Remove this Banner Ad

Sponsorship

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gough
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

phantom13 said:
So your answer to my question is yes.

Thats fine, her company did and i think shes the face of it, you dont think thats case thats fair.
Click to expand...

Surely it's reasonable to assume in the absence of a personal statement that the company statement reflects her views? Unless I'm missing something which happens.
 
the_interloper said:
Surely it's reasonable to assume in the absence of a personal statement that the company statement reflects her views? Unless I'm missing something which happens.
Click to expand...
Well to be completely accurate.

She has personally and professionally (as in her or her company) not said a word about her fathers comments AND her company (not her personally i suppose) have released the statement Gralin posted.

I think either of those in isolation would represent her views and both combined make her views absolutely crystal clear but to each their own?
 
Last edited:
phantom13 said:
So your answer to my question is yes.

Thats fine, her company did and i think shes the face of it, you dont think thats case thats fair.
Click to expand...
Its the suggestion she said anything when she did not.

I would like to kinow if anyone asked her. (full stop).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Kwality said:
Its the suggestion she said anything when she did not.

I would like to kinow if anyone asked her. (full stop).
Click to expand...
I think I clarified her company made a statement which Gralin posted in full.

So your issue is that I’m positing that her companies statement is her statement.

She runs the company so it seems pointless semantics to me but that’s what your issue is.
 
Last edited:
phantom13 said:
I think I clarified her company made a statement which Gralin posted in full.

So your issue is that I’m positing that her companies statement is her statement.

She runs the company so it seems pointless semantics to me but that’s what your issue is.
Click to expand...

& IF Mrs Rinehart said something you would be able to quote her. You cant.

A spokesperson /media release for Hancock Prospecting said (i.e the truth) ...... you made that choice !
 
Kwality said:
To the revised narrative you are claiming as truth. You are selling b.s
Click to expand...
… what the **** are you on about.

Her company released a statement which I was calling her words. You’re saying they are not her words but her companies.

I’ve agreed with you (albeit I think it’s semantics). She technically hasn’t said anything either about her fathers comments OR about the NA stuff, her company has though.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

phantom13 said:
… what the * are you on about.

Her company released a statement which I was calling her words. You’re saying they are not her words but her companies.

I’ve agreed with you (albeit I think it’s semantics). She technically hasn’t said anything either about her fathers comments OR about the NA stuff, her company has though.
Click to expand...

You chose to personalise it for a reason. You are selling something .....
 
A sensible person would have taken that money she put into the sport and used some of it to create or expand pathways for indigenous kids into netball.

A successful program and results and you probably get an ever bigger sponsorship at the end of it or even during the current one.
 
Gina Rinehart soft power (re program Clinton Wolf is involved in) is a consequence of government reluctance to fund indigenous programs because there's not enough votes in it.

It should never have to be like this.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom