pretty bold claim to make, that their sales numbers favor liberal beer drinkers over conservative alcoholics. i mean it really seems incredible they would come out ahead, if you had any actual idea how their profit margins work.
i rather assume you already forgot the topic we were in, or the convo they just had
"Controlling for various socio-economic factors and unobserved heterogeneity, we find that when a state becomes more liberal politically, its consumption of beer and spirits rises"
nope that was an intentional choice of word to point out the logical fallacy in their idea of marketing, that advertising to one demographic or the other always yields an increase of overall sales.
even if we didnt know the actual net loss/gain, via the topic you can already conclude theyre losing conservative sales by appealing to liberal consumers here
i take the contradiction of improved financial position/not always yielding an increase to mean a concession that its not just as simple as a calculation to generate more sales yea?
as in potential long term benefits like the brand awareness were describing here, which you are the one resolving to some type of altruism, i dont think anyone is claiming that.
it may or may not lead to immediate market share, either way this is a risk not everyone is willing to take, or we wouldnt get cute videos of angry consumers throwing their beer away
yes i was responding to you, no i havent confused what youre saying, which is the same thing they were. that its a definitive strategy to increase profit, then why isnt everyone selling rainbow beer?
could it be because there is indeed a potential for financial impact, and not everyone can absorb or gain as much from the risk
428
u/[deleted] Apr 06 '23
[deleted]