Hancock Prospecting invests in the Origin Australian Diamonds

Hancock Prospecting invests in the Origin Australian Diamonds2022-10-15T14:03:51+10:00
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 58 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Kwkiwi
    Participant
      Post count: 195

      Can’t see Sharni getting anymore commentating gigs any time soon. Maybe she’s thinking of entering politics??
      How daft is that, biting the hand that feeds you? Would like to know who the ringmaster is behind this.

      Stoj
      Participant
        Post count: 147

        As a bit of a ‘greenie’ I was a little upset by the sponsorship when it was announced. But sometimes you have to accept the situation for what it is. Is this an ideal sponsor – no. Do the organisation need the money – yes! I think they just need to suck up the situation and ‘make a deal with the devil’ (for want of a better phrase). The sports who can pick and choose their sponsors are the one’s making money – which is not ours atm.

        Nate
        Participant
          Post count: 422

          Is there any other sport where the ‘playing group’ feel entitled to have a say in every detail of their employers decisions?

          I know in real world jobs aka not being paid to play a sport you love if the bosses make a decision you’re not happy with, you usually bite the bullet and get on with it. Or you find another job :unsure:

          Yes like said above it isn’t the ideal sponsor but it’s a bucket load of dollars set to help you out. Didn’t the Fed Gov already say NA haven’t asked for assistance in a bail out? Doesn’t it also put a mark against NA if other sponsors want to offer their services or money?

          Tully
          Participant
            Post count: 1930

            I said early on that NA would need to make difficult and unpopular decisions. They are doing that and from a financial perspective from the information available they’ve made a sound one.

            I agree @schmeetle Sharni walk your talk. Put away the phone, disconnect your electricity and go off grid.

            Netballfan1
            Participant
              Post count: 287

              Gosh there’s some very moralistic comments on here. Good on the women who were brave enough to speak up for the future of the planet, and potentially sacrificing their professional spot to do so. Saying they have to go off grid to have an opinion on climate change and who they are willing to professionally align with is just insulting.

              Tully
              Participant
                Post count: 1930

                How is it insulting? If you have very firm views one way and are happy to criticise others then should you not live those morals before you criticise Gina Reinhardt etc?

                There is a difference between having an opinion and the views and actions expressed by some.

                Tully
                Participant
                  Post count: 1930

                  Lang Hancock has been dead for 30 years. I’m not saying I am in agreement with his historical views and comments but that clearly given that he passed in 1992 he does not have an opportunity to apologise or correct those statements. I personally would not want to be defined by the previously expressed view of a parent. Given when Lang Hancock passed it would be difficult for him to have a direct impact on the current views and practices of Hancock prospecting. Of course indirectly they may but he isn’t driving current company culture. For very obvious reasons.

                  Rather than saying there were cleaner and better options on the table I would like those options to actually be expressed. Hancock Prospecting have provided a sponsorship. They haven’t bought and do not control anything. A PE bid is far from altruistic and it has been quite naively glorified.

                  Avatar photoIan Harkin
                  Moderator
                    Post count: 22520

                    Please keep the discussion civil, everyone.

                    Avatar photoIan Harkin
                    Moderator
                      Post count: 22520

                      https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/best-of-abc-sport-podcast/bianca-chatfield/101540142

                      Netballfan1
                      Participant
                        Post count: 287

                        It’s insulting because it’s insinuating that having a cellphone and using electricity is equivalent in pollution and damage to nature to being a mining company. Are we really saying a person not have an opinion unless they live a morally perfect life? Not long ago tobacco companies were sponsoring sport. Big companies have millions of dollars to give to sport to make themselves look better and altruistic. It doesn’t mean it should be taken.

                        • This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by Netballfan1.
                        schmeetle
                        Participant
                          Post count: 327

                          So why this confected outrage and “principles” now all of a sudden? If it’s purely about Hancock where was this “principle” in years past when Roy Hill (70% owned by Hancock) has been sponsor of Fever? If it’s about resource companies, where has this been with Origin Energy being a major sponsor?

                          The Diamonds players didn’t seem to mind all the media day activities with the Hancock logo on their uniforms.

                          • This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by schmeetle.
                          JR
                          Participant
                            Post count: 1676

                            Ok….I’ll post this now given the posts have been moved to this thread – THANKS IAN

                            I can’t post with links – if you want to read the article about Australia’s increasing inequality google ‘The Age, ‘insecure labour’ and ‘wage theft’.

                            I am not saying Rinehart or her company is involved in either of those things, but her wealth is mentioned in the article. Thought it was great timing.

                            (1) Gina Rinehart’s wealth has tripled in a decade. (2) She is now worth $31B.

                            I wonder if she could give MORE to NA!!

                            Netballfan1
                            Participant
                              Post count: 287

                              There’s choice with what franchise you play for. There’s not when you’re talented enough to make the national team. As for the comments on the team looking happy in their uniforms could it be because this is womens sport and we’re told to be grateful to even be able to play at a level where pay is on the table. Again, good on these women for being brave enough to take a stand.

                              Netballfan1
                              Participant
                                Post count: 287

                                If anyone’s interested in the math she’s giving 0.048% of her net worth. So for the average person in Australia earning the median income of $62,400 its equivalent to giving $29.95. The company gets their name plastered on uniforms and advertised via sport as what’s often seen as an altruistic move for what’s essentially chump change to them.

                                • This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by Netballfan1.
                                Nate
                                Participant
                                  Post count: 422

                                  Dont see anybody else throwing that chump change to NA at the moment? Right?

                                  She probably could give more but whos to say how they came to that figure? Cant just be a random figure from Hancock? Maybe that amount is what costs for the yearly Diamonds programme?

                                  Anyone know what amounts the other sponsers are forking out? For example Origin who are main sponsers?

                                  Could they just do a SBW and just put tape over the sponser logo for those players who dont agree with it? Yes a silly suggestion i know but… its happened before. But then morally what do they do with their pay, donate it? Because its coming from Hancock?

                                  So many questions, so little answers lol

                                Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 58 total)
                                • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
                                Go to Top