runner,

A majority of Australians believe a strong
independent ABC is critical to a healthy
democracy and oppose a cut to ABC funding.

The Australian Institute found 70% of people
wanted a strong ABC. Their poll was released
after the Coalition slashed the ABC's budget
by $84m.

Australians think that a strong independent
national broadcaster is critical to a healthy
democracy.

Cutting funding to the ABC is the opposite of what
we should be doing in an age of "fake news" and
when the business model for journalism has been
seriously disrupted.

Media ownership in this country is notoriously narrow.
Mainstream media offers precious little diversity and
such diversity as there is runs along predictable lines.

Those of us who are torn between the desert of
mainstream media and the jungle of the internet need a
place where rational but diverse views can be found on
matters of enduring importance. The ABC is such a place.

Of course it would be difficult to agree with every view
expressed on the ABC but it would be difficult to disagree
with them all. And it would be impossible to criticise any
of them as irrational or foolish.

Steele,
AIUI Virgin Australia didn't pay a drop of tax on their revenue because their costs exceed it; they made a loss. Not just a paper loss, but an actual loss. As Richard Branson is very much a minority shareholder in it, his tax affairs are of little relevance. Profit shifting is easy with wholly owned subsidiaries, but much harder when others own most of them.

If you have any evidence I've misunderstood the situation, I'd like to see it.

Dear Aiden,

Virgin Airlines operates on one of the most profitable air routes in the world namely Sydney to Melbourne.

Yet somehow it has paid not a jot of tax over the last four years and still had over 2.5 billion dollars in accumulated losses to put against future profits for another 10 years.

In fact it hasn't turned a 'profit for 7 years straight.

So why do other companies like Eithad, which bought up a 20% share last year, invest in a loss making venture like this? How do you think they are making money? It gets moved around somehow.

Ultimately though the question is whether such a loss making, overseas owned, enterprise deserved 1.4 billion dollars of taxpayers money to bail it out. In my opinion no it bloody well didn't and I am glad the government withheld this largess and allowed it to go into administration.

Steele,
The Sydney-Melbourne air route is one of the world's busiest, but that doesn't automatically make it more profitable. There's fierce competition between Virgin and Qantas, as both airlines have tried to increase their market share at each other's expense. Virgin initially took the view that gaining and holding a high market share was the key to future profitability. For a while their owners were happy to go along with that, accepting losses in anticipation of future profits. When the losses continued, it was recognised that this was a bad strategy, and the CEO resigned.

These are real losses, not just paper losses. Etihad has had an expansion strategy involving buying stakes in other airlines. It still has a large stake in Air Serbia, which is also lossmaking. They still hope to make money from it - though this may have ceased to be a realistic objective after the coronavirus hit.

SR,

Given that you were such a stalwart supporter of the financial black hole that was the car industry, why are you so eager that Virgin goes to wall putting 1000s of Australians out of work and creating a monopoly in Qantas that will result in higher transport costs.

I assume that due to Qantas not paying taxes, that they should be allowed to fail too?

The less aeroplanes the better. And the less homosexual CEO's the better. And more football teams run by footballers for the fans the better.

Dan