Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
But in the case of Exxon and BP, those boycotts have typically been in response to specific events -- oil spills and the response (or lack thereof) by the oil company. Local franchisees, who may have had the franchises for years if not decades before the oil spills, have nothing to do with the spills or the responses. They're not in a position to suddenly say "Oh, let me go to a different oil company right now." And as others have noted, the effect of a boycott in these instances will be felt entirely by the franchisee, not by BP or Exxon.
In my view, that makes them collateral damage, and I personally have an issue with that. Fine if others don't. But I'll admit it -- even though I don't usually buy from BP, I did when others were boycotting it after the Gulf spill. I didn't want to see local business be punished for things they didn't do and had no control over at all.
|
I see your point, but creating economic pressure on franchisees creates pressure on the corporation. Franchisees complain loudly when stuff like this happens. They yell at the parent corporation. The parent corporation responds to that stuff. They need to keep their franchisees happy.