Did Chick-fil-A Gain After Gay Flap?

Joe Shoe · #1 (**permalink**) 10-27-2012, 09:58 PM

Yes indeed it did.

"Despite boycotts from pro-gay marriage groups, fast food restaurant Chick-fil-A may have benefited from remarks by president and chief operating officer Dan Cathy that he supported the "biblical definition of the family unit."
The number of people who said they visited Chick-fil-A in the "past month" increased 2.2 percent, according to a third quarter study by chain restaurant market research firm Sandelman & Associates' Quick-Track study. The research firm conducts research for all major fast-food chains in U.S. media markets." http://news.yahoo.com/chick-fil-gain...xQ2H0AAUrQtDMD

Boycots like these don't work. Reminds me of the SBC boycott a few years ago; it didn't work. Neither will this one. The gay pride movement will have to find some better strategies than attacking chicken stores. The profit reports show this is no exception. Not it mention it ads to their look-like-a-jek-strategy lately like when they try to take down the Boy Scouts of America like that. Backfired, both times.

1069 · #2 (**permalink**) 10-28-2012, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

Yes indeed it did.

"Despite boycotts from pro-gay marriage groups, fast food restaurant Chick-fil-A may have benefited from remarks by president and chief operating officer Dan Cathy that he supported the "biblical definition of the family unit."
The number of people who said they visited Chick-fil-A in the "past month" increased 2.2 percent, according to a third quarter study by chain restaurant market research firm Sandelman & Associates' Quick-Track study. The research firm conducts research for all major fast-food chains in U.S. media markets." Did Chick-fil-A Gain After Gay Flap? - Yahoo! News

Boycots like these don't work. Reminds me of the SBC boycott a few years ago; it didn't work. Neither will this one. The gay pride movement will have to find some better strategies than attacking chicken stores. The profit reports show this is no exception. Not it mention it ads to their look-like-a-jek-strategy lately like when they try to take down the Boy Scouts of America like that. Backfired, both times.

The company publicly promised to make no further financial contributions to political organizations which oppose gay rights, and that is all anyone wanted. Therefore, the boycott was a success. The fact that after agreeing to mend its ways, the company is doing better than ever is merely an added bonus. Win/win.

PT Again · #3 (**permalink**) 10-28-2012, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1069

The company publicly promised to make no further financial contributions to political organizations which oppose gay rights, and that is all anyone wanted. Therefore, the boycott was a success. The fact that after agreeing to mend its ways, the company is doing better than ever is merely an added bonus. Win/win.

Other than the FACT they made no such claim........

In response to Alderman Moreno's claims, Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy responded, “There continues to be erroneous implications in the media that Chick-fil-A changed our practices and priorities in order to obtain permission for a new restaurant in Chicago. That is incorrect. Chick-fil-A made no such concessions, and we remain true to who we are and who we have been."

Chick-Fil-A Agrees To Cease Funding To Anti-Gay Organizations, Chicago LGBT Group Claims

sky dancer · #4 (**permalink**) 10-28-2012, 12:12 PM

Boycotts allow citizens to feel empowered. The only way US citizens feel empowered is when they choose how to spend their money. In other words, citzen= consumer in America.

Coyote · #5 (**permalink**) 10-28-2012, 06:53 PM

Joe Shoe...do you EVER post anything that is not a thread about gays?

sky dancer · #6 (**permalink**) 10-28-2012, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coyote

Joe Shoe...do you EVER post anything that is not a thread about gays?

Maybe he needs a boyfriend?

saltwn · #7 (**permalink**) 10-28-2012, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

Yes indeed it did.

"Despite boycotts from pro-gay marriage groups, fast food restaurant Chick-fil-A may have benefited from remarks by president and chief operating officer Dan Cathy that he supported the "biblical definition of the family unit."
The number of people who said they visited Chick-fil-A in the "past month" increased 2.2 percent, according to a third quarter study by chain restaurant market research firm Sandelman & Associates' Quick-Track study. The research firm conducts research for all major fast-food chains in U.S. media markets." Did Chick-fil-A Gain After Gay Flap? - Yahoo! News

Boycots like these don't work. Reminds me of the SBC boycott a few years ago; it didn't work. Neither will this one. The gay pride movement will have to find some better strategies than attacking chicken stores. The profit reports show this is no exception. Not it mention it ads to their look-like-a-jek-strategy lately like when they try to take down the Boy Scouts of America like that. Backfired, both times.

Stock annalists say McDonald's is the best (FF) investment followed by a group that owns Taco Bell and KF Chicken.

Quote:

A staggering 30% of the 96,000 new jobs generated in August were driven by the food-services sector,

so I would say the earnings report is on par with or maybe even below where it should be.
Real chicken eaters don't go to Chik-file. They serve a specialty sandwich which while tasty is as I say a specialty food.

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article36853.html

Joe Shoe · #8 (**permalink**) 10-29-2012, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1069

The company publicly promised to make no further financial contributions to political organizations which oppose gay rights, and that is all anyone wanted. Therefore, the boycott was a success. The fact that after agreeing to mend its ways, the company is doing better than ever is merely an added bonus. Win/win.

Bull. If that were the case, there would have been no boycott as it wasn't needed for that. You should be praising Chick-fil-a for their stance of not contributions to political organizations which oppose gay rights. They were willing to do that even though their sales INCREASED and so were affected POSITIVELY by this boycott.

saltwn · #9 (**permalink**) 10-29-2012, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

Bull. If that were the case, there would have been no boycott as it wasn't needed for that. You should be praising Chick-fil-a for their stance of not contributions to political organizations which oppose gay rights. They were willing to do that even though their sales INCREASED and so were affected POSITIVELY by this boycott.

I doubt the cafes in the south went out of business after sit ins during civil rights. But as I say they are on par with the great profits fast food is making and they may be a bit behind. Some people too had never heard of them until the publicity. They're never going to compete with popeyes or KFC though because they mostly just sell a chicken sandwich .

foundit66 · #10 (**permalink**) 10-29-2012, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

Bull. If that were the case, there would have
been no boycott as it wasn't needed for that. You should be praising
Chick-fil-a for their stance of not contributions to political
organizations which oppose gay rights.

Except, they actually do / did…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-...b_1725237.html

Item #1
“Chick-fil-A has donated at least $5 million to organizations
(including a certified hate group) that, among other things, depict
gay people as pedophiles, want to make "gay behavior" illegal, and
even say gay people should be "exported" out of America.”

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

They were willing to do that even though their
sales INCREASED and so were affected POSITIVELY by this
boycott.

As saltwn points out, blindly claiming that their sales increase was a
positive effect of the boycott is premature. It’s just a step removed
from trying to proclaim a hurricane is god’s wrath for legalizing gay
marriage.
Moreover, I don’t think the generalization regarding this and boycotts
in general can be claimed on this example due to the added (and in
some ways separate) impact of the loud-mouth individuals who
proclaimed that they would ban chick-fil-a from cities.
Liberals on this board typically supported the boycott, but I can’t
think of anybody here who supported banning the chick-fil-a from the
cities. Liberals on this board typically condemned the ban
proclamation.
IMO, this egregious and inexcusable violation (the ban proclamation)
had a negative impact upon the boycott. I suspect the Chick-Fil-A
appreciation day would not have happened (or not seen the same
results) if not for some individuals pronouncing a “ban” in specific
cities.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to 1069 For This Useful Post:
catusfelidae, crazyflamingos, Mikeyy, rivrrat, saltwn

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PT Again For This Useful Post:
faithful_servant, MrLiberty

The Following User Says Thank You to sky dancer For This Useful Post:
saltwn

The Following User Says Thank You to Coyote For This Useful Post:
dabateman

The Following User Says Thank You to sky dancer For This Useful Post:
Coyote

The Following User Says Thank You to saltwn For This Useful Post:
foundit66

The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
saltwn