Was thinking similarly earlier after reading about the Jamaican women's bobsled team's ordeal.
For those not in the know, aside from the Cool Runnings flick from some years ago, the women also compete and have a squad at this year's Winter games. Their coach, a German woman, for whatever reason was demoted from head driving coach to track performance analyst. Needless to say she wasn't too happy and decided to quit entirely, but here's the kicker. The $50,000 (yeah 50 racks) sled that the Jamaican team was using was leased by her, was in her name, making her legally and financially responsible for it. So when she quit, the sled went with her. Only if the team would pay her for the sled would she allow them to use it. So they team was temporarily without a sled until Red Stripe stepped in and financed a sled for them.
To me, that's as illustrative as it gets about ownership vs representation.
Women's Jamaican Bobsled team = represented at Olympics
Original sled = leased by a German woman until she got pissed and left and took the bobsled with her
New sled = fronted by Red Stripe
The irony of Red Stripe is although it's widely known as a Jamaican lager, here are the two men who started it.
It was eventually purchased by a company in London and now owned by the Dutch company we're familiar with, Heineken.
Think about that, the land that produced iconic music, iconic foods and drink, an iconic culture, and renowned figures such as Garvey and Bolt, has it's women representing at the Winter Games in 2018 for bobsledding. And their country couldn't even front them a sled.

This is textbook "representation", but not true ownership. And as I pointed out it's not just current, but a history of a lack of ownership.