LOL: Victoria's Secret Figures Out That "Body Diversity" Isn't the Fantasy People Are Looking for in Budoir Attire

Get woke, go broke is proven again.

Although, as many have pointed out, this is another case of "going broke, so let's try woke." Victoria's Secret was in a major decline so they decided to remake their brand as the underwear for obese transgenders.

And then they went more broke.

Weird how that didn't work out.

Lingerie chain Victoria's Secret is reportedly ditching its woke, feminist makeover of recent years as it hasn't translated to business success.

Since the brand decided to move away from its "hyper-sexualized" image -- as BusinessOfFashion.com described it in a recent article -- Victoria's Secret has seen a significant revenue drop.

As such, it has looked to revamp itself and bring back "sexiness," the outlet noted in a piece that was also published by editorial partner CNN on Tuesday.

Cathaleen Chen reported that the brand's efforts to promote inclusivity -- which included making LGBTQ pro women's soccer player and outspoken leftist Megan Rapinoe, as well as a transgender woman, brand spokesmodels and getting rid of its famous "Angels" supermodels -- gained "favorable reviews from online critics [but] never translated into sales."

Really? You don't say?

That's weird, nothing like that ever happens in movies. Or comic books. Or video games. Or any other business that panders to the woke left.

According to the numbers, the lingerie brand's projected revenue for 2023 is $6.2 billion, which is 5% lower than it was last year, and even lower than 2020, when the brand's revenue was $7.5 billion.

The drop in Victoria's Secret's sales also followed the company's move to make its board of directors mostly female.

Again, you don't say. You don't say. Picking directors based on their vagina-havingness and not on their experience and record results in losing money? You don't say.

This is really eye-opening. Do go on. I've got my notepad out and I'm scribbling like a fiend.

In 2021, Rapinoe called out what the brand had been before the revamp, claiming it had sent out a "really harmful" message that was "patriarchal, sexist, viewing not just what it meant to be sexy but what the clothes were trying to accomplish through a male lens and through what men desired."

"And it was very much marketed toward younger women," the U.S. Women's soccer star added at the time.

Wait wait wait wait -- now you're telling me that abandoning your business model to do what a pink-haired angry woke lesbian extremist tells you to do was a bad move?

A woman who represents about 0.1% of the country doesn't have her smelly fingers on the pulse of the nation?

I'm learning so much!

...

In the fashion outlet, Chen noted that the lingerie company's attempt to stop the financial drain body-positive marketing was causing was to bring back its runway show format, and blend the sexiness the brand had become famous for with some of its more inclusive initiatives.

...

Chief executive Martin Waters also reportedly admitted that the inclusivity initiatives were not profitable for the company, stating, "Despite everyone's best endeavors, it's not been enough to carry the day."

According to BusinessOfFashion, the company's new goal is to "Improve profitability and cross back over $7 billion in annual sales." To meet this objective, the brand plans to roll out activewear and swimwear, update its existing stores and open up 400 new ones outside the United States.

Victoria's Secret did not immediately respond to Fox Business' request for comment.

Okay, here's what I can teach Victoria's Secret:

Your brand is dead. You will continue losing money year-over-year until you are forced to sell the much-diminished brand-name to a fly-by-night internet vendor at which point it becomes a zombie brand barely surviving on nostalgia fumes.

As they always say in business: It takes 10x as much money to get a new customer as it takes to merely keep the existing customers happy. In every woke "business" makeover, you intentionally alienate all of your existing customers to chase new customers, spending 10x more to attract this new supposedly more-desirable customer base than it would have cost you to excite the existing one. When the new "woke" customers do not come -- they never do -- you now have to spend 20x more to try to attract back your old customers.

But why would they come back? During this period they have either stopped buying the kind of products you sell entirely, and thus do not need your services, or have bought similar products from non-woke vendors, in which case they also do not need your services.

All of your old, undesirable customers remember that you decided that they were old and undesirable, and told them you did not want to sell to them any longer, and only wanted to sell to a new, more desirable (LOL) diverse customer base made up exclusively of People of Color, People of Size, and People of Made-Up Genders.

Why would they come back?

The woke death spiral is an irreversible one. You destroy all goodwill in your brand, and then you decide to try to dig yourself out of a hole of bad will.

It is cheaper just to start an entirely new brand where you start at zero instead of in a hole you have to dig out of.

Doesn't matter, though. Because even if you start a brand new company and build up customer goodwill -- we will be right back here in four years after you blow up your new company up with destructive woke anti-marketing again.

Barack Fucking Obama did not change human nature. Spike Lee is an ignorant midget clown and was completely wrong when he said that society would henceforth be divided into two periods, "Before Obama" and "After Obama."

You fucking maniacs continue huffing Obama's unicorn farts and acting as if garbage suddenly became gold just because Obama said "Hey we should pretend garbage is gold and see how that works out."

And they'll keep doing this, and keep going bankrupt, because they are committed Marxist ideologues.

Case in point: Australian Maxim, formerly a "ladmag" written for men with men's interests in mind, just published their list of the "100 Hottest Women."

For some definitions of "women." Of course they included a shman.

In the 92nd spot on the list, Maxim Australia included Dani Laidley, a transgender woman. Laidley was a coach in the Australian Football League before transitioning in 2020.

Laidley's inclusion on the list sparked criticism from many social media users.

Wow! What a hottie! She's a real looker, a five-alarm fire!

You know what I look for in a woman? A chin with the angularity and heft of a feller ax. I like a gal who can give me a beej and work out a charlie-horse in my thigh simultaneously.

Also I like big shoulders and arms, so she can hold me tight and protect me from the great big scary world at night.

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 04:30 PM

| Access Comments