Category: Corporate Wokism

Ummm Okay, Maybe Not

Corporate Wokism, Drive Time, Management

One has to laugh at this latest development:

Volvo has confirmed it has backtracked on its promise to sell only fully electric cars by 2030 due to a fall in demand for battery vehicles.

The Swedish company announced today it is now aiming for 90 to 100 per cent of its global sales to be either pure electric or plug-in hybrid by the end of the decade.

It comes in response to a decline in appetite for EVs across major markets, including a slowing uptake of battery cars among private buyers in the UK. 

Volvo executives said the delay to its EV schedule will ‘allow for a limited number of mild hybrid models to be sold, if needed’.

Let me be the first to say that “if needed” is going to become “vital to the company’s survival”, and the “limited number” will become most if not all of the entire product line.

In marketing terms, this is known as a “soft retraction” — note the shift from “all-electric” to “okay, we meant hybrids” — thus leaving space to keep using a normal internal combustion engine (ICE) instead of Duracell-only.

Gosh… let me see.  The original plan can be characterized as follows:

“We’re going to refocus our company’s entire product line into a technology that is unreliable, unsupportable and ultimately unsustainable, relying on a support system that doesn’t yet exist, all while hiding behind the twin figleaves of government mandate/coercion and feelgood eco-friendship”.

…because in cold hard business terms, that’s exactly what the “all-electric” policy came down to.

Were I a major shareholder in such a corporation, I would demand the resignation of the entire management group that initiated such stupidity.

Not for the first time, the oh-so politically-correct Swedes are getting their noses rubbed in the hard reality of their silliness (see also:  liberal immigration policy).

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of well-intentioned wokist assholes.

So Much For Mickey

Corporate Wokism, Management

Here’s a tale of how to screw up a franchise, perhaps the greatest franchise of them all:

Back in 2021, the bottom began dropping out of Disney stock, which had been worth around $175 a share before Disney decided to hyper-politicize its movies and TV shows. Disney specifically targeted little kids for grooming with gay-themed propaganda aimed at sexualizing them and encouraging them to question their gender.

Additionally, Disney destroyed some of its most beloved and profitable Golden Geese franchises—Marvel, Pixar, Star Wars, Willow, Indiana Jones, etc.—by turning them into left-wing propaganda videos obsessed with sexuality, race, and gender.

And the result?

In April the stock rallied to $123 per share, up from $91 per share at the beginning of the year. In Early May, Disney stock reached as high as $116. But all this year’s gains are now gone. Currently, the stock sits at just $90 per share.

It will probably sink still lower — perhaps as low as $70.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of wokist, child-grooming assholes.  No corporation is too big to fail, and I hope this one perishes utterly.

So Much For That Diversity Thing

Business, Corporate Wokism, The Gun Thing

I remember once attending a board meeting of a company I worked at, and one of the agenda items was replacing a deceased board member.  One of the nominations for the replacement was some woman I’d never heard of, but as the nominator stated, “It’s time we had a little diversity on this board.”  And that’s all he said;  no mention of her qualifications, experience, nothing.

As the most junior executive in the room, I wasn’t going to say anything, but I couldn’t help wondering why nobody else had either.

Anyway, a vote was held and the nomination passed unanimously, albeit with one abstention (guess who).

This was back in the mid-1990s.

Anyway, it appears that one company has recently followed the same route — one assumes for the same reasons, only it backfired horribly on them.

Here’s the story:

On December 5, 2023, Breitbart News noted that shareholders disgruntled over Smith & Wesson’s continued manufacture of AR-15 platform rifles had filed a lawsuit. The suit claims that the defendants, who are Smith & Wesson board members and the company’s senior management team, “knowingly allowed the Company to become exposed to significant liability for intentionally violating federal, state, and local laws through its manufacturing, marketing, and sales of AR-15 style rifles and similar semiautomatic firearms.” . 

And who were these “disgruntled shareholders”?

Plaintiffs in the case included the Adrian Dominican Sisters, Sisters of Bon Secours USA, Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia, and Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus & Mary.

…making me wonder:  what the fuck were Our Ladies Of The Blessed Disarmament doing anywhere near S&W’s management?

Anyway, they failed, the rotten rosary-swingers, and a jolly good thing it was too.

On March 13, 2024, Breitbart News reported that Nevada’s Clark County District Court signaled no “substantial likelihood” Smith & Wesson would be found liable, saying the activist shareholders appear not to be aligned with the company’s best interest and requiring them to post a half-million-dollar bond to continue their suit.

The plaintiffs were instructed to post the bond by April 23, 2024, but they did not.

On May 6, 2024, Judge Joe Hardy pointed to their failure to post the bond as ordered and dismissed the lawsuit against Smith & Wesson.

Errrrr “the activist shareholders appear not to be aligned with the company’s best interest” — I’ll say they aren’t.  They tried to get into the company to subvert its business — kinda like the Commies do in our school system — but it didn’t work.

If I were on the S&W board, I would file suit against these BoCs for compensatory damages for the legal fees, at least.

I know, I know:  something about “Vengeance is mine,”  saith the Lord.

Bollocks.

Alternatives

Corporate Wokism, Drive Time

Everyone’s always talking about concepts like “plant-based” or “knowledge-based” (A.I.) nowadays.

How about “reality-based”?  Here’s one company who thought they had it all worked out, until reality stepped up and said, “Nazzo fast, Guido” (actually, “Noch langsamer, Fritz” ):

Mercedes-Benz has backtracked on their plan to transition to selling only electric vehicles after 2030, with company officials saying that “market conditions” have not allowed that to happen.

Ah, those pesky “market conditions”, wherein customers tell their supplier companies to take a hike after said corporations make unbelievably stupid decisions (Bud Lite, coff coff).

The background:

The company said it would commit $47 billion to electrifying its fleet, with CEO and board chair Ola Källenius saying, “We are convinced, we can do it with strong profitability, and we believe that focus on electrical is the right way to build a successful future and to enhance the value of Mercedes Benz.”

In other words:  we’ve bought into the whole Green New Deal, hook, line and sinker, and we’ll just force customers to adapt to the New World Order by giving them no option to do otherwise.

And then came Q4 ’23 results.  Oh, and a few other things which might have made potential (and existing) customers reevaluate their options:

The business model change comes after multiple highly-publicized instances of Mercedes-Benz electric vehicles catching on fire and causing massive damage.

Yeah.  Imagine that.

My question is quite simple:  other car companies have also declared their intention to be all-electric by x date (e.g. Jaguar, Volvo).  Does anyone think they’re going to have a change of heart too?

Or will they just do the Lemming Thing and plunge off the reality-based cliff, secure in their own virtuousness?

Proper Attire

Business, Corporate Wokism, Travels

Oh FFS, this just takes the cake:

British Airways bosses have apologized for telling cabin crew members what bras to wear under new ‘transparent’ uniforms which led to comments from passengers.
The see-through blouses were issued as part of a new uniform, unveiled earlier this year, designed to ‘take the airline into the next chapter’ and for a non-binary crew.
Last year BA relaxed the rules around its strict uniform policy and went gender-neutral to allow male pilots and crew to wear make-up and carry handbags.

Lemme just deal with the low-hanging fruit first.

  • Companies have every right to create a “uniform” policy, and to dictate what does and does not constitute “proper” clothing under that policy
  • the corollary is that if the uniform consists of “transparent” clothing, they also have the right to set policy for “proper” undergarments
  • but if they do specify transparent clothing, they deserve everything that comes to them.

Now for the ugly stuff.

I’m sick and fucking tired of companies feeling that they have to apologize to their employees for bullshit like this.  Were the topic that of terrible salaries, foul working conditions and in short things that deserve corporate groveling, okay;  but for causing hurt feeewings?  Screw that.

But in to the topic at hand.

Nothing would make me question the capabilities of an airline’s crew faster than the whole thing turning into some kind of costume party, with the “men” wearing clown makeup and the “women” wearing no bra under a transparent blouse (although at first glance the latter wouldn’t seem too bad, please consider that the average age of trolley-dollies now appears to be 50, and all seem to have been recruited from branches of the Ugly Tree).

And frankly, I’m not sure I want to see any of the flight crew wearing transparent clothing, given that said crew will likely include girlymen and butchygirls, all of indeterminate gender.

I don’t know why I bother fulminating about this stuff anymore, considering that my chances of flying at all are minuscule, and on any British airline even less than that.

I’d give this one a try, though.