Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

BrewDog: yet another hip company using 'rebel' language to sell its stuff

Of course not. I'm not arguing m8, I agree, raise it all the time, constantly. Me kicking in isn't against that.

Ah OK. My bad then.

Not sure what your post was about, then, though. I mean, what your point was.

Maybe that's alright though.
 
Have you ever considered that boycotting may, on occasion, require you not to buy something?
I'm not sure of your point. Are you informing me that if I wanted to boycott Brewdog, then this would involve me not buying their products? Thanks - I will note that down.
 
I think that's a clue to BrewDog’s success, right there.

Not this thread.
Brewdog's marketing skills are what gets a decent non-alcoholic beer into supermarkets. And a large part of their marketing skill is in cultivating threads like this one.
 
It doesn't, but next time you're in the pub, it makes you see the Brewdog logo on a beer bottle/can/pump, and you remember the name, and you buy one.
That's how advertising works, and that's why subliminal advertising works. You don't have to like them, you just have to know the name.
That's a bullshit argument.

If I hear of some company being a bunch of cunts ands treating their staff like shit, I'm not going to automatically purchase their goods whenever I see them.

In fact I'll do the fucking opposite.
 
Doubt it, God bless Urban but it ain't driving their latest stock option.
The lies and bullshit never end with Brewdog.

Back in 2013, Watt said he would “rather take my money and set fire to it” than spend it on advertising, adding: “It’s the antithesis of everything we stand for and everything we believe in. It’s a medium that is shallow, it’s fake and we want nothing to do with it.”

Yet times change. Fast-forward six years and BrewDog clearly sees that marketing is worth investing in. And it is prepared to pay for it, both in terms of creative agency fees and media spend.

But if this ‘honest’ ad has taught us one thing, it’s that BrewDog isn’t anti-advertising or anti-convention. And that even most challenger brands will eventually have to adopt big brand advertising if they want to continue to grow.

And let's not forget:

It has also been accused of asking clients to pitch ideas, declining them and then taking ideas from competing agencies, as well as failing to reimburse prospective employees for travel.

 
Talking of stock options, have a couple of pieces pointing out how their self valuations are completely fraudulent. Thankfully, they’re not actually a listed company, so they can overcharge their investors absurdly to be a voteless member of their ‘community’


 
This (targetted TV advertising) clearly helped:

BrewDog uses TV to claim an unfair share of attention

Sincerely doubt that many viewers of Love Island, Game of Thrones, 8 Out of 10 Cats and The Last Leg, are particularly interested in Urban's thoughts on this matter or indeed any other.

Interesting to see in that article an outline of the strategy they used to start this thread on urban75:

Anti-context spots
The creative was loud and blunt, so the agencies saw an opportunity to keep the spirit of ‘punk’ alive in the TV plan and make the most of BrewDog’s distinctive brand assets. They chose a selection of ‘anti-context spots’ which had an audience match, but the creative would contrast with the programme content. In addition to Love Island, spots in First Dates and Celebrity Juice were chosen to achieve this.
 
I remember the name ISIS, I don't buy their beer. Advertising doesn't mean you have no free will.

Edit: To be fair ISIS might have a cracking micro-brew, I don't know.

איסיס - מבשלת בירה דרומית | isis desert brewery :thumbs: I've also been very drunk in the Isis Farmhouse near Oxford before.

I intend to boycott Brew Dog from now on though. The punk thing never really bothered me, it's just an advertising style now rather than a way of life. Rave culture was taken over in the same way in the 90s and that didn't really bother me. I don't mind their beer but it's pricey and not really that great. I spent an enjoyable evening in their bar in Aberdeen once and also in the one near Oxford Street but both times it was the company rather than the beer or ambience that was good.

But if they are fucking over their workers and customers so readily whilst flying around in private jets then they don't need my money. I'll stick to smaller independent brewers for now thanks.
 
Bullshit. You didn't show any of your working. You just claimed to have done calculations.
The workings were figuratively done on the back of an envelope.

This thread appears on the first page of google results for "brewdog punk appropriation"and "brewdog hip brand".

It doesn't appear on the first page of google results for "brewdog sexist monsters" or "brewdog worker exploitation" or "brewdog ethical vacuum".

This demonstrates that people wondering whether Brewdog is hip or has successfully modified punk culture to be better, will find this thread and have their thoughts positively confirmed, whereas people interested in brewdog's problematic behaviour will not find it.

So it's pretty obvious that they have managed to generate a thread that amplifies any existing interest in their brand, and which fails to amplify any objection to it. Therefore, the thread helps them commercially and fails to highlight the things they do wrong. Only the self absorbed beer-anger people fail to understand this.
 
Good to see their whopping lie being reported widely. And what a shitty way to try and rip off loyal customers.

BrewDog told the Guardian it stands by its £15,000 valuation, but could not guarantee their value on the open market.

A spokesperson also said BrewDog had immediately removed the “erroneous” mentions of solid gold in its marketing as soon as it realised the mistake, though tweets from Watt’s official account referring to the “solid gold” cans remained online until yesterday afternoon (28 June).

“Importantly, the phrasing in question was never included in the detailed terms and conditions of the competition, nor in the wording informing the lucky winners of their prize,” the brewery said.

The Guardian claims to have seen emails between BrewDog and the disappointed winner, showing that initial attempts to contact customer services to ask about the discrepancy were blocked.

And more lies:

The news comes just weeks after BrewDog was called out by former employees of creating an internal “culture of fear”, as well as using “lies, hypocrisy and deceit” to generate positive PR for the brand.

In an open letter, more than 250 ex-staff members accused the business of lying about a number of stunts, including sending anti-homophobia protest beer to Russia and about founders Watt and Martin Dickie changing their names to ‘Elvis’ in response to a legal challenge by the Elvis Presley estate.

I think it might be safe to assume that the Covid vaccination centres and claimed demand for their water from NHS centres were just more of their many lines too. Imagine being so scummy and ruthlessly profit-seeking that you'd think nothing of exploiting the Covid crisis and using it as a marketing opportunity.

 
Looks like those 'equity punks' could have their loyalty rewarded with a kicking too:

BrewDog’s “equity punks” are in revolt. A 180,000-strong army of crowdfunding investors has helped fuel the company’s growth over more than a decade, turning it into the UK’s largest craft brewer.

But the loyalty of these shareholders has been shaken, after former staff accused BrewDog of misogyny, a “toxic” attitude to junior workers, and pursuing “growth at all costs”. Some of the small investors the Scottish brewer calls “punks” — who have invested more than £80m and been reliable drinkers of its lagers and ales — are now concerned that attractive financial terms offered to private equity groups mean they will end up losing money even if BrewDog’s value increases.

“I wouldn’t have invested at all if I’d known what the culture was within the company,” said Andrew O’Neill, a 53-year-old veteran of Belfast’s hospitality industry who invested several thousand pounds last year. “The sheen has come off BrewDog for me.” Richard White, a London-based brewer who invested eight years ago, said: “I’m angry and I feel a bit responsible for enabling this . . . I feel a bit guilty for swallowing the BrewDog Kool-Aid, because clearly that hasn’t been everyone’s experience.”

And their environmental lies exposed:

The “punks with purpose” group of former staff said the company had used a private jet and “charter[ed] flights across the Atlantic that had to be filled with staff to justify them even going ahead”, claiming these undermined BrewDog’s sustainability goals.

The company said: “BrewDog is the world’s first carbon negative brewery, removing twice as much CO2 from the atmosphere as it creates. It has an industry-leading environmental impact action plan.”

The current fundraising prospectus said the company paid “approximately £125,000 annually . . . for flights” to Jet Pack Pie Limited, which is wholly owned by Watt. BrewDog declined to comment on what flights these were or why Watt’s company was involved.

 
The workings were figuratively done on the back of an envelope.

This thread appears on the first page of google results for "brewdog punk appropriation"and "brewdog hip brand".

It doesn't appear on the first page of google results for "brewdog sexist monsters" or "brewdog worker exploitation" or "brewdog ethical vacuum".

This demonstrates that people wondering whether Brewdog is hip or has successfully modified punk culture to be better, will find this thread and have their thoughts positively confirmed, whereas people interested in brewdog's problematic behaviour will not find it.
In passing, does this mean that you think "appropriation" means "successfully modifying something to be better"?
 
The workings were figuratively done on the back of an envelope.

Again, without you actually showing your working, we can all feel quite comfortable in calling bullshit on that claim. That's without even going into your known history of being a trolling dipshit.

This thread appears on the first page of google results for "brewdog punk appropriation"and "brewdog hip brand".

Google's results are customised to each individual user.


It doesn't appear on the first page of google results for "brewdog sexist monsters" or "brewdog worker exploitation" or "brewdog ethical vacuum".

So what? That doesn't prove the claim made.
 
In passing, does this mean that you think "appropriation" means "successfully modifying something to be better"?
I don't, but I suspect that most young(ish) people googling about punk will probably think it means that, in that particular context. The immense success of the Brewdog branding seems to confirm this.
 
Google's results are customised to each individual user.
Tested on two separate browsers with cookies/history etc disabled.

Have just double checked on Tor browser. Results stand, although one of the positive results is at the top of the second page instead of on the first page.

Therefore, my argument is unassailable.
 
That's a bullshit argument.

If I hear of some company being a bunch of cunts ands treating their staff like shit, I'm not going to automatically purchase their goods whenever I see them.

In fact I'll do the fucking opposite.
I haven't read the thread, but I've seen the Brewdog name whenever I click New posts. I hadn't heard of Brewdog until I saw this thread, and, like most people, wouldn't read through thousands of posts about a hipster beer company, but I will remember the name when I see it on the label of a beer on a shelf. I'm not saying I'd buy it. The name alone would put me off, but plenty will recognise the name and buy it based on nothing more than brand recognition.
 
I haven't read the thread, but I've seen the Brewdog name whenever I click New posts. I hadn't heard of Brewdog until I saw this thread, and, like most people, wouldn't read through thousands of posts about a hipster beer company, but I will remember the name when I see it on the label of a beer on a shelf. I'm not saying I'd buy it. The name alone would put me off, but plenty will recognise the name and buy it based on nothing more than brand recognition.
So you think stupid people just can't stop themselves buying things because they've seen the name somewhere, regardless of the context or reputation?

What a low opinion you have of people.
 
No other brewing company, as far as I am aware, has been accused of bullying in an open letter signed by over 250 former and current employees.

It's not they bully in a very special way, it's that staff are willing to stand up and be counted over it. That's the rare thing.

They've been taken taken to tribunal over their treatment of staff with disabilities, for which the reasonable adjustment was minor. They refused to carry out the reasonable adjustment.

They're real arseholes.
 
Tested on two separate browsers with cookies/history etc disabled.

Have just double checked on Tor browser. Results stand, although one of the positive results is at the top of the second page instead of on the first page.

Therefore, my argument is unassailable.

Again, bollocks. You've not shown how this argument relates to your given figure of 10%. Just declaring that your arguments are water tight is why you come across as such a fucking dick.

Do you genuinely think teuchter is attempting to convince you that this thread accounts for 10% of the beer company’s sales?

I have no clue what's going through his pointed little head right now. I would hazard a guess that he knows that he's full of shit, since instead of providing his calculations, he is just bullshitting.
 
Back
Top Bottom