This is demonstrably false. Anheuser-Busch’s share price was at a 12 month high when the Dylan Mulvaney controversy happened, and it’s still down ~15% since then, basically starting the drop the day they did the partnership.
You can see this for yourself on the stock market. Look at their share price since mid April - it was $66, it’s now $58. That means that they have lost a lot of money on it. Where are you getting that is now higher than what was lost?
Then you don’t really understand finance and how the Dylan mulvaney stunt cost them billions of dollars. The share price is the value of the company. The value of the company dropped ~15% directly off the back of it.
Wait you think Budweiser didn’t suffer financially from sponsoring DM? What metric are you using to determine financial loss?
The profits made by the company.
Bud lite may have sold less, but people switched up other brands by the same company, and it ended up higher than what was lost.
Source for that? Last I checked all sales were down for the company not just bud lite.
This is demonstrably false. Anheuser-Busch’s share price was at a 12 month high when the Dylan Mulvaney controversy happened, and it’s still down ~15% since then, basically starting the drop the day they did the partnership.
You can see this for yourself on the stock market. Look at their share price since mid April - it was $66, it’s now $58. That means that they have lost a lot of money on it. Where are you getting that is now higher than what was lost?
I didn’t say anything about stock prices
Then you don’t really understand finance and how the Dylan mulvaney stunt cost them billions of dollars. The share price is the value of the company. The value of the company dropped ~15% directly off the back of it.