You seem to have misunderstood that I meant it as a bad thing: Not at all.
I think that Patagonia is 100% committed to being sustainable because it is in their value but also and mainly because it is their market niche and what brings them business. still think it is part of a market strategy. I'm happy that they managed to combine ethics, value and business. It is of course extremely convenient for them that being so ethical is also what makes their business so lucrative.
Most companies don't have the luxury to fit a market niche where the target customer are the top 1% of the world (like Patagonia does).
In that case, I'd shy away from using language like
> "in order to get all the PR and hype coming out from it."
> "surfing on the climate change and greenwashing wave"
and
> "It is of course extremely convenient for them"
These are all phrases often used to signal that their primary motives are something other than what you are claiming to praise them for. (Indeed, you say as much: "mainly because it is their market niche and what brings them business.")
Yes, they're a business and to stay in business they to be profitable. What people choose to do to be profitable makes a difference.
I think that Patagonia is 100% committed to being sustainable because it is in their value but also and mainly because it is their market niche and what brings them business. still think it is part of a market strategy. I'm happy that they managed to combine ethics, value and business. It is of course extremely convenient for them that being so ethical is also what makes their business so lucrative.
Most companies don't have the luxury to fit a market niche where the target customer are the top 1% of the world (like Patagonia does).