Trevor W
Years ago

State Govt to Bail out BSA!

The Govt. has again announced it will not be privatising any state assets under its new term.

(http://www.ministers.sa.gov.au/minister.asp?mId=6&pId=6&iHealth=0&sId=6220)

It has even signed a decree to that nature (can't find a media release). But what does this mean for BSA?

As the major creditor to BSA, the state govt. effectively ownes BSA, and as the owner, under its decree (more stringent than another politican promise), it cannot sell off any assets privately.

Surely this means Sixers must remain in BSA hands, and the only two otions that remain are folding (and they will not allow that), or a govt. bail out.

While we all thought this would happen, logically, its the only choice, the only surprise on April 30 will be, how much $$.

Topic #6655 | Report this topic


thedoctor  
Years ago

Does BSA fall under the definition of an "asset". For the last decade it's been nothing short of a liability.

Reply #74696 | Report this post


anonymous  
Years ago

I think the decree covers state utilities not basketball organisations

(Mod: Basketballs for both of you - fair points.)

Reply #74699 | Report this post


Indiana  
Years ago

BSA IS NOT A STATE ASSET AND WILL NOT FALL UNDER THESE CONDITIONS.
STILL PROBLEMS TO BE RESOLVED.

Reply #74705 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Is that what you heard Big Kev shouting from his Office Indiana?

Reply #74706 | Report this post


Indiana  
Years ago

GLASS TO THE DOOR!

Reply #74707 | Report this post


Trevor W  
Years ago

thedoctor - your a lawyer, and i'm an accountant. Our profession's definition may differ from your's, but ours is something like

Sac 4 definition -

An asset must be the result of a past transaction (yes, built the dome), provide future economic benefit (questionable, but hopeful), and be controlled by the entity (given the level of debt, you'd think so).

But anon, i think your right, looks like Belly may get his team. Do you think Jingles would return to adelaide if the sale went through?

Reply #74716 | Report this post


thedoctor  
Years ago

Trev, my post wasn't meant to be a legal definition, more of a jibe at how BSA has been run over the last decade. Even so, you agree that the 'future economic benefit' requirement is questionable at best!

Reply #74754 | Report this post


thedoctor  
Years ago

And anyway, it's a lawyers job to mould definitions to suit purpose. That's why any decree that states that assets will not be sold does not fill me with confidence that BSA will remain a State Govt body.

Reply #74757 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Heard jingles wont be returning to adelaide at all, somewhere more southern apparently.....

Reply #74760 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Honestly if the sale went through now. We would be behind the 8 ball so to speek. As most of the good players seem to be signing else where. I think it would be the best for the 36ers if they were sold and I know a lot people disagree with that.

Reply #74762 | Report this post


EC  
Years ago

The price couldn't possibly be right at this present time. At best, the club needs to re establish itself as a great club to increase its sale value. A number of great players flying the coop won't help the situation.

Reply #74782 | Report this post




You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.



Close ads
Serio: Tourism photography and videography
Little Streaks - The fun and interactive good-habits app designed especially for kids.

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 5:05 pm, Tue 19 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754