Football Federation Australia budget contribution?

FFA Chairman, Frank Lowy, is overjoyed about a new $160 million broadcasting deal. Now would be a good time for the FFA to repay taxpayers the $45 million paid for the 2018 World Cup bid (around $47.3 million including 5% PA interest). The Budget needs the money. Australian taxpayers want the money. Wayne Swan would be delighted by the money.

HT: Noodle

About Samuel J

Samuel J has an economics background and is a part-time consultant
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Football Federation Australia budget contribution?

  1. Scapula

    Lowy lobbied for the money, so he should pay up not the FFA.

  2. JC

    Christ you’re a waste of space and oxygen Bob.

    Lowy lobbied on behalf of pansyball and the FFA took the loot. They should pay it back, you incontestable lunatic.

  3. DaveF

    Watch what you say SamJ.

    You CANNOT speak up against government funding of sport in this country.

    Seriously though the frigging Feds kicked some money into the Western Sydney AFL team – I think for the stadium. FFS.

  4. DaveF

    They already had Kevin Sheedy.

  5. jumpnmcar

    Do we know much of the $160 mil is SBSs share?
    Isn’t SBS part funded by the taxpayer?

  6. jumpnmcar

    Oh, what a coincidence

    A $158.1 million Federal Budget investment will ensure the sustainability of SBS as a major contributor in the Australian media and enable it to deliver a new national free-to-air Indigenous television channel.
    The 2012 Federal Budget funding boost is a 27 per cent increase on SBS’s base Government funding over the next four years , and will equip the organisation to continue to play its vital role in reflecting Australia’s diverse multiculturalism, and contributing to a more cohesive society.

    Here.

  7. Le Chiffre

    Don’t be tight. The revenue from the World Cup would have been several billion dollars like the Olympics.
    The stakes were high, $45mil was a small investment.

    Although from Rudd’s point of view it was a small contribution from you all to get his mug on to the WC bid promo video.

  8. DaveF

    part funded? more like 70%

  9. Scapula

    Lowy lobbied Ruddsy, from memory, and Ruddsy of course said yes sir, but if some random fnik from FFA asked for money I don’t think he’d get any so yes maybe Lowy and Rudd should split the bill.

  10. Samuel J

    Don’t be tight. The revenue from the World Cup would have been several billion dollars like the Olympics.
    The stakes were high, $45mil was a small investment.

    Le Chiffre is right in one way – the Australian taxpayer was saved from a massive bill by losing the bid. We dodged a bullet. But wrong in the other way – the revenue from the World Cup might have been several billion dollars, but it would be far far less than Government expenditure would have been had we ‘won’. $45m wasn’t an investment – it was a disgraceful waste of taxpayers’ money. It would have been better to walk into Jamie Packer’s casino and put the entire $45m down on the spin of the roulette wheel. Come to think of it, the Australian taxpayer would have been better if the Rudd / Gillard governments just took the money they spent on pink bats, the Education Revolution, the stimulus package etc etc and just sat down at the roulette table. At least the taxpayer would have had a chance of getting something back. And it would have created a lot of excitement – imagine Julia sitting down at the roulette table with $147.3 billion of taxpayers’ money and placing it on red (of course the bet might need to spread out among many casinos). At worst, if she lost, the debt position would be the same as today. At best, it would have repaid the debt and left us square.

  11. Milton von Smith

    If it’s such a “small investment” and would have yielded billions of dollars, let the proponents fund it themselves, and leave taxpayers alone.

  12. Driftforge

    More than just the proponents would have benefitted.

  13. H B Bear

    The stakes were high, $45mil was a small investment.

    Bwahahahahaaaaaaaaaa…. ….somebody has been watching too many tomwaterhouse.com.au ads. Pissing money up against a wall or into FIFA pockets is not an “investment” in any known sense of the word.

    See also: co-investment; Holden, Ford and Toyota.

  14. H B Bear

    Hey I think I agree with Scrappy @7.39pm. That’s a first.

  15. Rabz

    Although from Rudd’s point of view it was a small contribution from you all to get his mug on to the WC bid promo video.

    Rudd was indeed in the ad, but it was lardarse who was PM by the time the official bid video package was produced.

    I also have it on good authority that our world cup bid went tits up pretty much from the time that Kate Ellis was moved on from the sports minister position.

    The FIFA grandees were none too interested in arbib’s bog ugly mug, so our influence waned from that point on.

    But yes, given that the winning bids were a result of the sort of corruption the IOC would have blanched at, it certainly was an inexcusable waste of taxpayers’ money.

    For which I blame frigging laybore.

    Lowy simply played them for the mugs they are.

  16. At least the taxpayer would have had a chance of getting something back.

    Samuel
    What are you talking about the taxpayer would be guaranteed to get about half back or double their money it is actually quite a good bet. Casinos are still taxed you know and if they won the half the casino kept could be reinvested or distributed to shareholders. I advocate that we put at least 20% of the federal budget in the casinos on a few bets.

  17. jumpnmcar

    If anyone puts up that animated roo clip with gillard in it, I’m not clicking on it.OK!!.
    I wish i never saw it in the first place.

  18. Scapula

    Lowy simply played them for the mugs they are.

    so who says no to Frank? certainly neither the labor nor the liberal party

    All these civil society grouplings try to get a business or political grandee to head them so that they can negotiate taxpayer largesse whichever party is in power.

  19. Ant

    I’d support that idea. Straight after successful Olympic athletes tip in their endorsements until they’ve repaid the mega millions we’ve handed over to them.

  20. Scapula

    We hand athletes small sums of money so we can project our prestige on the world stage. Its they who fight and die for their nation.

  21. Samuel J

    Very amusing Scapula. I don’t think that athletes ‘fight and die for their nation’. I think you’re thinking of our soldiers, who get paid much less than athletes. Athletes don’t die for their nation (nor for themselves), but they do compete for their own glory.

  22. dd

    I think scapula was being sarcastic, and incidentally Samuel, he seems to agree with the thrust of your post.

Comments are closed.