• TinyBreak@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      FFS dont say his name! Now he knows where you are and he is going to send a bunch of voting material to you! Or recruit you as an au pair!

  • Nath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Woolies would keep the crap if people bought it. I’m unconvinced they would drop the range if it were making them buckets of money.

    I’ll bet it’s loads more profit per shelf to fill that space with back-to-school stuff.

    It’s us who don’t want Australia Day stuff. Possibly because we don’t exactly have wads of spare disposable income to spend on luxuries? Maybe because we have a personal stance on Australia Day? Maybe we just don’t care?

    • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Woolies would keep the crap if people bought it. I’m unconvinced they would drop the range if it were making them buckets of money.

      Nah, it’s just more DEI-led stuff where they’re trying to pander to the vocal minority to score points, like Bud Light and Target did in America, where it backfired massively. Make no mistake, they’re dropping it for “inclusivity” like Kmart did, not because it doesn’t make money. They even mentioned this in their statement:

      There has been a gradual decline in demand for Australia Day merchandise from our stores over recent years. At the same time there’s been broader discussion about 26 January and what it means to different parts of the community,"

      It’ll be back next year when they fuck around and find out this year. Keep politics and pandering out of grocery stores. Didn’t ever think I’d have to say that lol. It’s ridiculous.

      • fine_sandy_bottom@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Make no mistake, they’re dropping it for “inclusivity” like Kmart did, not because it doesn’t make money.

        Even if this were true, it would be because they’ve determined that the “inclusivity” (whatever that is) is going to make them money.

            • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Bud Light tanked. It was the number 1 beer in its category up until that decision - a title it had held for 20 years. It isn’t now.

              Their vice president responsible for it was removed.

              They lost marketshare across the board.

              Their american sales have not recovered.

              Bill Gates threw $100 million at their stock in an effort to get it to go back up. Remember - Bud Light is not their whole company. Bud Light has likely been irrevocably harmed. Other beer brands have gained market share, Bud Light lost the number 1 spot it had held for 20 years. Share price isn’t everything when it’s a worldwide brand.

              • fine_sandy_bottom@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 months ago

                Some facebook-meme level reasoning here bro. If gates bought $100m in stock in september then he’s made $10m on that bet in the last 4 months. You can cherry-pick whatever factoids you like but the bare facts are, no one really cares.

                I guess we will see what happens when woolies share price tanks this week. SMH.

                • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  So you ignore 90% of my post that proves my point to focus on the 10% that you think proves yours? Lol

                  Let me guess - it was a coincidence that bud light got dethroned after 20 years at the same time they pulled their stunt?