Jaguar Reveals Rebrand for its EV Future (šŸ˜¬)

  • Thread starter Famine
  • 234 comments
  • 10,714 views
By using these forums, you agree to the following:

You will post all messages in English.
You will not use ā€œtextspeakā€ (ā€œrā€, ā€œuā€, ā€œplzā€, etc.) in your messages. Decent grammar is expected at all times, including proper usage of capital letters.
You will not behave in an abusive and/or hateful manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack any individual or any group.
You will not knowingly post any material that is false, misleading, or inaccurate.
You will not post or link to content that is obscene or sexually oriented.
You will not use profanity in the forums, nor link to content which contains offensive language without sufficient warning.
You will not post advertisements or solicitations outside of designated areas or without proper authorization.
You will not post any personā€™s private information within the forum but your own. You acknowledge that you are solely responsible for any personal data or information that you choose to disclose and make publicly accessible via GTPlanet, and that any personal data or information may remain indefinitely.
You will, if asked by a representative of the forums, cease posting any content.
You will not use the forums to violate any laws nor to discuss illegal activities.
You will not use the forums to impersonate any person or entity, disguise the origin of any posting, nor collect or store personal data about other users.
You will not use the forums for the purposes of sharing or distributing viruses, licenses, registration information, software keys, pirated commercial multimedia files, ā€œcracksā€, or other information designed to do harm to or allow unlawful access to any computer software or systems.
You will not attempt to access any protected section of the site, nor make any attempt to bypass or modify the features of the forum software.
You remain solely responsible for anything found within your posts and agree to indemnify and hold GTPlanet and its affiliates, sponsors, or other partners and employees harmless from any claim or demand, including reasonable attorneysā€™ fees, made by any third party due to any material you post to or transmit through the forums.
Violation of these rules may result in termination of your account or your ability to access the GTPlanet website, and your service provider(s) may be notified. GTPlanet expressly reserve our rights under the law to take any other actions we deem necessary, and may remove posts or withdraw membership at any time for any reason.
GTPlanet ā€œPremiumā€ subscription fees are non-refundable.
 
I'm not surprised the guy who couldn't tell what mocking was before he got banned before still doesn't understand what mocking is. Nor is it surprising you're still missing the point Bud Light has long been an advocate of the pride community.
Bud Light may be an advocate for the pride community, but they arenā€™t the brands core customer base. We have seen the core customers of Bud Light turn their backs on the brand due to a sudden rebranding that isnā€™t to their liking, call them bigots if you will, but the rebrand kind of showed what the customers really think.
 
Clinton Ducks
You tried this before you got banned.
Bud Light may be an advocate for the pride community, but they arenā€™t the brands core customer base. We have seen the core customers of Bud Light turn their backs on the brand due to a sudden rebranding that isnā€™t to their liking, call them bigots if you will, but the rebrand kind of showed what the customers really think.
It wasn't even a rebranding. Bud Light was trying to reach a younger audience & used a major Tiktok influencer who happened to be transgender in 1 video. Conservatives saw her & lost their minds ignoring the fact Bud Light had been using LGBTQ+ to promote for decades.

As I already pointed out, their ignorance was also seeped in hypocrisy whether it was partaking in "cancel culture", people still drinking it or buying other AB products. Kid Rock went viral for shooting a bunch of Bud Light bottles, yet he was seen drinking it & selling it in his Nashville bar months later. Only a few months after that, did he try to claim they "learned their lesson".
 
Last edited:
You tried this before you got banned.

I feel the need to remind you (because apparently nobody else will) that openly mocking other forum users is against the rules. As is discussing moderation action. Please abide by the AUP so we can all have a pleasant discussion without resorting to ad hominems. Thank you.

Anyway, back on topic: I find it quite strange that Jaguar are doing an advert for their EV relaunch before they have an actual car available. Whatever buzz they create now (be it positive or negative) will have long fizzled out by the time they have anything to sell. It seems like a bit of a waste of money to me. Surely all a Jag advert needs to be is ā€œJaGUar, fast cars that (maybe) you can affordā€. And then show the car going fast down a road through some picturesque scenery. Call me old fashioned maybe.
 
Last edited:
You tried this before you got banned.

It wasn't even a rebranding. Bud Light was trying to reach a younger audience & used a major Tiktok influencer who happened to be transgender in 1 video. Conservatives saw her & lost their minds ignoring the fact Bud Light had been using LGBTQ+ to promote for decades.

As I already pointed out, their ignorance was also seeped in hypocrisy whether it was partaking in "cancel culture", people still drinking it or buying other AB products. Kid Rock went viral for shooting a bunch of Bud Light bottles, yet he was seen drinking it & selling it in his Nashville bar months later. Only a few months after that, did he try to claim they "learned their lesson".
Trying to appeal to a younger generation in order to sell beer is not the right approach because young people these days tend to not drink beer. But I do agree that the conservatives lose their minds when they see a trans person and especially in a marketing context of BEER.
 
So, this was the last Jaguar advertising campaign I remember...

It starts with Churchill, and climaxes with Hiddleston, a tear in his eye - over Shakespeares 'This Sceptered Isle' bit... whilst in a LHD car with a whited out US plate in London.



This is the kind of stuff that appeals to Jaguar buyers, it's flag-shagging-wank for trad conservative white English dudes. I'd agree this new take on Jaguar absolutely will miss that target, and I wouldn't put money on it finding that many buyers in it's new guise*... I think it just demonstrates that Jag was ** before, and it's still **. At least this time around they're not reskinning Mondeos.

*I wouldn't put money the other way either.
 
Anyway, back on topic: I find it quite strange that Jaguar are doing an advert for their EV relaunch before they have an actual car available. Whatever buzz they create now (be it positive or negative) will have long fizzled out by the time they have anything to sell. It seems like a bit of a waste of money to me. Surely all a Jag advert needs to be is ā€œJaGUar, fast cars that (maybe) you can affordā€. And then show the car going fast down a road through some picturesque scenery. Call me old fashioned maybe.
They have got cars available though, their current range, (and yes I'm aware they're cutting ties with a good proportion of their current dealerships).
Their I-PACE is still considered a good EV for what it is. Maybe the ad will attract new buyers to the brand in the meantime, who knows?
 
They have got cars available though, their current range, (and yes I'm aware they're cutting ties with a good proportion of their current dealerships).
Their I-PACE is still considered a good EV for what it is. Maybe the ad will attract new buyers to the brand in the meantime, who knows?

I was having a bit of a race against a Subaru WRX in my Nissan 370Z down a motorway the other evening, and one of those I-Paceā€™s went effortlessly sailing past the both of us. My dashcam footage wouldā€™ve made a good advert for them. ā€œJaguar EVs, leaving petrolheads in the dustā€ :lol:
 
I'm not sure why a transvestite in an ad has anything to do with enjoying your Bud Light.
"If a trans person enjoys it, this must mean it is tainted."
...
Yes it is tainted.
No, it backfired because it triggered a transphobic boycott of the company. It had nothing to do with how the target audience (hint, it wasnā€™t you) received the video.
It had everything to do with it.
Shooting melodramatically at beer cans because you donā€™t like an Instagram influencer they sponsored is pretty much peak drama queen content.
Drama king content you mean.
I would suggest really trying a different approach, my guy. History has shown this line of thinking before, esp. in regard to a drink....
5c4f26ec291b6.image.jpg
This is not the same thing.
It's called widening your market base & they had been doing it for years. See, conservatives got into a big fuss over nothing b/c their right-wing media told them to. Up until Dylan, Bud Light had been running pride ads for decades. These are from before you were born, brother.


The men in these ads are not hiding the fact that they are men. It's obvious that these men are acting as women as a joke, or rather a ploy to get some beer. It's not preachy, it's fun and doesn't insult the core audience.
 
This is not the same thing.
Conservatives going, "I don't want to drink the same beer as transgenders" is just as bigoted as white racists going, "I don't want to drink the same water as blacks".
The men in these ads are not hiding the fact that they are men. It's obvious that these men are acting as women as a joke, or rather a ploy to get some beer. It's not preachy, it's fun and doesn't insult the core audience.
Yeah, because drag queens have definitely not also been the target of conservatives for the past couple years, yet 30 years ago, Bud Light was featuring multiple ads with them without a peep.

But, as with Clinton, you're being purposefully oblivious. Bud Light ran 5 different ads around "Ladies Night" promoting inclusion throughout the 90's as well as ads throughout the 2000s & 2010s promoting LGTBQ+ openly, but snowflake conservatives lost their minds at 1 tiktok ad acting like Bud Light suddenly went "woke" because a transgender person was seen.

Yes it is tainted.
There's a hypothetical I could propose given your own life situation, but if you're so far as to openly saying it's "tainted" b/c a transgender is enjoying the same beer as someone else, you need to talk to a therapist or another professional, b/c that's a concerning stance to have.
 
Conservatives going, "I don't want to drink the same beer as transgenders" is just as bigoted as white racists going, "I don't want to drink the same water as blacks".
Maybe it is bigoted but if most people see the brand one way and are then presented with something that's completely different, they are going to complain. The Anheuser-Busch company did not NEED to employ a trans activist for their marketing. Why make such a risky decision KNOWING how most people would react?
Yeah, because drag queens have definitely not also been the target of conservatives for the past couple years, yet 30 years ago, Bud Light was featuring multiple ads with them without a peep.

But, as with Clinton, you're being purposefully oblivious. Bud Light ran 5 different ads around "Ladies Night" promoting inclusion throughout the 90's as well as ads throughout the 2000s & 2010s promoting LGTBQ+ openly, but snowflake conservatives lost their minds at 1 tiktok ad acting like Bud Light suddenly went "woke" because a transgender person was seen.
Conservatives are not slowflakes, they just don't resonate with the marketing.
There's a hypothetical I could propose given your own life situation, but if you're so far as to openly saying it's "tainted" b/c a transgender is enjoying the same beer as someone else, you need to talk to a therapist or another professional, b/c that's a concerning stance to have.
The brand had no reason to shoot themselves in the foot! They brought the entire controversy onto themselves and they have paid the price. The thing that concerns me is that the people in charge were too pig-headed to realise who they were dealing with. It was a dumb decision that has, unfortunately, tainted the brand.
 
Last edited:
Maybe it is bigoted but if most people see the brand one way and are then presented with something that's completely different, they are going to complain. The Anheuser-Busch company did not NEED to employ a trans activist for their marketing. Why make such a risky decision KNOWING how most people would react?
Good god, it's like you just completely ignore what I've been posting the last 2 pages.

Bud Light has spent 30 years using LGBTQ+ in its advertising & it has never been a problem. So, of course they would continue to do so.
Conservatives are not slowflakes, they just don't resonate with the marketing.
If seeing a transgender person drinking Bud Light makes them react the way they did, they're snowflakes.
The brand had no reason to shoot themselves in the foot! They brought the entire controversy onto themselves and they have paid the price. The thing that concerns me is that the people in charge were too pig-headed to realise who they were dealing with. It was a dumb decision that has, unfortunately, tainted the brand.
A simple ad showing a person of a minority group and the minority is somehow the issue, not the conservatives who used to say people get too offended over everything yet threw an absolutely bitch fit over seeing a transgender drinking the same beer as them.

The simple fact you keep using the word "tainted" is evidence you are way too lost in the sauce.
 
Last edited:
Good god, it's like you just completely ignore what I've been posting the last 2 pages.

Bud Light has spent 30 years using LGBTQ+ in its advertising & it has never been a problem. So, of course they would continue to do so.
This is not the same. Putting a controversial figure in front of a marketing campaign was never going to work. The Bud Light ads of the past do not place a contentious issue or person at the forefront.
If seeing a transgender person drinking Bud Light makes them react the way they did, they're snowflakes.
I guess they are.
A simple ad showing a person of a minority group and the minority is somehow the issue, not the conservatives who used to say people get too offended over everything yet threw an absolutely bitch fit over seeing a transgender drinking the same beer as them.
They throw a bitchfit because it's a betrayal!
The simple fact you keep using the word "tainted" is evidence you are way too lost in the sauce.
Sure thing.
 
Last edited:
This is not the same. Putting a controversial figure in front of a marketing campaign was never going to work. The Bud Light ads of the past do not place a contentious issue or person at the forefront.
Lol, the drag queen ads literally feature the same people throughout them.
They throw a bitchfit because it's a betrayal!
Betrayal? It's just beer.
Sad Cry GIF by First We Feast


Either stop buying it or man up & realize it's not like Dylan is going to the brewery to personally spit in each drink to turn you gay.
 
Last edited:
Lol, the drag queen ads literally feature the same people throughout them.
They aren't controversial or preachy!
Betrayal? It's just beer.
Sad Cry GIF by First We Feast
So people who don't like the marketing are just bigoted crybabies?
Either stop buying it or man up & realize it's not like Dylan is going to the brewery to personally spit in each drink to turn you gay.
People did stop buying it.
 
Last edited:
They aren't controversial or preachy!
Really? Drag queens aren't controversial? Lol, tell that to today's conservatives.
So people who don't like the marketing are just bigoted crybabies?
Big difference between not liking marketing & filming yourself destroying products you already paid for. As silly & soft as people who burn jerseys because their favorite player switched teams. It's not that serious.
People did stop buying it.
If that's all they did, fine. But, they didn't. They went online to make themselves look like childish morons. Your very own posts in this thread even go step further to highlight that they're also just dumb bigots b/c somehow, a transgender drinking the same beverage as of them makes it "tainted".
 
Good thing Jaguar(jagaur?)didnā€™t show the models drinking from the same water fountain. Thatā€™d really be the last straw for the bigidiots.
 
Really? Drag queens aren't controversial? Lol, tell that to today's conservatives.
No, drag queens are not controversial.
Big difference between not liking marketing & filming yourself destroying products you already paid for. As silly & soft as people who burn jerseys because their favorite player switched teams. It's not that serious.
It's about sending a message.
If that's all they did, fine. But, they didn't. They went online to make themselves look like childish morons. Your very own posts in this thread even go step further to highlight that they're also just dumb bigots b/c somehow, a transgender drinking the same beverage as of them makes it "tainted".
"Childish morons" who made the beer successful in the first place.
 
No, drag queens are not controversial.
Uh, in this country, conservatives will literally terrorize places that feature drag nights.
It's about sending a message.
Damn dog, Bud Light really learned their lesson by counting the dollars Kid Rock spent buying all that beer to destroy.

Boycotting works well as a message. Making yourself look dumb is not.
"Childish morons" who made the beer successful in the first place.
Lol, that is not an excuse to look like a colossal baby online. Those few dozen people who went viral are not the sole success behind Bud Light.
 
Last edited:
It had everything to do with it.
Soā€¦ the people that got upset about the sponsorship were followers of Dylan Mulvaney on Instagram? Thatā€™s a strange and unusual plot twist. Why do you follow her there if you canā€™t even stand her drinking the same beer as you?
Drama king content you mean.
No, drama queen.


Conservatives are not slowflakes, they just don't resonate with the marketing.
Cancelling your favourite beer because they sponsored an influencer who is not politically correct? Sounds snowflaky to me.
 
Back