Black Rifle Coffee drops sponsorship

[Koda]

If a company has to be lock step with you in every ideological aspect of your life, you will end up disappointed pretty regularly. I don't have the time or energy to devote to being outraged all the time.

I actually agree with this and have no problem buying from most companies that dont fit my political ideas but there are very few exceptions and its the potential hypocrisy at play here with BRCC, not that Im their biggest customer but I have made purchases simply in support of the 2A they originally marketed for. To learn they are donating to politicians actively working to remove our constitutional right is the definition of hypocrisy especially with a black rifle as their namesake and logo.

 

[Tarawa86]

At the end of the day, they are a for profit business. And yes (gasp), making a living for themselves and their employees are their number one priority. I'm not going to get all butthurt because they make decisions for their business that I may or may not agree with.

Don't think anyone's 'butthurt'. This is just a discussion of a current event, and how some members decide to spend their money. People come here to talk about stuff; it's more strange to me that this triggers people to come into a thread to try and low key insult people for wanting to talk about things.

edit: a word

 

[slimmer13]

I actually agree with this and have no problem buying from most companies that dont fit my political ideas but there are very few exceptions and its the potential hypocrisy at play here with BRCC, not that Im their biggest customer but I have made purchases simply in support of the 2A they originally marketed for. To learn they are donating to politicians actively working to remove our constitutional right is the definition of hypocrisy especially with a black rifle as their namesake and logo.

If I want to donate to 2a causes, I donate to 2a causes. If I want coffee, I buy coffee. Nevermind the logo on the bag.

 

[sobo]

Evan Hafer donated personal money to Obama (he said it was a lost bet and offset it with a donation to Mcain).

I found it interesting that Hafer's donations to McCain occurred months before his donation to Zer0bama.
For Hafer to state that he lost a bet and had to donate to Zer0bama, and then claim to "offset" (*) that loss with donations to McCain, would not a reasonable person conclude that the McCain donations would necessarily come after the Zer0bama donation, and not months beforehand...???

Look at the dates:

Browse Individual contributions - FEC.gov

Explore current and historic federal campaign finance data on the new fec.gov. Look at totals and trends, and see how candidates and committees raise and spend money. When you find what you need, export results and save custom links.

www.fec.gov

(*) Also note Hafer's supposed "offset" is not a true offset. Zer0bama's war chest is up $100 in the exchange. That's not what reasonable people would call an offset.

Sorry, but Hafer's explanation just don't hunt...

 

[User 1234]

His statement to Dana does not match up with the dates in the FEC record.

 

[Tarawa86]

I found it interesting that Hafer's donations to McCain occurred months to even years before his donation to Zer0bama.
For him to state that he lost a bet and had to donate to Zer0bama, then "offset" that loss with McCain donations, wouldn't a reasonable person conclude that the McCain donations would come after the Zer0bama donation...???

Come on man with that logic, don't be butthurt.

 

[slimmer13]

Don't think anyone's 'butthurt'. This is just a discussion of a current event, and how some members decide to spend their money. People come here to talk about stuff; it's more strange to me that this triggers people to come into a thread to try and low key insult people for wanting to talk about things.

That was an insult? Now it all makes sense.

 

[Koda]

If I want to donate to 2a causes, I donate to 2a causes. If I want coffee, I buy coffee. Nevermind the logo on the bag.

yeah, and that was my whole intent behind purchasing BRCC coffee. There are many ways to support a cause and getting a bag of coffee in return isnt a bad idea.

 

[slimmer13]

I found it interesting that Hafer's donations to McCain occurred months before his donation to Zer0bama.
For him to state that he lost a bet and had to donate to Zer0bama, then "offset" that loss with McCain donations, wouldn't a reasonable person conclude that the McCain donations would come after the Zer0bama donation...???

No idea. I'm not going through and cross referencing dates on an individuals donation habits.

 

[Tarawa86]

That was an insult? Now it all makes sense.

agreed

 

[sobo]

No idea. I'm not going through and cross referencing dates on an individuals donation habits.

Wasn't that hard, really. Matter of fact, it quickly stood out as a glaring inconsistency with the "story" he told Dana...

 

[Member 53328]

All this talk has me craving some coffee.

 

[Flopsweat]

Come on man with that logic, don't be butthurt.

C'mon man! https://hooktube.com/watch?v=gNajwpiOEO4

 

[Ttuck]

So just so I'm not missing anything, let me make sure I have a good understanding of the mortal sins BRCC committed.

They, as a public company failed to weigh in on an ongoing legal matter
They at some point stopped donating as a company to 2A causes
Evan Hafer donated personal money to Obama (he said it was a lost bet and offset it with a donation to Mcain).

Don't ignore the fact that Hafer has donated to Tulsi Gabbard whos stance on the 2A is to ban guns, restrict magazines, and bar anyone with PTSD from owning firearms. They've built their business off the backs of people who thought their ideals aligned with theirs but in the end they're just laughing all the way to bank.

 

[slimmer13]

Don't ignore the fact that Hafer has donated to Tulsi Gabbard whos stance on the 2A is to ban guns, restrict magazines, and bar anyone with PTSD from owning firearms. They've built their business off the backs of people who thought their ideals aligned with theirs but in the end they're just laughing all the way to bank.

Like posted earlier, it's a schtick. It's marketing. Every company does it to an extent. Yes it's designed to separate you from your dollars. It seems like they have been fairly transparent that their primary charitable focus is on veteran advocacy. The rifle is a logo. Kind of like how Apple isn't really an agriculture company.

 

[No_Regerts]

I highly recommend civit coffee. My brother bought it was a gag gift years ago. Jokes on him, Turned out to be a fine cup of joe and not very cheap

 

[awshoot]

...
They, as a public company failed to weigh in on an ongoing legal matter
...
At the end of the day, they are a for profit business. And yes (gasp), making a living for themselves and their employees are their number one priority. I'm not going to get all butthurt because they make decisions for their business that I may or may not agree with.

The first quoted section is somewhat inaccurate. Nobody asked them to weigh in -- they got dragged in and answered the question in a way that was offensive to many of their customers and not satisfactory to all of the mob.

It's important to remember that they are the Black Rifle Coffee Company -- the 2A has been part of their schtick since the get-go, and so they should expect that there would be certain things that alienate their customers. Donating to Everytown for example, or making it look like they had an issue with Kyle himself rather than a more esoteric issue with marketing. The interview above where he talks about the bet, and later about Kyle (spoiler: he thinks he acted in SD) should have been what he said from the beginning. It wasn't though.

Which brings us to the second quote excerpt above. They damaged their brand. They could have said nothing but at all the early steps -- until we get to that radio interview -- they were unloading magazines into their own feet. If their goal is to make a profit, they have some remedial education to complete.

 

[Patriot1775]

I admit I was duped. Here you have a vet owned coffee company that supports the military and is pro gun. Being ARSOF like the owner, I thought this was a win-win. Hell, I even remember Evan from Iraq back in the day. I wanted to support a company that parallels my ideals. Unlike Starbucks and the rest of the self described coffee snobs making "coffee" these days. But I will not compromise my principles and buy Levis, Nikes and still am no fan of S&W caving to Bill Clinton back in the 90's etc. Thanks for reading.

 

[Ttuck]

Like posted earlier, it's a schtick. It's marketing. Every company does it to an extent. Yes it's designed to separate you from your dollars. It seems like they have been fairly transparent that their primary charitable focus is on veteran advocacy. The rifle is a logo. Kind of like how Apple isn't really an agriculture company.

Apple doesn't market itself as an agricultural friendly fruit business. Unlike BRCC whos whole brand imagery revolves around guns and gun culture, IE their logo, company name and pretty much their entire marketing. I wouldn't say it's fairly transparent to end 2A advocacy with nary a peep while keeping the brands image all about guns and gun culture while the head honcho is donating to anti 2A people and organizations.

 

[awshoot]

Here's another interview with Hafer -- before this event -- I'm about 1/4 of the way through and so far nothing of any pertinence to the current situation (tax payer funded espresso machine in Iraq or Afg (like $30k), hunting, giraffe is supposed to taste awesome but Joe won't eat it, diets, and brown rice is worse for you than white rice because of arsenic in the hull), but I read elsewhere that some anti-2A views had been expressed. It being a Rogan episode though, the due diligence required is excessive, but I'm working on it. Guess I'll deprime some brass.