“followed another green scheme blindly”

Seems accurate. Something like this is exacty the reason why government should either control the project completely, or wait until it is mainstream tech.

Saying ‘Green’ seems more important than actually promoting schemes that produce a good conservation return for the money. Electric cars are just plain silly. A car that cost twice as much and can go 1/4 as far? Pleeeeeaaaassseeee!

Well, Better Place is being funded by ActewAGL who have a penchant for backing losers.
Remember, they lost over $50 million of ACT Ratepayers’ money with TransACT and then had the temirity to say the eventual sale of their shareholding was a “win win” situation for ACT Ratepayers.
ACT Ratepayers need future protection from these grandiose ventures. If the enthusiasts running the Territory want to risk our money (like Rhodium, Glassworks or Arboretum) let them sign personal guarantees to underwrite the losses thus isolating us ratepayers from the consequences of their lack of commercial judgement.
That’s what happens in the real world.

I’d say Zed should definitely be asking these questions. Where exactly has the money gone? What are we left with? Why do we think our government is capable of running a viable business?

dungfungus said :

Well, Better Place is being funded by ActewAGL who have a penchant for backing losers.
Remember, they lost over $50 million of ACT Ratepayers’ money with TransACT and then had the temirity to say the eventual sale of their shareholding was a “win win” situation for ACT Ratepayers.
ACT Ratepayers need future protection from these grandiose ventures. If the enthusiasts running the Territory want to risk our money (like Rhodium, Glassworks or Arboretum) let them sign personal guarantees to underwrite the losses thus isolating us ratepayers from the consequences of their lack of commercial judgement.
That’s what happens in the real world.

Better Place’s Australian unit to close after losing funding by: John Durie From: The Australian February 06, 2013 3:12PM Increase Text SizeDecrease Text SizePrintEmail
Share Add to DiggAdd to del.icio.usAdd to FacebookAdd to KwoffAdd to MyspaceAdd to NewsvineWhat are these?
THE Better Place electric car concept in Australia is officially dead after the Israeli parent company last night formally withdrew funding for the local operation.
The Australian team failed in its attempts to raise funding on its own and will now be wound down.
.

John Durie from The Australian reports that The Better Place electric car concept in Australia is officially dead after the Israeli parent company last night formally withdrew funding for the local operation.
The Australian team failed in its attempts to raise funding on its own and will now be wound down.
.

dungfungus said :

let them sign personal guarantees to underwrite the losses thus isolating us ratepayers from the consequences of their lack of commercial judgement.
That’s what happens in the real world.

Hilarious. In the “real world” the worst possible outcome for a CEO is that they get asked to leave. Even if you cock things up as badly as Tom Albanese the worst thing that can happen is you don’t get your nice fat payout. During the GFC, as the tide went out and we could see which CEO’s weren’t wearing pants, they were still all getting themselves “performance” bonuses.

In the exceedingly unlikely event that Zed gets an answer with a specific dollar figure attached, it would be most interesting to compare that to the cost of keeping Pegasus afloat.

davo101 said :

dungfungus said :

let them sign personal guarantees to underwrite the losses thus isolating us ratepayers from the consequences of their lack of commercial judgement.
That’s what happens in the real world.

Hilarious. In the “real world” the worst possible outcome for a CEO is that they get asked to leave. Even if you cock things up as badly as Tom Albanese the worst thing that can happen is you don’t get your nice fat payout. During the GFC, as the tide went out and we could see which CEO’s weren’t wearing pants, they were still all getting themselves “performance” bonuses.

I don’t agree with your analogy.
You are using public companies as an example and shareholders in public companies have a choice to invest in them or, if they perceive that the risks are too great or the decisions made by the CEO are not to their liking, they can sell their shares and invest elsewhere. Directors of public companies cannot be expected to personally guarantee the shareholders money either so this is why there is no accountabilty. If public companies need liquidity they can always make a call on their shareholders and the shareholders have a choice to go along or cut their losses and bail out.
What I was alluding to is completely different as the ACT Government and its associate corporations are more akin to a private company and the shareholders (ratepayers) are locked in. We can’t simply “cash out” and move across the border because rates and utilities are cheaper there. If our “CEOs” lose money on a bad investment they increase the rates, we don’t have a choice do we?
I think most ratepayers would agree that the core purpose of our elected government and its corporate subsidiaries is to deliver services efficiently and with good value for money; not to embark on a whimsical commercial ventures borrowing the ratepayers’ money to fund them.
If a private company in the real commercial world does this through borrowing the directors will have to personally guarantee repayment of the loan and often lodge collateral securities to balance perceived risks.
You may find my comments hilarious now but when your rates and other government service charges increase without explanation you may not find it so funny.
Can you nominate one commercial venture that our ACT government “CEOs” have embarked on that has returned a dividend for the ratepayers?