The personal product-driven mega-corporation Proctor & Gamble had a pretty successful run last quarter, even beating Wall Street predictions. Only one of their brands found themselves deeply in the negative, and it just so happens to be the one that insulted its customer base in the name of being “woke.”
According to Reuters, Gillette suffered a net loss of billions of dollars last quarter. That’s billions with a “b”:
However, P&G reported a net loss of about $5.24 billion, or $2.12 per share, for the quarter ended June 30, due to an $8 billion non-cash writedown of Gillette. For the same period last year, P&G’s net income was $1.89 billion, or 72 cents per share.
According to Reuters, P&G chalked the billions in dollars lost up “to foreign exchange fluctuations, increased competition and a contracting market for blades and razors as consumers in developed markets shave less frequently.”
They’re partly right. A net loss of that much money can only mean that those who do shave have abandoned Gillette en masse, and rightly so. Gillette’s commercial that blanketed the male gender with the accusation of “toxic masculinity” while using feminist buzzwords and clips of hard-left news organizations was one of the most hated commercials of the past decade.
As P&G continued to see profits go up for all of their brands, Gillette began suffering profit drops that were revealed last April. Apparently, the drops never stopped.
Perhaps P&G isn’t willing to come forward yet with the fact that they made a monumental error in assuming men would take the “toxic masculinity” commercial well, but they should soon. The brand is damaged enough to lose billions, and men aren’t coming back, especially with cheaper alternatives embracing men for who they are and not assuming the worst about them.
I personally go out of my way to not buy Gillette products of any kind over the insult and I know many men who do the same. The commercial wasn’t just a call to fight toxic masculinity, it was an attack on men from a company known to create commercials that specialize in attacking the male gender.
The sooner P&G fires whoever thought this was a good idea and begins to move toward making amends with its customer base, the better, but it may be politically stuck now. Walking back their stance may cause them a lot of trouble with the SJW community who know how to raise a mob.
As I’ve said before, however, the mob is more bark than bite. If P&G can show some backbone and apologize, they will invite the wrath of the SJW mob but they may begin to staunch the blood flow from a very still-wide wound.