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
Lowy lobbied for the money, so he should pay up not the FFA.
Scapula
19 Nov 12 at 7:01 pm
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.
JC
19 Nov 12 at 7:04 pm
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.
DaveF
19 Nov 12 at 7:06 pm
They already had Kevin Sheedy.
DaveF
19 Nov 12 at 7:08 pm
Do we know much of the $160 mil is SBSs share?
Isn’t SBS part funded by the taxpayer?
jumpnmcar
19 Nov 12 at 7:16 pm
Oh, what a coincidence
Here.
jumpnmcar
19 Nov 12 at 7:20 pm
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.
Le Chiffre
19 Nov 12 at 7:22 pm
part funded? more like 70%
DaveF
19 Nov 12 at 7:22 pm
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.
Scapula
19 Nov 12 at 7:39 pm
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.
Samuel J
19 Nov 12 at 7:49 pm
If it’s such a “small investment” and would have yielded billions of dollars, let the proponents fund it themselves, and leave taxpayers alone.
Milton von Smith
19 Nov 12 at 8:15 pm
More than just the proponents would have benefitted.
Driftforge
19 Nov 12 at 8:17 pm
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.
H B Bear
19 Nov 12 at 8:25 pm
Hey I think I agree with Scrappy @7.39pm. That’s a first.
H B Bear
19 Nov 12 at 8:27 pm
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.
Rabz
19 Nov 12 at 9:01 pm
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.
kelly liddle
19 Nov 12 at 9:12 pm
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.
jumpnmcar
19 Nov 12 at 9:20 pm
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.
Scapula
19 Nov 12 at 9:21 pm
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.
Ant
19 Nov 12 at 11:53 pm
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.
Scapula
20 Nov 12 at 12:23 am
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.
Samuel J
20 Nov 12 at 1:49 am
I think scapula was being sarcastic, and incidentally Samuel, he seems to agree with the thrust of your post.
dd
20 Nov 12 at 2:20 pm