Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Revolve resolve

By louise - 27 March 2007 119

ABC news reports that Revolve has said it will fight the government’s decision to effectively close it down.

I know Revolve wasn’t the flavour of the month with some readers (see this thread). But wouldn’t it be nice if govenment could actually make an open, transparent and justified decision that had broad community support, and left no avenue or desire for ‘fighting on’?

What’s Your opinion?

Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
119 Responses to
Revolve resolve
Charles 8:27 am 28 Mar 07

Revolve was the first Public Company to do this in an organised way. we all know that it has been going on for decades. Remember the good old days of a free for all on the tip face!

We also now have a monopoly on our tips. This was the very Reason revolve didn’t Get The tender for the tranfer station in mitchell when it was called for, the government didn’t want Revolve to hold both.

gaelhope 9:48 pm 27 Mar 07

Revolve was not the first org or business to recycle stuff from the tip. In Sydney on the Northern Beaches, and old tip-wench called Mary used to run a legal warehouse business of scavenged junk from the Kimbriki Rd Tip at Ingleside. She did this all through the 70’s and 80’s (and probably still does). Part of her biz was to employ others – similar to the Revolve model.

Revolve are too precious about things like their history even though they once provided a great service…but perhaps their time has come. And that lady on 666 this morning sounded like a fruit-loop; did Revolve no favours at all.

jr 8:30 pm 27 Mar 07

Just because a particular group of people have been doing something does not mean that they can claim to have a god given right to continue to do the same thing ad-infinitum..

People are speculating about tender responses they haven’t even seen… maybe the winning tender actually offered the best outcomes… who knows if the value of the contract is worth more than $50,000 it will turn up on for scrutiny eventually.

Thumper 8:26 pm 27 Mar 07

But I also agree with bonfire in that AJ out at Mitchell is very clean and organised.

unlike the current Revolve which is, well, a tidy rubbish tip.

Thumper 8:25 pm 27 Mar 07

I agree with Louise. The old Belconnen Revolve was great.

I built my pergola from wood I bought there for nix.

Sammy 8:17 pm 27 Mar 07

Perhaps the Gubmint should allow 2 operators at each site. There is plenty of space.

I assume the most valuable part of the contract is the first (and only) right to whatever people throw out.

Allow 2 operators, and each gets equal time to scavange. Make it a rolling time period, say 2 days each.

That way, no operator gets the benefit of a particular day(s) of the week when better stuff traditionally turns up.

Pandy 7:54 pm 27 Mar 07

So what? It’s all rubbish.

louise 5:38 pm 27 Mar 07

I found the opposite. I liked the days when i could wander in to Belconnen Revolve and find that odd piece of small junk, like a half tap fitting, or a screen door handle. The replacement at Mitchell is nothing like that, and we have pretty well stopped bothering to even look. For the renovation phase of life, Revolve Belconnen was great.

bonfire 5:23 pm 27 Mar 07

we are making a tonne of assumptions.

what were the terms they have been operating under ?

and what do we as a community really want ? if we want junk recycled then i think aussie junk do a good job. honestly, they are better than revolve from a consumer perspective.

Charles 3:28 pm 27 Mar 07

That is the issue. Love them or hate them, Revolve are expected to close the gate one day and Aussie junk open it the next.Sounds like easy money to me!

louise 3:04 pm 27 Mar 07

So where is the compensation (for goodwill) then? It seems like an unfair process to me.

Charles 2:57 pm 27 Mar 07

Revolve as I understand it were (untill friday) sub-contracted to Thiess. who in turn were contracted to the government.

I think the issue is that ‘Revolve’ has pretty much become a generic term for a recycling facility and drop off center There are hundreds of them with that name popping up all over the world.

Revolve was the First Compnay in the world to do this so therefore have made it acceptable and even expected amongst the community. Anyone else coming In already has a customer base and really has none of the hard work to do

seepi 2:36 pm 27 Mar 07

And what terms were revolve operating under, seeing as they had not had to tender in the past?

Tenders on existing operations seem to be designed to make people offer to do what they are already doing, for less profit.

louise 2:33 pm 27 Mar 07

The question is whether it should have gone out to tender in the first place, and whether Revolve could have ever competed as a not-for-profit organisation. Were the terms of the tender process such that Revolve couldn’t have met them? Does anyone know?

Sammy 2:20 pm 27 Mar 07

Well it seems to me that we have the ‘open, transparent and justified decision’, in the form of the tender process. Now thats not to say that tender processes always result in the best outcome for everyone. Of course they cannot.

I’d be very interested to know if Revolve even submitted a tender. The lady from Revolve, speaking on 666 just before nine this morning, intimated that they didn’t.

1 2 3 8

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | |

Search across the site