-
it is symbolic sure but unrelated (ancillary) to any actual change on the issue. it would however hurt people unrelated to the issue (negative externality). so if the appearance of doing your bit to help things change is more important to you than letting giro employees keep their jobs then carry on, good job.
a good alternative is liking anti-nra posts on facebook or twitter.
zmjones_-
if the appearance of doing your bit to help things change is more important to you than letting giro employees keep their jobs then carry on
It’s interesting to me that Giro profits support the NRA. I’m not alone. It’s not ok to wish the same info reaches others?
The idea of mass job losses is silly. Giro doesn’t manufacture anything does it? The money stays within cycling when choosing a different brand. The consumer still consumes, helmets and shoes still get bought. Giro are unlikely to lose significant market share as a direct result of actions by The Radavist - what percentage of global Giro helmet customers follow that blog do you think?
The value of Prolly to the brand is as an incubator for ideas/direction. Indy blogs are heavily referenced when developing products to meet new trends. And are followed by those in the industry.
As I said in my initial post what is missed is the potential to influence Giro talent. If being associated with gun brands is working against hiring for your business (Giro in this instance) then that has a knock-on effect on the value of gun brands in a portfolio.
miro_o
Oh hai. Ancillary motherfucker over here ... keen to hear how choosing Sidi shoes, or a Spesh helmet etc hits good people in the externalities more-so than buying from a company that helps finance the NRA?