Live data from Hacker News

How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

jacquesmattheij.com

31–40 of 334 posts

Re: How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

#31
post #12

This is stupid. If the elephant is going to be shot by a warden anyway, WHY NOT let some rich american shoot it? Why does it matter WHO shoots the elephant? It doesn't! If you want to argue about whether the elephant SHOULD have been killed, that's fine. There is plenty to debate there. But who does the shooting is of no importance. That said he's right that as a CEO you represent your company--especially when you're…

Because basic supply and demand suggests that their are way more rich Americans wanting to shoot elephants than there are elephants in need of shooting.

Ergo: the idea itself isn't sustainable, economically or morally.

Re: How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

#32
post #6

Anyone who has had the misfortune of registering a domain with GoDaddy and using its horrible user interface to try to adjust DNS settings will not be surprised by this. GoDaddy should have been out of business a long time ago just due to the horrid usability of its product.

I like the implication that companies with bad UI are likely to have bloodthirsty sociopaths as CEOs.

Re: How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

#33
post #18

In the grand scheme of things, my 27 domains switched from GoDaddy won't change much from their company's perspective, but I will not continue to use them as a domain registrar because of this.

Actually, it will. What if a 1000 customers like you who own 10 domains do it at the same day?

They sure HAVE to notice it. I've already transferred my domains and I'll make sure I won't buy any from GoDaddy again.

GoDaddy already has one of the scammiest UIs I've ever come across (with a possible exception of, maybe, MySpace) and the recent elephant killing was the last straw!

Re: How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

#34
I agree that it's a horrible stunt, but I don't see how it can harm GoDaddy's reputation. As far as I am concerned, GoDaddy's reputation is so far down in the dumps that it is difficult for it to sink any lower, and that is based on their behavior as a registrar, not stunts by the CEO.

Re: How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

#35
post #12

This is stupid. If the elephant is going to be shot by a warden anyway, WHY NOT let some rich american shoot it? Why does it matter WHO shoots the elephant? It doesn't! If you want to argue about whether the elephant SHOULD have been killed, that's fine. There is plenty to debate there. But who does the shooting is of no importance. That said he's right that as a CEO you represent your company--especially when you're…

He explained it - it gives an incentive for marking more elephants as "problem elephants" than needed.

I wonder if a couple of fence (electric) might be a better solution than shooting the elephant. And all I saw in the video was a couple of square meters of trampled grass. I wonder what animal court in the world would give the death sentence for that.

Re: How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

#37
So, to recap: sexist advertising campaigns for the benefit of the entire company == OK; the CEO shooting an elephant == boycott. To be clear, I'm in no way agreeing with his actions, but it was getting fed up with the advertising that got me to dump GoDaddy for DynDNS long before anything like this occurred.

Re: How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

#38
post #12

This is stupid. If the elephant is going to be shot by a warden anyway, WHY NOT let some rich american shoot it? Why does it matter WHO shoots the elephant? It doesn't! If you want to argue about whether the elephant SHOULD have been killed, that's fine. There is plenty to debate there. But who does the shooting is of no importance. That said he's right that as a CEO you represent your company--especially when you're…

He addressed that in the article: because "there is an immediate opportunity to mark more animals than needed as 'problematic' or 'diseased' than is really the case and that would cloud the issue considerably."

As a thought experiment imagine some rich guy offers a tremendous amount of money (let's say millions) to allow authorities to perform an execution of a death row inmate. To allow that would be playing with fire. The government now has a financial interest in having more inmates on death row, as opposed to simply serving the public interest.

Re: How to damage your brand in one smooth shot - Way to GoDaddy

#39
Unfortunately all my domains are with GoDaddy. Moving them ASAP. It is unacceptable for such a big company to have its CEO involved in something like this.

For years we've been discussing social responsibilities of the enterprise (I've been on it since 1998 here in Brazil) and then we see something like this. If it has the potential to make one disappointed and wonder if she shouldn't give up the fight, it also makes one see that discussing the social impacts and actions of businesses is still tremendously important and necessary.

I'm proud to be on the right side of the fight. And I'm ashamed of having my domains hosted with the slaughterhouse registrar.

Post reply on HN