#snowflakes

Gillette Direct – the best things in life are more than 50% off

Gillette.png

Everyone knows CM is no longer a user of Gillette products. The brand is rife with double standards. To be lectured on toxic masculinity while it happily plastered its brand on the backsides of Dutch supermodels wearing skimpy jumpsuits to promote a racing car series.

Interesting to see the company has turned to sponsored advertising on social media. Is Gillette Direct tempting? We don’t have a good idea of the costs of selling at supermarkets and chemists. So how much will Gillette margins change at the margin? Best sell for 50% off direct than 50% off at Woolies. Await coming 10Q data to see how the trends evolve.

Our total outlay would be $76.00. Savings are:

Free handle: $7.00 saving

Blades: $7.79 savings x 4 = $31.16

4th Set of Blades: Free ($28.00 saving)

Shipping: $10 savings

Total Savings: $7.00 + $31.16 + $10.00 + $28.00 = $76.16 

On top of this for Father’s Day, Gillette appears to be offering an extra 10% savings. 52.3% off.

Will be interested to see if the Dollar Shave Club model will somehow lift Gillette out of the hole they dug for themselves.

Dollar Shave Club offers 8 replacement blades per cycle and shaving cream for $31.35. Better value. A starter kit is only $15.00.

CM is unmoved. Thanks but no thanks.

Good on Schick BTW for this counter advert questioning gender stereotypes without pandering to radical leftist feminist cabals inside corporate marketing departments driving narratives about oppression obsession. #getwokegobroke

The Woke will end up being the Joke – as usual

Do the marketing departments of these corporations honestly believe they will gain anything via this ill-considered moral preening? Do they have any real cohesive cognitive plan outside of vacuous virtue signalling to appeal to an existing or potential client base that has already moved on?

What is the bet had Alan Jones told PM Scott Morrison to shove a sock down President Trump’s throat that they would have said absolutely ZIP. Maybe they’d up the spend? The double standard is guaranteed. What it really says is that the marketing teams are pandering to their bigger client – trying to appear relevant to their own management team. Such gutless and spineless actions speak volumes of the utter uselessness of marketing teams in general.

Before dozens of woke corporations pulled their adverts from the top-ranked radio jockey, did they ponder for one second that their clientele who listen to him probably haven’t collapsed into an inconsolable heap? What is more, they couldn’t care less what Anytime Fitness, Chemist Warehouse or Big W think.

It doesn’t take much imagination to work out the utter brain dead groupthink in these marketing meeting rooms (echo chambers) of corporate Australia as they seek to self-censor to justify their glaringly redundant roles. No rocket science is required. Big W could have had a special campaign on socks and BBQ charcoal. When did Australia lose its sense of humour? Especially at the expense of our neighbours across the ditch. It is not to condone Jones’ remarks but it is only because NZ PM Jacinda Ardern is the high priestess of woke causes that these corporates have buckled.

If the decision to advertise on Jones’ program was made because of his reach and ideally the “right” demographic for their products, will they stand to gain anything from this? Haven’t they studied Gillette’s latest 180-degree flip on trying to win back customers they have probably lost for good in that ridiculous self-inflicted $8bn brand destruction?

The Jones’ clientele is likely to remain exactly the same. The ratings will unlikely budge a jot. The activists moaning to have ads pulled are probably the least likely to use their products and services in any case.

For instance, why would anyone think that Commonwealth Bank (CBA), which has been found seriously wanting in the ethics department after the Royal Commission, has any leg to stand on over Jones’ remarks? CBA is still pondering what to do. Do they follow the herd (proving marketing departments aren’t warranted) or twist 2GB’s arm to get some bonus slots for showing loyalty?

Here’s an idea. Why don’t CBA and others leave the moral grandstanding to their customers? When people withdraw cash at an ATM it is highly unlikely they’re going to punish them by closing their accounts. Why not keep tabs on the number of complaints from its 10m customers and see if they number more than 0.000001% of the total. Don’t marketing departments use data? Clearly not.

So watch this space. Corporate boardrooms might think their marketing teams walk on water but if they opened their eyes for a moment would soon find their utter lack of creativity and zero value add as clear as crystal. Or maybe they’re just as out of touch to fall for the Yes, Minister PowerPoint presentation.

Look at the bullying by groups such as Mad Fucking Witches. Can corporates take activists seriously with names like that? How weak are they to fold when words like “complicit” are thrown at them. Once again marketing departments should study data, not fear standing up for themselves.

The double standards of companies like Koala Mattresses, which is happy to have the potty-mouthed Clementine Ford as a brand ambassador (who has a long track record of tweeting profanity, misandry and killing all men) but preach sanctimonious tripe over pulling advertising from Alan Jones’ program.

Make no mistake. The woke are already looking like the bigger joke. These self-appointed enforcers of a moral points system President Xi might approve of have even ignored Jones’ unconditional apology for his remarks. Tells you exactly what ideology is being preached inside so many Australia’s companies. It is hardly the stuff that will rescue them in a slowdown. The ones which have cut Jones have signalled why they don’t make good investments. Get woke. Go broke.

NB Mad Fucking Witches deleted this post because as always with the radical left the only free speech that matters is their own.

Gillette champions what it censured. Too late

So is this admission that Gillette has finally realised it made a catastrophic marketing mistake to throw the majority of its customers under the bus? How interesting that the company now champions the very macho men it sought to criticise. You know, those who put their lives on the line to protect us. Unfortunately, Gillette, it is a bit late. More than happy with my Schick Hydro. Your $8bn is a fantastic Harvard case study of failed marketing campaigns.

Literally taking the piss

CM met with an American professor this evening who said he recently attended a seminar at his old alma mater. His astonishment when using the rest rooms was two all gender bathrooms, one with urinals and the other without. Presumably this is just male and female in the real world. He said that the female academics were none too pleased with the arrangement (for understandable hygiene reasons no doubt), despite the Marxist nature of many attendees.

While not paying constant attention to those entering either bathroom he said when he visited the all gender bathroom with urinals it was 100% male. Period. What a surprise?

Climate change – as should be taught to school kids

Image result for climate strike school

Thank you SMcK.

“Attention, students. Because so many of you missed Friday’s classes, what with your little climate party and all, today I’m assigning extra work.

Let’s begin with mathematics. 558,400,000 is a really big number. Can anyone here tell me what it might represent? No?

Well, that’s the amount in tonnes of carbon dioxide that Australia emitted last year.

I’ll just pause here for a minute until Samantha stops crying. By the way, Samantha, your sign at the climate rally needed a possessive apostrophe and “planet” was spelt incorrectly, so I’m putting you back in remedial English again.

Where were we? Oh, yes. 558,400,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

Let’s see how we can reduce that number. Ban coal mining? That’ll knock off a big chunk.

Ban petrol-powered vehicles? Good call. That’s another slab of emissions gone.

Does the class believe we should ban all mining? You do. Interesting. For your homework tonight, I want you all to design batteries that contain no nickel or cadmium.
Good luck getting to school in electric cars without those.

And there’ll be no more steel wind turbines once the iron ore mines are closed. It’s just the price we’ll have to pay, I suppose.

Even with all those bans, however, Australia will still be churning out carbon dioxide by the magical solar-powered truckload. Cuts need to go much further.

More people means more human activity which means more carbon dioxide, so let’s permanently ban immigration. Is the class agreed?

Hmmm. You’re not quite so enthusiastic about that one. Come on, students. Sacrifices must be made.

Speaking of which, how many of you have grandparents? Not any more you don’t.
And Samantha is crying again. Can someone please take her to the school safe space and let her “process some emotions”, or whatever the hell it is you kids do in there? Thank you.

Sing along with Kim Carnes: “All the world knows of her charms/She’s got/Stop Adani arms”

Who agrees we need to simplify our lives in order to reduce emissions? Returning to earlier times, when emissions were much lower, might help save our earth.

So goodbye to air travel, the internet and your cell phones. People got by without them in the past and they’ll survive without them in our sustainable future.

Still, those emissions will be way too high. Just for fun, let’s ban Australia and see what happens.

All factories, houses, streets, farms – gone. All people gone. Every atom of human presence on this land mass, completely erased.

At that point we’ll have finally cut our emissions to nothing. We’ve subtracted an annual 558,400,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Congratulations, children. By eliminating Australia, you’ve just reduced the world’s yearly generation of carbon dioxide from 37,100,000,000 tonnes to just … 36,541,600,000 tonnes.

Still, every tiny reduction helps, right? Maybe not. Let’s have a quick geography lesson. Tyler, please point out China on this map. No; that’s Luxembourg. China is a bit bigger. Try over here. There you go.

Here’s the thing about China. How long will it take for China to produce the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide that we’ve slashed by vanishing Australia? One year? Two years? Five years?

Not quite. Start the carbon dioxide clock on China right now, and that one enormous nation will have matched our annual output in 20 days, for China adds a whole Australia to the global emissions total in that time.

For that matter, China will have added another 1,190,953 tonnes by the end of this one-hour class.

Even a tiny increase in China’s output puts Australia in the shade. Various experts last year estimated that China was on course for a five per cent carbon dioxide boost.
This would mean an extra 521,637,550 tonnes – or basically what Australia generates. Our total is the same as China’s gentle upswing.

So maybe your protest was in the wrong country. Here’s another assignment: write letters to the Chinese government demanding it stops dragging people out of poverty.
Make sure you include your full name and address, because the Chinese government is kind of big on keeping records. Send a photograph of yourself standing in front of your parents’ house.

You might repeat this process in India. In fact, rather than going to Europe for your next big family holiday, prevail upon your parents to visit India instead. The tiny village of Salaidih would be the perfect place to tell slum-dwelling residents they shouldn’t have electricity.

They’ll probably thank you for it. Or they should, if they aren’t stupid climate deniers. Indian paupers must avoid making the same tragic affluence mistakes as us, so we must keep their carbon footprints as tiny as possible.

Can you imagine how terrible is would be for the earth if all of India’s one billion-plus population owned cars and air-conditioners? It really doesn’t bear thinking about.
One further assignment: tonight, locate a clean, green alternative source for $66 billion in exports. That’s how much was raised last year by the Australian coal industry.
Working it out won’t be too much of a challenge, I’m sure. After all, you know science and stuff. About half of your signs on Friday claimed you know more about all these things than does the Prime Minister.

Show him how advanced your brains are by devising a brand-new multi-billion export bonanza.

Hey, look who’s back! Feeling better, Samantha? That’s nice. Feelings are the most important thing of all.”

63m gun repossessions?

Kamala Harris’ brilliance knows no bounds. She intends to repossess guns from “racists”. If we use the strict definition from the Democrats, all 63mn Trump voters will lose their guns.

No Greta, Trump doesn’t have time for you

Image result for thunberg trump

As 16yo Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg sets sail for America she claimed she doesn’t want to waste her time talking to President Trump. CM is pretty sure that Trump wouldn’t waste his time making time in his calendar to see the teenager. There is absolutely no way in the world that the lefty activists that guide her would pass up an opportunity to pillory Trump in person as she challenged him on the need to panic. The mainstream media would be gushing in its derangement on how the headlines would describe how she “owned him”.

Despite looking forward to pooping in a bucket on a carbon made boat that emits no carbon (hoping they don’t need to fire up the emergency fossil fuel engines), she was forced to admit that “people can’t just take a sailboat across the Atlantic Ocean.” Spot on, Greta. However, she should take more comfort to know that the 280 million commercial airline flights every year contribute only 1.47% of human-made CO2 according to some of her biggest supporters – the EU. So on a global basis, airlines make up a mind-bogglingly frightening 0.00001825% of global CO2 emissions. Time to panic? If we increase our air travel 50% we’ll only match Germany for emissions…