Nike is a corporate entity and made a business decision, I doubt as a company they have any strict values other than make money and pay themselves and their shareholders. If those in charge of the business actually made it as an uncalculated purely ethical decision then good for them, but I’m sure there’s plenty of anti-gay morons running around the company as well.
It seems like everywhere you go, you’ll find people who are pretty far up their own asses trying to act like supreme beings when in fact they are simply vain supremacists who have a lot to learn about humanity and are lagging behind the rest of the class as foolish dopes usually do, thinking they’re better than everyone else. The truth is, they’re simply making everyone else look better by comparison.
Oh I have similar thoughts about what those Nike people are thinking. After all, Pacquiao is now practically a has been. And like all boxers who made it big, their eventual defeat will likely be in the hands of the tax man. But I think he’ll end up better than Tyson or Luis.
It’s the hipocrisy of the whole thing that’s galling.
What is so wrong with a politician who speaks his mind, consistent with his core beliefs (albeit recently adopted)? And if he’s bad for a business, for whatever reason, what do you as a business gain by making a strong signalling move, when corporate relations can be executed in a quiet, even imperceptible manner? Does Nike care that much for gays and wish to utterly destroy anti-gays?
His core beliefs are shitty. In 2015 63.6% of Nike’s revenue was generated in North America + Western Europe where majorities of the populaces as of that year now seem to agree that such beliefs are shitty. Therefore smart company dumps stupidly outspoken politician with shitty core beliefs in order to shield their largest sources of revenue.
Seems pretty simple to me. Not to mention logical.
I didn’t have the_diego down as a particularly shitty poster until fairly recently. An amusing degree of unjustified overconfidence when it came to answering geology questions in GQ, but didn’t know he was outright crazy until the seatstabbing. Apparently I also missed some homophobic posts, somewhere?
Did the very simple lesson penetrate though? I do have patience enough to try a different approach to explaining why Nike would stop endorsing toxic sludge and do so publicly if this one bounced off your apparently heavy reason deflection shields.