Re: The "real" logic of POV
Re: Re: The "real" logic of POV -- billy	Top of thread		Forum

Posted by: NikW ® 10/15/2004, 13:37:00 Author Profile Edit Alert Moderators

>But defending the indefensable is not the answer either.< It depends upon what the question is. If it is "How to ensure the continuance of a revenue stream large enough to support both massive organisational indebtedness and presentation of a high cost brand/product ?" Then "defending the indefensible" is the unequivocal business PR response. The Tabacco industry has been doing just that for forty years. POV is  a Rawat Corp. soldier, making sure that should any media types be reading here they've got an online rebuttal fed to them alongside the health warnings and independent research that underscores this Forum.

Previous

Recommend Current page

Next

Replies to this message

POV as Rawat Corp soldier, you are exactly correct --- gerry ( Fri, Oct 15, 2004, 20:01:15 ) ( 47 bytes ) +1 PS I would have bounced POV a long time ago for that reason --- gerry ( Fri, Oct 15, 2004, 20:03:50 ) ( 200 bytes ) +1 I gotta thank POV, really...just read on... --- San ( Fri, Oct 15, 2004, 20:39:05 ) ( 1427 bytes ) +2 Washed it down with a little Cream and went Gratefully Dead --- San ( Fri, Oct 15, 2004, 21:53:49 ) ( 1369 bytes ) +2 " When there was no ear to hear.... --- Lexy ( Sat, Oct 16, 2004, 07:33:57 ) ( 865 bytes ) Re: Washed it down with a little Cream and went Gratefully Dead --- #9 ( Sat, Oct 16, 2004, 14:14:17 ) ( 624 bytes ) +1 You are very charitable --- San ( Sun, Oct 17, 2004, 01:02:23 ) ( 240 bytes ) You just had to sneak that in, eh Sandy? --- Jim ( Sat, Oct 16, 2004, 00:36:50 ) ( 13 bytes ) +1 What are you talking about? --- San ( Sat, Oct 16, 2004, 06:26:50 ) ( 388 bytes ) +1 You guys... Are the Best! (no text) --- Hilltop ( Sun, Oct 17, 2004, 03:38:38 ) ( 0 bytes )