They should have removed the post and blocked the user.
2 Likes
When I walked past the TV in our kitchen today, there was an ad featuring Ariarne Titmus saying that she is proud to be a Harvey Norman ambassador.
Most disappointing that she would be prepared to have her name associated with Harvey Norman of all businesses.
At least Ash Barty ir promoting Gillette products.
Funny, I thought the opposite. I thought: how smart of Harvey Norman to back Titmus before the Olympics i.e. without knowing whether she would come home with zero medals and big disappointment, or come home with a handful of medals.
Product endorsement has been part of the commercial landscape for decades, with high profile figures backing all sorts of products. It is often the case that there is far more money to be made in endorsement than in the actual sport. Can you really blame her?
I think TV manufacturers love major sporting events, as a catalyst for TV upgrade - and Harvey Norman sell a lot of TVs. Canāt really blame Harvey Norman for getting behind the Olympics.
I think I bought my most recent TV from Harvey Norman. Sure, they arenāt the cheapest place to buy a TV - but Iāve had no problems with the TV and I have no complaints about Harvey Norman in connection with the few other things that I have bought there over the decades.
1 Like
That probably got them in in the basement compared to what she should be getting paid now, although they could undoubtedly afford to pay more with the Jobkeeper payments that they have refused to repay.
I just donāt like to see someone of her calibre being associated with the likes of Harvey Norman,letalone making them sound like an ethical business. There are many other ethical businesses who would sponsor her.
I guess there is always one customer who draws the lucky straw.
If I may go off topic a little.
Isnāt the greater concern that high achievers in sport are not all paid equally or fairly? Thatās a judgement that could be made of how much earned compared to their peers and also a judgement of their earnings relative to the wider community.
We have commercially developed sporty business which pays stupidly high amounts to individuals so that one sporty business can out earn another sporty business.
Most Olympic sports are not exploited other than within the narrow base of those who participate actively. The more elite rely on sponsorships just to cover basic costs while also holding down full time work. The rest struggle, unless they have family support and wealth behind them.
Individuals such as Gerry Hervey and Gina Reinhardt to name two are prepared to offer support, and there are those willing to accept. What does that say about Australianās falling for the āBSā around the commercialised sporty business vs the rest when it comes to where our dollars go?
Harvey Norman was advertising appliances on SBS TV a week or so ago with:āget up to $500 in gift cardsā and āget up to $500 in gift cardsā if taking out the ā60 months interest free termsāā¦
The offer on the purchase is subject to paying the ticketed price or the advertised price so one can only guess that there is a lot of fat built into the price.
The āinterest freeā bonus offer is the equivalent of 5% of each full $1.000 spent, so the $500 in gift cards is only for purchases of at least $10,000.
So the modus operandi appears to be to try to get full whack on the sale price and then hope that the punters fail to pay the items off by the end of the āinterest freeā period.
Choice had something to say.
So too did Reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/by1r4m/harvey_norman_advertise_interest_free_but_still/
3 Likes
This is an older topic but thanks to Harvey Norman it just keeps going and going.
2 Likes
