This post first appeared at Fellowship of the Minds
In America today, privately-owned businesses are no longer motivated by profit and service. Instead, businesses have become an arm of the Democrat Party by discriminating against conservatives and promoting the Left’s agenda — on abortion, anti-Trump political partisanship, illegal immigration, LGBT, and anti-Second Amendment gun-control.
A case in point is Dick’s Sporting Goods.
After the mass shooting last February 2018 at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, Dick’s was one of the first businesses in the U.S. to clamber on board the ensuing “March for Our Lives” gun-control movement by declaring they would stop selling assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, barr the legal sale of guns to those under age 21, and hire their own gun-control lobbyists to push for stricter gun laws nationwide.
At the time, Dick’s paradoxically predicted that although the move could hurt sales, it would also draw more shoppers to its stores.
In August 2018, Dick’s admitted that sales at stores open for at least 12 months tumbled by a bigger-than-expected 4% during the second quarter. But billionaire Chairman and CEO Edward W. Stack, 65, put on a brave face, insisting he was confident sales would turn around. (See “Pro-gun control Dick’s Sporting Goods sales down 4%; will close 35 stores”)
Dick’s drop in sales has continued, such that the company may soon close down their entire Field & Stream chain of 35 stores across 18 states. CEO Stack admitted the company’s gun control stance was hurting business but offered no indication he would reverse course.
On March 29, 2019, Bloomberg reports that since its gun-control policy, Dick’s lost “about $150 million” — an amount equivalent to 1.7% of annual revenue. Yet Stack claims the $150 million loss was worth it. He virtue-signaled:
“The system does not work. It’s important that when you know there’s something that’s not working, and it’s to the detriment of the public, you have to stand up.”
What happened at Dick’s confirms a new Stanford University study that fond that although respondents said they were more likely to buy a product to support a CEO’s political stance than they were to boycott in disagreement, their actions revealed the opposite. When asked for specific examples, 69% could name a product they’re boycotting, but only 21% could recall a product they started buying to support a political stance.
Strangely, despite Dick’s loss of $150 million from its gun control stance, the company’s stock price hasn’t suffered. Dick’s shares, which didn’t move much following the gun-control announcement last February, actually climbed 14% in the 13 months since, outpacing the 4% rise in the benchmark Russell 3000 Index.