2006-10-10 01:43:13 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
I wouldn't pay that much for a racket, but then again, I don't have that much money to piss away on anything.
They have money and it is for a fundraiser.
They aren't really paying $360,000 for a racket, they are donating $360,000 to a charity.
2006-10-10 01:45:49 · answer #1 · answered by timc_fla 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's more about the giving money to the charity behind the fundraiser than buying a racket. I would guess she didn't pay that much for a racket when she was called Steffi Graff and was the number one ranked tennis player.
I buy frozen cookie dough from my kids PTO for $8, but end up tossing the cookie dough because it tastes like crap. It's more about giving the $8 for the PTO playground fund.
2006-10-10 08:55:17 · answer #2 · answered by dlobryan1 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on the rackets
2006-10-10 08:44:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since it is for a fundraiser, then that is totally cool. If she just did it to waste away excess money, I would be totally ticked.
2006-10-10 08:48:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you have several million in the bank, 360k is nothing, so why worry about it?
Personally, I wouldn't. Especially as I don't play tennis.
2006-10-10 08:45:07 · answer #5 · answered by shoby_shoby2003 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. She could hire someone for a week to distribute that amount directly to the needy.
2006-10-10 08:45:28 · answer #6 · answered by Liwayway 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I wouldn't pay that much for a house!
2006-10-10 08:44:48 · answer #7 · answered by ...mr2fister... 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is this what they call "racketeering"? Awwwww, man. I crack myself up.
2006-10-10 08:44:49 · answer #8 · answered by Spud55 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
famous people pay ridiculous amounts of money for things all the time, at least this time it was for charity.
2006-10-10 11:55:21 · answer #9 · answered by Jep 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No
2006-10-10 08:53:18 · answer #10 · answered by Hootcoot 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋