Volinbham Talks Marketing and Bud Light

#551
#551
Vol8188 said:
When your definition of “might have breached” is “I have no evidence nor any reason to believe they breached anything”, then no, there should be no inquiry. You need a reason for an inquiry
Click to expand...
The value has absolutely tanked due to their own actions of alienating their established, well known consumer base and not some unlucky outside force. It was entirely predictable that it would create a negative consequence.

The inquiry could easily result in an unfounded result. I don't know why you are against an inquiry. If something severely impacted a portfolio, you should look into it.
 
#552
#552
RikidyBones said:
The value has absolutely tanked due to their own actions of alienating their established, well known consumer base and not some unlucky outside force. It was entirely predictable that it would create a negative consequence.

The inquiry could easily result in an unfounded result. I don't know why you are against an inquiry. If something severely impacted a portfolio, you should look into it.
Click to expand...

Because you’re supporting an inquiry without cause just because you don’t like a company. You’re failing to realize the same government overreach you are supporting will be used against corporations/people you like too.

If Biden announced tomorrow “we are conducting an inquiry into the DeSantis campaign. We have no actual evidence of wrong doing, but hey, maybe we will find something” you’d be losing your mind.

You need to find some values and stick by them
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#553
#553
Vol8188 said:
Because you’re supporting an inquiry without cause just because you don’t like a company. You’re failing to realize the same government overreach you are supporting will be used against corporations/people you like too.

If Biden announced tomorrow “we are conducting an inquiry into the DeSantis campaign. We have no actual evidence of wrong doing, but hey, maybe we will find something” you’d be losing your mind.

You need to find some values and stick by them
Click to expand...
There's a difference between civil and criminal. If desantis launched an investigation for criminal findings, then we agree. This is civil. Fiduciary duty. That's it.
 
#554
#554
RikidyBones said:
There's a difference between civil and criminal. If desantis launched an investigation for criminal findings, then we agree. This is civil. Fiduciary duty. That's it.
Click to expand...

So you have no problem with Biden or left wing governors doing civil suits against companies they don’t like despite 0 evidence of wrong doing?

That’s your standard?
 
#557
#557
Majors said:
Scott will make a move forward once the debates start.
Click to expand...
sheit-well.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, Carl Pickens and Majors
#558
#558
Grand Vol said:
Nobody...

It'll be a Trump/Scott or Trump/Noem ticket.

Maybe even a Trump/Haley... not sure about that though.
Click to expand...
WOW... I hope not Scott or Noem. But If I see either come to pass, I will not trust Trump's selections on anything else. Hopefully (hopefully) he learned from the first time around.

On second thought... I trust Scott far less than Noem on foreign policy and Noem far less on domestic policy.
 
#559
#559
Vol8188 said:
So you have no problem with Biden or left wing governors doing civil suits against companies they don’t like despite 0 evidence of wrong doing?

That’s your standard?
Click to expand...
Desantis isn't filing a civil suit. And he certainly isn't doing it with zero evidence. They are looking into it to see if any evidence exists to protect the interests of the pension holders. Evidence isn't just mailed to you.
 
#560
#560
hog88 said:
Man that's a tough one, I really don't know. I wish Trump would just bow out because he's not sniffing the WH again, the only thing he can do is ensure a Dem victory.
Click to expand...
I agree…. Not to mention I’m sick and tired of hearing about him
 
#562
#562
RikidyBones said:
Desantis isn't filing a civil suit. And he certainly isn't doing it with zero evidence. They are looking into it to see if any evidence exists to protect the interests of the pension holders. Evidence isn't just mailed to you.
Click to expand...

You’re still not answering the question. If Biden or a left wing governor opened an “inquiry” into right wing companies or politicians without reasonable suspicion….would you be okay with that?
 
#564
#564
Vol8188 said:
You’re still not answering the question. If Biden or a left wing governor opened an “inquiry” into right wing companies or politicians without reasonable suspicion….would you be okay with that?
Click to expand...
I think I see the separation.

1. I see reasonable suspicion based on result.
2. Budweiser isn't left wing per se. They donate to DeSantis
3. As a civil matter, should pension holders just accept the loss?
4. I would be ok as long as we have a result that damaged state pension and it's holders that wasn't a result of outside forces. I think we have that here.
5. Like I said before, should state pensions be invested in stocks? That's a different question that might need exploration.

We disagree if there's reasonable suspicion in this case but we might agree about everything else to be honest.
 
#566
#566
RikidyBones said:
I think I see the separation.

1. I see reasonable suspicion based on result.
2. Budweiser isn't left wing per se. They donate to DeSantis
3. As a civil matter, should pension holders just accept the loss?
4. I would be ok as long as we have a result that damaged state pension and it's holders that wasn't a result of outside forces. I think we have that here.
5. Like I said before, should state pensions be invested in stocks? That's a different question that might need exploration.

We disagree if there's reasonable suspicion in this case but we might agree about everything else to be honest.
Click to expand...
You invest in a company that makes bad decisions that's on you. Management make mistakes all the time. Boards are replaced. The pensioners have no one to blame but whoever manages their fund
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#567
#567
volfanhill said:
You invest in a company that makes bad decisions that's on you. Management make mistakes all the time. Boards are replaced. The pensioners have no one to blame but whoever manages their fund
Click to expand...
You speak as if shareholder derivative action doesn't exist
 
#571
#571
Vol8188 said:
I actually like Pence. His problem is the x% of crazies who think he should’ve overturned the election. I think he’s a very strong conservative who behaves like a president rather than a spoiled brat
Click to expand...
I think he shot his political hopes in the head with the Russo-Ukranian war responses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#572
#572
Vol8188 said:
You’re not going to be able to prove negligence. They tried something and it failed. The idea that the courts should get involved here is absurd.
Click to expand...
Have to agree. However, a similar move On the heels of this could raise some questions, but probably not enough to prove culpability.
 
#573
#573
Vol8188 said:
You’re not going to be able to prove negligence. They tried something and it failed. The idea that the courts should get involved here is absurd.

I honestly don’t understand your entire second paragraph.
Click to expand...

I think keeping the CEO around will prove negligence a whole lot more than the failed Mulvaney campaign....
 
#574
#574
Rasputin_Vol said:
WOW... I hope not Scott or Noem. But If I see either come to pass, I will not trust Trump's selections on anything else. Hopefully (hopefully) he learned from the first time around.

On second thought... I trust Scott far less than Noem on foreign policy and Noem far less on domestic policy.
Click to expand...

So... whom do you recommend?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top