Globalization, which began at the end of the 19th century, opened global markets to various companies from different countries and has spread greatly over recent decades, to the point that many Western companies now own a large chain of branches and monopolize some industries, especially the field of restaurants and cafes.
But the popular campaigns witnessed by the Arab and Islamic countries, as well as the group of supporters of Palestine from various countries of the world, during the past seven months, led to a kind of revolution in concepts in a way that serves humanitarian principles, even if it is at the expense of personal interests.
This was greatly helped by globalization and the fact that the world has become a village due to the ease of communication with the spread of the Internet and means of communication. Boycott campaigns began to pursue foreign companies and products that support the Israeli occupation. People see it as an effective and effective weapon, and the scope of the popular response expands in a steady and unprecedented manner, almost reaching the level of consensus in a practical response to the continuing massacres against the Palestinian people that have continued in the Gaza Strip for the seventh month.
A slap in the face of Western companies?
Western companies – especially those that monopolize information and consider their products distinct and unique – received a severe blow through boycott campaigns that rose above their limited interests in the interest of common humanity and achieving justice. There was greater consideration for human dignity, achieving justice, and rejecting or supporting injustice.
As calls for a boycott increased, stores and branches of major companies became empty of customers due to the boycott.
It has also been observed that there has been a significant change in the behavior of buyers, as checking the country of manufacture has become necessary, and many customers resort to using their phones to confirm whether a certain item is on the lists of boycotted goods.
This new behavior particularly included the younger generation and even children, who began to alert their parents to the need to make sure before purchasing.
Although there are no accurate figures on the extent of the damage to major cross-border companies as a result of the boycott, the economic impact is present and clear.
The boycott is considered a type of pressure exerted by the consumer base, as many restaurants, cafes and companies have had their shares decline, and their sales volume has been affected.
Support local product
The boycott campaigns had a positive impact on a number of local companies, turned towards local products, and were able to compensate for foreign products that countries import from international companies that support the occupation.
In parallel with the boycott campaigns, campaigns have spread calling for the adoption of alternatives to these goods, and in this context, calls have spread specifically for the adoption of the “locally made” alternative.
As the boycott spread, large markets and stores took the initiative to place written and repeated signs prominently to identify local goods.
The stores also rearranged the priorities of the display cabinets so that they gave an advanced position to some local goods and goods produced by countries that were considered friendly. Some local investors took advantage of the opportunity to produce alternative goods to those boycotted goods, or to establish restaurants or cafes that provide alternatives to those boycotted goods, thus revitalizing the local market and providing new job opportunities.
Here it is worth saying that local companies must take advantage of the opportunity to provide goods of greater quality, so as to be a permanent alternative to foreign goods.
Some believe that boycott campaigns cause losses to local agents and reflect negatively on the economy by increasing unemployment. Some of this may be true, especially with a quick look and in the short term, but it establishes a broader, stronger, and more competitive local industry.
However, establishing or expanding local companies and factories will increase local production and provide new job opportunities, and workers who have graduated from agents of international companies may be the most likely to obtain work due to their previous experience.
The influence of popular boycotts
Those who follow economic affairs and the performance of international companies acknowledge the impact of the boycott, even if its strong results have not yet appeared. Many are also surprised by this popular trend and the extent of its impact, because the impact of the boycott is usually clear if countries or international organizations adopt it, and its impact is large and rapid and within a few months, while popular campaigns require more time.
Specialists warn of the effects of boycott campaigns on major companies, their policies, and the way they deal with them.
Boycott campaigns put pressure on brands
Boycott campaigns constitute a pressure factor on many Western brands, and each party is now taking into account any position it takes and taking into account people’s trends so as not to confront these companies with the weapon of boycott.
As a reaction to the recent boycott campaigns, many of these companies began supporting the Palestinian cause in one way or another or announcing that they were providing aid to those affected by the aggression in Gaza.
This comes in light of data indicating that many brands are exposed to significant losses, or at least not achieving the planned level of revenues and sales.
The most prominent data of the boycotted companies
- Starbucks shares, listed on the New York Stock Exchange, have declined by more than 31% since the global escalation of the boycott of the brand accused of supporting Israel, which is waging a devastating enemy attack on Gaza. The company’s share price at the close of the session on Friday, May 3, reached $73.11, down from $107.1 at the close of trading on November 16.
- On April 30, Starbucks announced lower-than-expected quarterly profits and revenues for the first quarter of 2024, as the company’s profit per share amounted to 68 cents, compared to 79 cents expected.
- A recent report revealed a significant decline in the financial performance of Americana International Restaurants – the quick-service restaurant giant – in the first quarter of 2024. Net income attributable to shareholders of the parent company decreased by 51.8%.
- McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski acknowledged last January that the company had seen “tangible damage” in a number of markets in the Middle East and beyond due to the war waged by Israel on Gaza.
- During the period from October 7, 2023, until January 4, McDonald’s stock lost in 21 trading sessions, and recorded its lowest level during this period in the October 11 session, when it reached $250.92.
- McDonald’s lost about $7 billion of its value within hours after its CFO, Ian Borden, announced on March 13 that the boycott in the Arab region and the Islamic world would continue to affect sales during the current year.
- Domino’s Pizza, another US giant, has faced the boycott head-on, especially in Asia, where store sales fell 8.9% in the second half of last year. Pictures circulated on social media showing the company distributing free meals to Israeli soldiers caused major angry reactions.
- Yum, the parent company of KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell, saw lower-than-expected revenue in the fourth quarter of 2023.
- KFC and Pizza Hut’s sales in the Middle East witnessed a decline during the last quarter of 2023, as their sales decreased by 5 and 3%, respectively.
