’ If Nivea sales tank, they can blame the marketing department for inadequate due diligence.

Maybe CM should protest the sunscreen market for heightening insecurities over skin cancer because whites have less melanin? Do people realise that sunglasses lower the risk of tanning because the eyes regulate melanin production based off the glare the eyes receive? Why doesn’t Nivea promote the use of sunglasses instead of selling expensive sunscreen?

However this is where the Nivea story gets stupid.

FCB Global has been Nivea’s as agency for over 100 years yet its CEO Carter Murray said it intends to end the relationship with Nivea at the end of the contract.

FCB is within its rights to bin a century of business development but if the client wants to follow a mainstream campaign rather than get woke, surely isn’t it Nivea’s prerogative to do so? Does it require Nivea to meticulously follow the social diktat of its service providers? Who does FCB Global think it is? Why does it seek to throw its client under the bus? So much for respecting a century old client relationship.

LGBTQ Nation argues that one of the agency staff who proposed the campaign was indeed gay himself. Presumably he was offended.

Sadly Nivea felt the need to make an irrelevant statement to defend something completely unnecessary,

We are an international company with more than 20,000 employees with very different genders, ethnicities, orientations, backgrounds and personalities worldwide…Through our products, we touch millions of consumers around the globe every day. We know and cherish  that individuality and diversity in all regards brings inspiration and creativity to our society and to us as a company.”

Do consumers honestly ask themselves how “woke” every brand they buy? It is not dissimilar to ANZ preaching about Maria Folau. Is that in the forefront of the 5 million customers it serves? That is not even taking into account the hypocrisy of a bank which was admonished by the Hayne Royal Commission for unethical behaviour.

If Nivea believe that advertising to the LGBT community is a winner, let it decide because it has far better information than FCB Global about markets, products and segmentation. It shouldn’t feel guilty. Subaru America ran a campaign that targeted the lesbian community. Clearly the brand felt its market position had to differentiate away from the monsters of Toyota and Honda.

Talk about FCB Global cutting off its nose to spite its face. Expect its business to be affected more than Nivea. #GetWokeGoBroke . Interested to see how Gillette’s Q4 trend has been since the disastrous Q3 when P&G reports.

The moral of the story is to let the free market weigh Nivea’s decisions. It hasn’t called for anything other than defending how it serves its client base. Nivea parent company, Beiersdorf AG, has not experienced a share price backlash.

USWNT score predictable own-goal

It was no surprise but the USWNT decided to avoid the invitation to the White House. Yet if these superstars truly can’t stand the democratically elected leader of the country they represent, why not use the opportunity to prosecute their convictions face-to-face instead of acting to the level they criticize him for?

If these people want to oust him in 2020, showing their love of self over love of country will only backfire when people mark their ballot papers. For world champions they really know how to kick the ball in the back of their own net.

Forbes addresses the equal pay argument in soccer

Forbes has thrown light on the gender pay gap in women’s soccer. The numbers are rather telling. As CM has always stated, if the earn more than then men they should Ben paid more, not equally. Journalist Michael Ozanian notes,

France earned $38 million from FIFA for winning soccer’s World Cup in Russia, while the women’s champion in France this summer will earn just $4 million, has prompted outrage…

…The total prize money for the Women’s World Cup in France this July will be $30 million compared with total prize money of $440 million for the men’s teams at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar…

…The men still pull the World Cup money wagon. The men’s World Cup in Russia generated over $6 billion in revenue, with the participating teams sharing $400 million, less than 7% of revenue. Meanwhile, the Women’s World Cup is expected to earn $131 million for the full four-year cycle 2019-22 and dole out $30 million to the participating teams.”

Thanks to JL for the flag.

Equal pay! Equal pay!

No longer is pride in representing a nation the core of a major sporting event. It is all about activism and grievance. The oppression obsession. The crowd joined in shaming the FIFA boss and the United States Soccer Federation (USSF) based off little or no true understanding of the facts at the women’s World Cup Final. The stadium would have made Kim Jong-un blush at the symbiotic coordination. It felt eerily similar to the crowd scene from 1984. It is unfortunately so telling of today’s society. Never have they had it so good, but act is if they’ve never had it so bad.

However isn’t the point of playing for one’s country about the “pride” in representing it? If Rapinoe hates Trump, that is one thing and her personal choice. She is not alone. Should her personal pet grievances outweigh the 330m other Americans she represents? Why not ask for the flag to be removed from her strip?

If she wants to kneel during the national anthem she is nothing more than a hypocrite who seeks to rub it in the face of those who have pride in their country. She is a conditional citizen. Much like those Hollywood celebrities who claimed they’d leave the country if Trump won. He did and they’re still all there.

If Rapinoe wants to truly protest, she should refuse to play. She should sit out and watch America flail and then witness the USSF panic as sponsors dry up and have them run to her. Yet the trappings are such that her principles take a back seat to the expediency of the luxuries afforded by her talent.

She can rant all she wants outside the field. Free speech. CM is all for that. She has a profile to do that. Yet when representing the country, why not respect her fellow citizens rather than throw the toys out of the pram using profanity against a democratically elected president? What she doesn’t realise is her wokeness is exactly the type of thing that will produce the same result in the 2020 election. People are sick and tired of the constant political correctness dragged into places it needn’t be. She is only going to retard the growth in the sport if she continues turning a beautiful game into a platform of white noise.

Rapinoe may tell the media that “we’re over it” with respect to equal pay. However has she considered that if she stopped being such a brat that even more sponsors might beat a path to her door? If she displayed the types of values that represent those of the sponsors and broader society rather than lower the level to the man she repudiates she might surprise herself? Set the standard, Megan! Don’t lower yourself to it. Is having a high number of LGBT players truly the secret sauce of the US team as you claim?

What if men identifying as women demand a place in the side? Physically they’ll dominate the women players as they are already doing in so many areas of sport. Don’t they deserve an equal opportunity? If they trial and outplay all the biological women, will you begrudge them? Or accept that “Science is science. Trans rule“? The Democratic Party has enshrined trans players in women’s sports as policy. Be careful what you wish for.

For the record, CM has always stated equal pay in sports is a farcical quest. It has never been equal. Nor should it be, because the talent pool would never be able to be developed in a way that is self sustaining for the audiences to watch it. Cristiano Ronaldo gets $100m per year because he is “that good”. He sells more strips each year than his fellow teammates. He scores lots of goals. He gets endorsements because he is so talented. Corporations see a return in the investment. Ronaldo has 78 million Twitter followers vs his Real Madrid captain, Sergio Ramos who has a pitiful 16m. Rapinoe has 725,000. Should she get paid the same as Ronaldo? US men’s soccer team player Landon Donovan has 1.3m followers. Does the USSF see that the box office is sadly still skewed to the men’s game?

If we truly want ‘equal pay‘, shouldn’t we demand that each player plays for exactly the same amount of time and limit the physical distance they run? After all it would be unfair for one player to do less or more work than another. If the goalie had to be included in the physical exercise equality argument then field players could only have a two minute stint at best. 10 players would need to be replaced every two minutes of the 90 played meaning a 450 player side. With GPS tracking, the rules of the game can be changed so that can be accommodated in theory.

We know that such a game would be boring to watch and cause audiences to abandon such spectacles because professionals sports require no participation medals. We cheer the player that has the extra stamina, skill and guile to win matches and pay to watch that privilege. Not watch a game where talent is castrated.

For starters, Rapinoe should address the inequality within women’s soccer, before targeting the broader gender pay gap. No doubt she gets paid a lot more than some of her lesser known teammates. No one discusses that factoid. Crowds consumed by propaganda based group think champion the causes of people who already earn probably way more than they’ll ever do. Were the crowd chants aimed at the Dutch women too? Or just the Americans who were the ones fighting this pay dispute.

CM is also on record for saying that female tennis players should be paid more than men for the higher audiences they attract. The reality is outside of the World Cup, women’s soccer does not attract the revenues of the men’s game (partly due to men’s game having decades more time to develop). That will take time. It is hard to find willing sponsors to even it up if the return on that endorsement is lower. Sponsors aren’t just rich benefactors.

In closing, shame on the crowds for dragging an international event into a twisted spectacle. What they don’t realise is that such actions will only work against them. Fans want to escape the stresses of daily life, not pay high ticket prices to have it directly served up. Maybe the #USWNT needs to look at what has happened to the NFL after political correctness engulfed it.

Megan, a bigger truism is that, “Economics is economics. The market rules!”

”New Balls, Please”

Forget 135 years of tradition. Let’s pander to politically correct identity nonsense where there is zero need for it. What is it with the faux outrage mob that leads the England Lawn Tennis Club (ELTC) to feel pressured to “move with the times”? Whose times exactly? Does the ELTC honestly believe people might be triggered by the use of “Mrs” or “Miss” when they win a game, set or match? Even Hawkeye would roll its eyes at this clear “out.”

Tell you what, why not ask each individual tennis player what their preferred pronoun is and have the umpire address them accordingly. Here is betting that none of the players will request a change to basic biology and marital status.

To be honest if the height of oppression for the LGBTQI+ community extends to the umpires calling a game at Wimbledon, one suspects we are beyond the threshold of grievance that will change anything on margin.

If the ELTC wishes to push the “equality” ticket, perhaps they should dispense with the tournament being split by gender? Why stop at pronouns? No point being half “woke”

Will the ELTC lead the way to allow those men who identify as women to go head-to-head with Williams, Barty or Osaka? Why not? If they know they’ll never beat Rafa, Federer or Djokovic why not seek equality elsewhere by cheating a system the championship convener will end up encouraging to “move with the times.”

Time the fans asked the ELTC for “new balls please“.