Let's not gloss over the fact that the author of this piece on Breitbart is a big Orca supporter - my guess is he's not paying for those coolers that he's promoting so hard on Twitter. https://twitter.com/AWRHawkins
Bingo. This is the NRA doubling down on something that most likely is going to be impossible to prove one way or another. It's a he-said, she-said thing at this point. I'll drink to that.
With the NRA doubling down on its claim (somewhat as point out by dnoodles) and myself trying to remain open minded. (i.e I took NRA's word for it when they released their statement and then took Yetis response as truth) I still think the NRA is playing the role of "bully" here. Although I will say, Yetis "decision" (assuming the NRA isnt blatantly lying about the order cancellation) did open them up to this attack. Justin Hammer isnt president but is still involved...I forgot her title, so its not off the wall that she would respond. Where did you get this? From the article NRA says Yeti asked them to refrain from using their trademark in FUTURE print materials-my assumption is they were allowed to use it before? EDIT** Just saw it was your assumption, nevermind
In business as large as Yeti and the NRA, you don't just bandy about using other big companies logos without an agreement to use it. I call BS.
This makes me think of a question back to Justin's point. If you are not an NRA member are you automatically against the 2nd amendment? If YETI doesn't work with the NRA, are they against the 2nd amendment? It would seem the NRA takes that stance where if you are not with them, you are against them. Which IMHO isn't the case.
In defense of NRA (Just playing devils advocate here) It doesnt need to be if your not with us your against us, NRA is saying Yeti used to be with us but are caving to anti gun right advocates and cutting ties with us. In other words here claiming Yeti as a fair weather friend, so its not that they are attacking an unbiased company but rather a former supporter. again, not saying its a good practice to burn every company who changes its business model and the amount of support of they give.
Depends on Yeti's motivation. If they cut ties due to political motivations then they are not pro 2nd. There's literally no way to spin it. If I stop being a member of the NRA and my motivation is I don't like all the sh*t they continuously mail to me or I don't agree with lackluster performance defending the 2nd or because I think their funds would be better spent defending the 2nd than sending their top big wigs on ten safaris a year then I can argue I'm more pro 2nd than the NRA. The question pertinent here is what was Yeti's motivations which may be impossible to prove unless the NRA has documentation that supports their claims. Besides, the NRA isn't calling for a backlash on Yeti as far as I can see. Best I can tell, that's basically from the author of the article and NRA supporters. If we want to talk about business models alone then there's not any more to hold against the NRA than Yeti. It looks like the NRA is just explaining a sudden lack of Yeti/NRA cross marketing.
He promoted Pelican because of an NRA fundraising thing they were doing. Since the Yeti news broke his feed has been nothing but Orca - including pics of a brand spanking new cooler that I'm pretty sure he didn't go out and buy on his own. Not saying there's anything wrong with having an opinion, but let's just be honest about our motivations.
Good point although impossible to prove (most likely). NRA claimed Yeti cited "recent events" in reference to Parkland
Doesn't matter if he paid for it or not (as long as he didn't steal it). If he believes the story then why wouldn't he support another company.
But its probably safer to say they cut ties because of business motivations rather than political motivations.
Well they thought they had enough evidence to draw the conclusion they came to (the NRA). So it falls into the court of public opinion and some don't like how that trial is playing out.
Of course the NRA would claim that YETI is caving to anti gun right's advocates. It fits their agenda of throwing them under the bus and sicking their supporters on them. But just because a company is no longer doing business with the NRA, doesn't mean they are against them or against the 2nd amendment. Perhaps YETI is saying, this isn't our fight and we are stepping away. That is of course an assumption or a thought of mine.
I don't do twitter so I can't say what overpriced cooler he was previously supporting or when; but while I like his writing and appreciate his place in media; he's not a straight reporter by any stretch- he's the Sean Hannity of 2A media. He's a cheerleader; and while I've not seen anything factually wrong with any of his writing previously I have seen some of the conclusions he has drawn from said facts that I did not necessarily agree with and identified as editorializing. This specific article is just reporting on the NRAs official statement. Hawkins doesn't need to editorialize; his subject does it on their own. Where the lines are blurred between editorial vs. news is on whether or not he gave Yeti a chance at rebuttal; which based on a lack of reference I am guessing he did not. Had he done so and Yeti declined comment, it would have behooved his (and the NRAs) position to point that out.
The left has made business political; which was the entire reason for this thread in the first place.
I am not an NRA member, but I am definitely pro-2A, owning several guns. This kind of attitude is exactly why I have not, and will not ever, support or donate to the NRA without a serious change in that attitude. This mess simply reinforces this to me. Being pro-2A does not require adopting the NRA mindset. I can't afford YETI coolers (you can buy a lot of ice at those prices). I have their 32 oz tumbler that my wife bought for me. It is a great product. I drank coffee from it this morning. Still not buying an over-priced cooler from them; price being the only factor. As I see it, the real loser in this will be the NRA. This kind of stupid crap will only further alienate the pro 2A people who were skeptical of the NRA to begin with. For all its claims to want to strengthen support for the 2A, actions like this by the NRA will only weaken it in in the public perception.
