In what decade will you be in surplus?
Will Joe rule out starving the ABC, then merging it with SBS and renaming it, and selling the SABS to Lachlan Murdoch or John Singleton? Will he say what ‘waste’ in the ABC means?
Is it 7.30? Is it AM? Is it Tony Jones?
Name:
Sales is dead meat walking, after hanging Tony out with his chronic cough, Jones will get a rude shock too, Joe will give him the flick, I’m sure of it. Alberici may survive, though in a diminished roll.
SABS sounds about right.
The words ‘surplus’ and ‘Chris Bowen’ should not appear in the same sentence.
“selling the SABS”
As Joe Hockey pointed out, you can’t sell a company that has a net cost/loss of about a billion dollars per year. I guess you could liquidate it and sell the real estate for development, but the severance costs for the employees would be ruinous.
Why would it help for Chris Bowen to play up how bad the deficit is?
You can sell it to someone who would like to have it, like Rupert Murdoch, and put commercials on it, and influence, nay dictate government policy because of it, as he did the ‘unaffordable’ and ‘chronically unprofitable’ London Times.
What are you talking about? Do you work for him? Of course you do.
I do, I’m his valet. How did you know?
But I still don’t understand, how does a buyer value a company that costs a billion dollars a year?
If you wanted to make money out of Rupert Murdoch you would sell him spectrum to start his own channel. But he already has one?? How many ABC viewers want to watch Sky News 2? I doubt there are enough to justify it myself.
Dan,
Have you kissed the Mongoose yet, sworn upon his scaly lips to do all he asks of you, without question?
Or is a valet too far down the pecking order?
You do know about the chamber?
trolling much dan/daniella?
On Monday, Rudd will be on Q&A, without Abbott, who of course will chicken out. Rudd should use the opportunity to savage Abbott over cuts to the ABC, even telling Jones and the technicians in the studio that he will save their jobs, while Abbott will destroy them.
dilemma for Abbott. To be or….
bob,you should drop this talk of a surplus as if has some intrinsic virtue,it means nothing.it is only a number in a ledger,there is no pile of money anywhere or no large hole waiting to be filled when in deficit.it is like arguing that 3 o’clock is better than 5 o’clock or that wednesday is better than thursday it is meaningless.all that matters is that governments support the economy when private spending drops or gets out of the way when private spending increases.the surplus fetish is owned by the tories and as long as we play along and do not challenge them on it,they win.
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/
Perhaps, but it has been an article of faith for the Opposition over the last several years.
It has only suited them very recently to ignore it.
Their hypocrisy is legion.