Conservatives have embraced the results of the black civil rights struggle. When’s the last time you heard a conservative saying that we should bring back segregation? And they’re willing to let black people vote as long as they vote for Republicans. Why, most conservatives even have a best friend who is black.
Conservatives love to join the winning side.
That’s not “embracing.” That’s “being forced to hug your Aunt Velma, who smells of Vapo-Rub and sauerkraut.” 
No, it’s very much relevant. The financial duty that Disney has is a political. If they realize, like the majority of American companies, that being “woke” as you call it will make them more money, that’s what they do—even if some shareholders get upset by that.
Disney was willing to go along until the government started passing laws specifically to try and harm certain minorities. LGBT people are a HUGE audience for Disney, and the majority of the US is pro-LGB rights. What’s more, Disney has tons of LGBT employees, and it’s good business not to allow them to be persecuted.
You’re once again acting like politics is this completely separate thing, but it’s not. The whole point is that this political decision harms Disney. They tried to do what they usually do, but they were called out publicly, and it became something they had to do. They knew they would anger some bigots, but they realized that losing them would cost less than losing everyone else.
You think that this decision will harm Disney. The people in charge clearly believe this will make them more money, and have every reason to believe this. You are free to sell your shares.
You, however, do not have enough stake in the company to decide which strategy they take to try and make more money. They don’t have to side with you if losing you would cost them less than losing LGBT people and their supporters—who together are the majority of Americans.
This is basic economics. It’s bizarre that you seem to think your ideology trumps this. It’s bizarre that you think politics can never affect the bottom line of a company, and that companies don’t then fight back against those changes.
Again, where were you with every other political move Disney has made? Where are you when companies decide to support your political ideology? Yeah, that’s not the issue. The issue is that Disney is standing up for LGBT rights, and that bothers you. Because you want to believe that most people agree with you.
DeSantis is willing to make it MORE likely that kids get molested by taking away their ability to confide in a teacher. He’s making it where they will learn about LGBT stuff on the street rather than in the classroom. Any rapist can use their lack of knowledge and inability to tell any adult in their life what’s going on.
It’s very obviously a bad business decision to support that nonsense.
What is the opposite of woke? Slep?
In all their calculations about the decision making at Disney, it may have never crossed their mind that a simple letter saying “we don’t like this” would have this sort of reaction. But ISTM part of this may be that even 60 years later, a whole lot of people in the Florida political establishment still can’t help but look at Orlando/Disney as an enclave of carpetbaggers, and there was always simmering a resentment about it.
There was a conversation at work about how Florida is kind of hopeless for a change in political current. Basically the problem in Florida is that it has never had any sort of decently strong “liberal” political structure. It was Deep Southern Democrat all the way until they transformed into the modern Republicans, with only some more urban communities really moving in the direction of modern moderate Democrats and together with Old Democrat inertia (including among some of the first wave of pre-boomer retirees) creating a brief “swing state” window around the end of the 20th/start of the 21st century (*) but that did not stick as the Old Democrats passed on or finally ditched the label and crossed over altogether. See for instance how their apparent only hope against DeSantis is former-Republican Charlie Crist.
( * and the most powerful minority community in Florida for two generations, was made up of people whose voting criterion was based on “JFK did not deliver us from Castro!!” Now, sure their younger cohort is more liberal… but they are not as politically active and motivated.)
Heck that has always been the whole point for the RW. Trans issues, racial identity issues, language, sex education, evolution… all of that is just the symptom of the week. The idea is that the school should just teach “readin’, ‘ritin’ and 'rithmetic” enough to create wage-slave employees who’ll do as they’re told, but in no way shape or form prepare them to question the “Traditional Values”…
Sure. I wrote conservatives either believe that the black civil rights movement was a good cause or they see that they should say that they believe the black civil rights movement was a good cause. They acknowledge this fight has been lost (while denying they were on the losing side). Nowadays you see conservatives spouting nonsense like Martin Luther King Jr. was a true conservative and Martin Luther King’s Conservative Legacy. Conservatives are trying to claim the black civil rights movement was theirs.
They talk the talk, sure enough. But they sure don’t walk the walk.
Disney is indeed performing its fiduciary duty for Ultravires. Corporations which market to the public at large are becoming “woke” because the public at large is “woke” now.
Volume of complaints notwithstanding, social conservatives continue to lose in the marketplace of ideas. And they won’t be able to legislate their way to victory.
Yes, fortunately there is no electoral college or 2-senators-per-state-regardless-of-population advantage against popular opinion and the marketplace.
Sadly, everyone here knows exactly as little about the actual financial and practical facts that would result from the legislation as you and I do. That doesn’t keep them from pulling opinions out of their ass. Of course, if any online venue barred uninformed opinions their usage would plunge 99% on the first day, and they’d shut down on the second, because nobody goes online for information.
However, UltraVires is going above and beyond in ignorance of basic business policy. Others have already revealed that the posts are pure ideology and have no connection to business reality. They are wish fulfillment fantasy at best. Here’s one example.
No they do not. They have a fiduciary duty to the totality of the approximately one million people who own their stock. (In the real world, that means they have a duty to Vanguard, BlackRock, and State Street, who own 18% of the shares and can individually or collectively use them to change policy.) If the managers and board do not take the collective interests of the totality of the stockholders into account, then consequences may occur. (In the real world, consequences occur somewhat less often than blue moons, but I digress.) Disney has acted to the collective interest of its stockholders over virtually every minute of its existence. That you think it doesn’t in this specific instance is an opinion you are entitled to, though not one you are bothering to state in so many words. You have the right to go to a stockholders’ meeting and state your concerns.
You also have the right to cause us to laugh hysterically by saying explicitly that businesses should not get involved in politics. I mean, seriously, dude. Someone can say that and not expect the world to roll their eyes so far over that they can see their own assholes?
I think I am bowing out of this (Lester Maddox? Really?) pile on as I have said what I wanted to say. This is not about gay marriage or whether LGBTQ people can go to Disney parks or restaurants, hotels or lunch counters in FL.
The issue is unimportant. I don’t think a company should have an opinion on issues which do not affect its core mission. It invites boycotts and is bad for business and polarizes its customers. Yes, Chic-Fil-A, I am looking at you as well. In this world of smart phones, we deal with politics all of the time. Can I not go to a happy fun park and leave that behind?
You don’t have to think about it, really. Go to the park. Enjoy yourself.
Miller asked you upthread: “let’s stipulate that 95% of the buying public doesn’t care about a corporation’s position on Issue X, and will continue to patronize them regardless of any position they take. 3% of the public will stop patronizing the corporation if they don’t support Issue X. 2% of the public will stop patronizing the corporation if they don’t oppose Issue X. Does the corporation not have a fiduciary duty to support Issue X, and get that extra 1% of revenue?“
I’d like to hear your answer.
Again, we are assuming that issue X does not affect its core mission, right?
If we are assuming that, I still say no. First, the polls could be off. If this was a clear issue as in “do we support black chattel slavery” then I think that is an easy one. But a current political hot button issue? Just stay away from it.
Second and finally, you don’t know where public opinion will be on this months or years from now. It is not your job as a corporation to push for change. Let others do that. Just make me money.
But that’s the whole point of the hypothetical: you can move on to arguing whether it’s the case in this case, but what happens if they figure taking this position would make you more money and then they — didn’t? How is that not grounds for a lawsuit?
In that scenario, your proposal to ignore the issue means they lose even more money.
Disney’s core mission is to make money. Disney clearly believes that NOT taking a stance on this issue would cost it. Ergo, it DOES sffect its core mission.
I disagree. I think that it already makes 27 gazillion dollars a year and if it only makes 26 gazillion dollars because of this position, it doesn’t care because they aren’t going to be living under a bridge either way.
I thought your point was that you care. “Just make me money”, you said.
That is most definitley not how corporations act.