The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Penny pinching and SPC

Penny pinching and SPC

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
If Coca Cola thought SPC was a viable company that would make a profit after a $25 million dollar cash injection they would do it, also if Coca Cola thought the Government was stupid enough to give them $25 million they will try and get it.

The big problem I see is Big Business don't want to make a reasonable profit they want to make an obscenely huge profit.
Posted by Philip S, Friday, 31 January 2014 1:04:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes snake, our situation can be summed up with two words, wants V needs.

As for doing business here, that's fast becoming a thing if the past, because you can throw all the money you like at a business, but unless they can compete it's money down the drain. Just look at Holden.

Any government assistance must be conditional upon the tax payer getting value for money. A hand out does not delive any such value to the tax payer.
Posted by rehctub, Friday, 31 January 2014 1:13:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Coca Cola made a $250million profit last year? Come on, $25 mill. to save their own company cant be too much of a struggle. They'd make it back in less than two months.
Why is SPC not profiting anymore? Are the Big Supermarkets importing overseas products to increase their profits? If so how un-Australian. Surely the Government (dare I say it) has a responsibility and the right to implement controls whereby only a certain percentage of products can be imported.

Have Coca Cola investigated SPC to ensure no profiteering or fraud is occurring among CEO's and peers? No overpaying themselves, overdoing the bonuses and perks? (sounds familiar).

In case Coca Cola hasn't noticed this country is in DEBT. Big time. The Govt are picking on the aged, medicare, the lower end of the scale for crying out loud to 'regain a healthy surplus'.'chipping in a mere $25mill' Chicken feed to some it seems.

Have they convinced themselves that they deserve a hand out? And in what almost seems a threat 'consider 2000 more on the dole' there it is again, pick on the bottom end of the scale.
Posted by jodelie, Friday, 31 January 2014 1:43:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Belly, "Why not just drop the high income baby bonus and fund this community?"

You keep going on about that. I wish it had never been promised but for the moment I hope its not dropped. It was part of LNP election platform. I for one have had far more than enough of pollies dropping inconvenient parts of their platform when they get into office.

Time for a change on that front, I don't know if Abbott has what it takes to keep his word but hope so. Someone has to make a start at regaining trust.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Friday, 31 January 2014 2:11:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Okay folks lets put the argument a little differently.

It all comes down to obligations.

CCA had agreed as part of the package to invest over $90 million dollars as part of the restructure and were putting a rather sound case it appears that one off grants from both the federal and state governments would turn an iffy business proposition into a viable one.

Like it or not CCA are a company with shareholders and the board is required to act solely for the benefit of those share holders. This is their obligation as mandated by law.

If the required investment into the SPC arm of the business was going to result in profits being skimmed from other areas to fund its continuing operation, because of interest repayments incurred by funding the full project had turned it from being profitable to only a marginally profitable or indeed a loss making exercise, then the smart thing to do is to get out.

For those who are calling for CCA to fund something that doesn't add up in a business sense is idiotic and an insult to their ideology.

CCA went seeking another co-investor, the government. The government's obligation is to its citizens and the communities in which they live. This doesn't just mean the workers directly employed by the company or the farmers producing the fruit but all those employed in associated jobs in Shepparton and its surrounds. Its charter should be about putting in place incentives that will see people gainfully employed and paying taxes. It should be about protecting the social good industries and provide through their employment, especially to rural communities. And these benefits should be weighed against the costs, both in terms of unemployment support and in damage to those communities.

Cont...
Posted by SteeleRedux, Friday, 31 January 2014 2:33:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cont...

If this investment in the form of one off grant helped to secure the jobs of 3000 workers for the next ten years then this equates to a little over $800 per year per worker.

But this bunch of ideologues would have none of it. Why? If you listen to Abbott's speech it is all about the workers and their above award payments. Basically saying it is CCA's responsibility to go strip them of conditions to remain viable.

In the end it is typical of the crop of Liberal politicians over the last couple of decades. Hands off and take no responsibility! Sell the Australian Wheat Board? Too right! Oops, did they really become Saddam Hussain's largest provider of illicit funds? Well don't look here. Not our responsibility!

Australians have elected these guys because we had been assured they were the better economic managers but all they want to do is let go of the controls and let the market do the work. This is not what the 'old school' Liberal Party would have done. Damn what an utter disappointment they have turned out to be.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Friday, 31 January 2014 2:34:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy