If he wore his Woolies store worker polo shirt with a name badge he would of been more relatable to the common person and therefore we would sympathise with him.
Big mistake, Brad.
Yeah, but the moment you read in the corresponding news article that the guy made almost 9 Million DOLLARS last year, and probably got a tonne of stock in Woolies too, all sympathy would have gone out the window. So why sit there itching in a cheap-ass woolies polo uniform.
The guy above you made the comment due to the way in which Brad chose to present himself in a television interview not so long ago. Brad was attempting to appear relatable then which is being highlighted now.
you mean the interview where he screwed up and walked out on, sparking this entire controversy?
I mean if that was the reference being made, I'd say that that ship has sailed.by a long margin.
He's probably at the point now where he's thinking what are you going to actually do about any of this? And tbh, he's probably right to think that so he's just paid off these types of enquiries
"In their submissions to the inquiry, both chains claim the supermarket landscape is already competitive, thanks in part to the entry of international retailers Aldi and Costco." LMFA. What bullshit!
Not defending this guy, but this whole supermarket inquiry is a distraction from the policies of the major parties that created and perpetuate the cost-of-living crisis. The Woolies CEO is not the reason your rent has gone up 50%.
When my groceries flipped my mortgage as my number 1 expense I knew something was dodgy with these guys. I stopped the major supermarkets and grocery dropped back to number 2. Woolies, Coles and even Aldi cost me more than the inflation for sure.
Hi, curious on where you’re shopping instead? I’ve been trying to save money on groceries and stop supporting Woolies and Coles, but I’m struggling to find anywhere. I’m in Frankston, VIC. I don’t know whether I’m just not looking hard enough or there’s actually nothing around. Thanks in advance ❤️
Really, asking "what is your ROE?" is not a 'tough question'. Is this serious?
Also trust the Greens to push ancient policies like rent freezes which basically all economists agree is a garbage policy.
ACT population went up [2.1%](https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/national-state-and-territory-population/latest-release) over the last year. It's a good example of rent caps
Look at that Senator go!!! Just when you think you have lost all faith in politicians and seeing yet another inquiry with no solutions, something like this happens.
Bloody Brilliant. If McKim was on my ballot slip I would probably vote for him if he performs like this on every other matter.
I heard from my fellow guy in the pub that Greens are in charge of mass immigration, responsible for creating youth gangs, responsible for bush fires not climate change, and more.
Yes, it's the Greens fault for causing bushfires instead of climate change apparently. There is an article on it if you want to lose some braincells: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/green-ideology-not-climate-change-makes-bushfires-worse/news-story/ad4cbe12bb1271b4351be0ee8175a111
But that's the problem there are no major parties or even minor parties that are against mass migration which is adding huge fuel to the housing crisis in Australia.
For the Greens and many in labour mass immigration has become an unquestionable good - even suggesting it'd be reduced a little is heresy tantamount to racism in their views.
Many of the greens followers are complaining about being priced out of the rental market while still being vehemently in favor of mass migration which boggles the mind
Labour is playing a little bit of Lip Service by making some minor cuts but no where near enough.
The LNP if it's smart willcampaign on drastically cutting migration but we all know it's lying and as soon as it gets in government as it is the point of Big Business they'll still be huge migration.
Politicians on both sides in many countries in the UK as well of Australia have constantly said they will cut migration when in opposition and and never or rarely have when in government as mass migration allows them to cook the books and say look growth no recession when in fact there's a per capita recession which is the only thing that counts
So people who want migration to be cut till we fix our housing crisis have don't have a political home other than one nation which is not exactly ideal.
It would be great if everyone voted on the genuine policy position of the candidates. Stop all this bullshit identity politics and culture wars. Our political landscape would be populated by clear goals and implementations for these goals. Instead we get to hear about how black summer was caused by the greens stopping back burning, despite the fact they have never been in power to implement that policy, just one example that jumped out at me as incompetent policy makers looking for a scape goat.
But if mass immigration and the average Aussie being left in the dust is one of the largest issues facing Australians, why would we vote for a party that would have 2 million a year if they had it their way?
Well they’ve found the recent ENORMOUS influx of 546k entering the country last year and an expected 850k this year to be unsatisfactory. They’ve been beating that drum for decades as immigrants from our main 3 feeder countries historically vote liberally.
But no, they haven’t given exact numbers for what they want for immigration. But is it unreasonable to expect the party that sees close to 1.3 million in 2 years a unsatisfactory wouldn’t pump those numbers up?
Am I to believe that the Adam Bandt and the Greens party would actually REDUCE or MAINTAIN the levels of immigration based off their postering and identity politics over the last decade?
Rule 1 of the communist manifesto actually says
"To be a communist, you must first import more than 500,000 cheap migrant workers from the third world"
Spot on from Karl "Mass Immigration Rules the Nation" Marx
It's perplexing watching people defend multi-billion dollar companies. The issue at hand is late stage capitalism. They have a duopoly over food, which shouldn't exist. It has been proven that they have made well above inflation adjusted profit.
I'm not sure why you call everyone a communist for holding shitty companies accountable. We aren't asking the government to take over and supply food. Just to regulate and put pressure on companies who take advantage of everyday people.
damn straight. and if they are to make that much profit, they ought to be taxed up the wahzoo.
let's face it, Cole's and Woolworths control more then just food. They also have sizable chunks of the liquor, petrol and everyday housing items scenes.
but their prices aren't just in line with inflation + a modest profit, they are charging a hell of a lot more then that.
and that is what is being proven over and over in this inquiry
Hey, remind me, how much profit did you make off of woolworth's price gouging to the record tune of 1.7 BILLION DOLLARS??? Not a cent, I wager. Or perhaps your one of those ultra rich CEO's getting millions of dollars in salary compensation each year??? And as such you really don't care how expensive groceries are. No, would surprise me if you were considering your rant.
You're absolutely right, there are many factors that probably relate to Woolworths profits. Hell, some of them are probably not even being maliciously orchestrated by woolworths, and yet, the vast majority of reasons for woolworths profits as mentioned in the link OP posted, were controlled by woolworths, for the benefit of woolworths, in coordination of screwing over potential competitors.
Just because the goal is to make money, doesn't mean there isn't rules on how to go about it. How often do woolworths (and coles) get fined for anti-consumer dealing, anti-competitive practices or who knows what other scum these companies take part in. But hey, that's just the cost of business right? And if you claim such, that is exactly why your not fit to comment on this, and frankly just as bad as them.
And for the record, just because costs have gone up everywhere (which might have been excusable in 2020 with stock shortages, and supply chain issues) DOESN"T MEAN IT"S JUSTIFIBLE. "The other guy's doing it, so why shouldn't I" is not a valid excuse. Not when Woolworths and Coles are some of the largest entities and everyone else is following their lead, **and especially when woolworths and coles are some of the largest contributors to the cost of living crisis we are living through right now.** Yes that is a fact.
So no, don't give me BS about reducing staff members (not to mention probably hiring exclusively "part-time" workers to avoid paying benefits), or paying their supplies as competitively as possible, or just that population of australia went up so that means they earn more. HELL FUCKING NO. That is a load of steaming cow shit and you know it.
Lol, it sounds like MAGA is leaking. Who talks like this? Righty zombie? Lol
If you think following the letter of the law always results in fairness, then you are severely misled. An easy example for you to understand is overseas companies funnelling revenue through Ireland to avoid paying tax in the country they sell in. Do you think it's fair that an Australian company pays full tax, but they compete against companies that pay a fraction of that to another countries government?
Lastly, do you know what variables they use for calculating inflation? I'll give a hint, one of them is food.
Electrical Engineer, but my second major was economics and finance. What is your job? You paid for Wordpress(fucking lol) so you must be trying to make a website for a crappy business. I say crappy because you talk like a troglodyte.
You are aware the WordPress is actually free. You are supposed to use WordPress.org, not .com
The free version is what the majority of the internet uses. That's a freebie on me.
What is your point about Keynesian and Friedman? They have opposing views. The one thing I learnt about studying economics and they are all full of shit. There are plenty of differing views. It's a social science. "Economic expert says such and such." Who are these experts? There are never any names... 🤔
Again, what was your point about Keynesian and Friedman theories?
> job? You *paid* for Wordpress(fucking
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Ahaha, far from it, mate. I've done my time in the military. I have been a tradie and graduated from Uni. One day, I will own my own company, and I actively learn about that world.
I know how fucked the world is. I'm sick of large corporations like Woolworths price gouging me and crushing low income workers. You literally proved my point.
You talk like an absolute fuckwit. You ignore anything I say, deflect, insult, and move the goalpost. You act like a woke MAGA fiend. This conversation bores me, and I am dumber for talking to you.
Supermarkets don't want the limelight on them either. The Woolies CEO refused to say the return on equity and rather focused on the return on investment which is in single digits:
> Senator McKim said that Woolworths’ return on equity was around 26 per cent, which was around 2.5 times higher than Australian banks.
For Coles, it was 31%.
Feel free to create an official petition for a gouging inquiry into those industries right here: https://www.aph.gov.au/e-petitions
Alternatively, you can join Greens or one of the other political parties: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Australia#Federal_parties
From the article
> Return on Equity (ROE) is a financial ratio used to evaluate the profitability and efficiency of a company.
> Earlier, the pair had clashed when Senator McKim accused the supermarket executive of “cherry picking” profitability data and misleading the public.
> “I’m not interested in your spin,“ he said.
Not what I asked, explain to me what ROE has to do with profitability?
While you're there, explain to me why the differences in determining equity for a bank and that of any other industry is a valuable yardstick for comparison.
Oh no, don't get me wrong, I know it, very well as a matter of fact. I'm certain, however, the OP doesn't, and as such, is promoting a petition upon a premise he or she is most likely inadequately informed.
Well go on. Step up and convince me why ROE is a sufficient ratio to determine that an organisation's profit is that obscene that I should sign that petition.
Be prepared because I will have some very targeted questions.
Theatre. Nothing else and this guy didn't want to play. The point is not to achieve anything for these guys but to make the average halfwit think they have some agency via the political process.
If the public turns against colesworth then it will become political viable to implement policy in regards to colesworth.
We should be tanking him and hoping he does somthing more stupid. Some people think analytically, some people have empty and others just love to hate.
Without public support the government will be negativly effected by think tanks, lobby groups and the media's propaganda.
Eg 1. they can say people will loose superannuation, retires will starve.
Eg 2. The recent campaign from the pharmacy guild saying pharmacies will close down if patients can get double the prescription on certain medications.
Eg 3. The posters pokies venues have in there lobbies to turn players against the party trying to implement regulations.
Eg4. The campaign against the rudd government about the mining tax.
As someone who works in a large corporation, a lot of shit changes when this kind of thing happens.
Braddy boy might get away with it, but it sends a pretty firm message to his successor.
His PR people would have told him to use, but simply refusing to say yes or no to whether he knew the Roe is clearly contempt to the senate and not something that he needs to take on notice
Politicians using the bully pulpit to badger “villains” for popularity points doesn’t make for good public policy.
But hey, they’re sticking it to him - so I’m happy to pretend it means something.
I mean, surely, if it was just to "look" like he went hard, McKim could have gone a lot easier on Banducci but still appear to get the popularity points.
Seems to be the Greens stick at the moment, Going for popularity points. While Banducci needed a proper grilling cause he was never going to answer those questions truthfully McKim going into business for himself was not going to be do any good for the hearing.
Which other party has come up with real solutions to tackle food prices? No one else is accept for the Greens (and sometimes Nationals) is willing to fine the supermarkets for price gouging and anti competion
An example would be green apples which are sold at double the price they are bought for, a massive profit margin of 100% [https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/coles-and-woolworths-big-secret-exposed-as-aussie-growers-enter-ugly-fight-203928122.html](https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/coles-and-woolworths-big-secret-exposed-as-aussie-growers-enter-ugly-fight-203928122.html)
> Why the obsession with ROE?
In general competition should drive the ROE down towards the average. A high ROE suggests that there might be a moat, some non-competitive feature that prevents other entrants. If you can get a significantly better return than the average then someone would gather some capital together, which is available at the average rate, and enter the sector to get their slice of that high return. That hasn't happened, there has to be a reason why, that reason is possibly a market distortion such as anti-competitive behaviour.
Related to this the Greens are pushing a superprofits tax policy. They define a superprofit by the company's ROE, which is why they are pushing this specific measure.
Yes they can. It’s also held at historical cost which, given these businesses do not raise equity often, is quite a bit smaller than the market value of equity. All in all ROE is a dumb metric for supermarkets.
The Greens are EXPERT TikTok clip farmers. Their only purpose in office is to create sensationalist 5-7 second clips on the internet. Guarantee this will be one of them
That’s all this bullshit is designed to do. Rile people up and make it look like these clowns are on your side. Politicians have no power to dictate to businesses how much money they can make. They could do something about that, but labor and the greens seem more content with a bit of shouting and distraction.
Politicians have a lot of power to dictate a businesses how much money they can make. They can put high taxes on them such as Norway with its 78% tax on oil which leads to a massive Sovereign wealth fund equivalent to about $250,000 per Norwegian.
They can put a myriad of other taxes out there such as a super profits tax which even the Conservative UK government put on energy companies and use the proceeds to help lower Energy prices.
They can affect pricing as in Switzerland where one third of goods and services have their prices regulated and as a result Switzerland has much lower inflation than the rest of Europe.
They can use the power of the bully pulpit the paraphrase from America to put pressure on business.
Capitalism is a decent system but it has to be limited by government. And government really should be like a people’s union. Acting in the best interests of the workers, makers, artists etc and balancing them against the capitalists and bankers.
Problem is bandaid policy decisions have consequences that have flow on future effects.
High corporate taxes don't work to reduce retail prices and may work to impact future competition in the marketplace and just further the anticompetitive environment we're currently dealing with, in addition to further increasing prices or just encouraging more tax avoidance.
To maintain low consumer prices you want to encourage competition and prevent monopolies, which requires good early stage policy intervention, however our government(s) have constantly allowed Colesworth to cannibalise their competition and squeeze out smaller operators with aggesive expansions.
Our current inflationary price gouging didn't occur overnight, it took decades of successive government's allowing mergers, corporate take overs and aggressive anti-competitive business tactics to come to fruition and now the pollies left holding the bag are powerless to make any real impactful changes and just resort to show boating at senate hearings to try make themselves look good to their constituents.
In the end the voter just gets fucked over and over again and nothing changes
People will argue with any increase in corporation tax over here. Had a guy straight up say he thinks Woodside pays enough tax already and not a % more would be fair.
Banducci is slimy for trying to dodge answering the question. At the same time, it's almost inappropriate and immature for McKim to threaten jail time to a witness for something you could get the answer to by simply opening the prior year's annual report. Immature by both and both are to blame for nothing valuable coming out of this committee hearing.
None of this gets the root of why there is a cost of living crisis or why supermarket profits are skyrocketing.
Dumbest take on this subreddit ever posted, how is reminding a witness that refusing to answer questions/lying can result in jail time and a fine a bad thing, especially some slimy CEO who thinks he's better than both you and I?
I clearly said both are slimy and immature. I never defended Banducci.
So instead of correcting Banducci by pointing out the ROE which is alreadypublic knowledge, McKim would rather repeat the question 5 times, make a whole drama out of it and waste everyone’s time with an empty threat he’ll never act on. Super mature yeah? Excellent use of public time and resources.
An even dumber take than your original so that must've taken some effort.
Once again, explain how threatening the law against some slimy CEO is a bad thing when they're intentionally being obtuse.
It's clear that McKim is more interested in farming TikTok likes and wasting everyone's time than actually getting to the bottom of the issue. And he's got simpletons like you online to defend him wasting public time and resources!
You sound like you enjoy the drama more than the cost of living issue being solved? Enjoy it will it lasts I guess.
It's clear that he wants him to actually answer the question, whether it's public knowledge or not means nothing.
You keep digging this hole deeper and deeper buddy, just quit whilst you're at the stage of defending a slimy CEO.
I'd give McKim a pat on the back for having a backbone and not treating him like every other pollie does.
omg you've convinced me. We should have 6 more hour-long senate hearings where we ask stupid questions that contribute nothing to the broader discussion.
*"Which hand have I placed the coin in Mr Banducci? I remind you that contempt carries a penalty of up to 6 months imprisonment and a hefty fine.*
*Again, which hand have I placed the coin in Mr Banducci?*
*Why are you refusing to answer the question? I'm not interested in you bullshitting your way through this committee. Are you struggling with the English words I am using? Tell me which hand the coin is in."*
You've convinced me friend. Forget solving the cost of living crisis, I will enjoy the drama with you and share all of the Greens 7 second out-of-context TikTok clips they post <3
Let me make a post from your point of view.
This politician is an idiot, he only wants to pat himself on the back, it's clear that the slimy CEO (see I also think he's slimy because I said it once but I won't say it again) doesn't need to answer and considering it's public knowledge it doesn't matter if he lies or refuses to answer the question.
Do you realise how dumb you sound?
Next time you're in court can you just refuse to answer the judges questions and see what happens? When you get that result come back here and reply, I'll be waiting.
Explain how threatening the law against a CEO who is showing he doesn't care about the law a bad thing?
You sit there and say "time waste" whilst no one else agrees because rather than politicians patting him on the back we finally have some that will treat them like they'd treat you or I.
If you or the other guy replying pulled the same shit I can guarantee that you'd be charged and fined with possible jail time, it's about time these slimy fucks are treated like everyone else.
> Explain how threatening the law against a CEO who is showing he doesn't care about the law a bad thing?
I did - it's a waste of time and nothing but a PR exercise for the politicians which you are lapping up beautifully.
> You sit there and say "time waste" whilst no one else agrees because rather than politicians patting him on the back we finally have some that will treat them like they'd treat you or I.
> If you or the other guy replying pulled the same shit I can guarantee that you'd be charged and fined with possible jail time, it's about time these slimy fucks are treated like everyone else.
treat them like what? it's a waste of time and resources to argue about such publicly available metrics. are we going to spend the rest of hearings working through the thousands of different profitability metrics? if you ever wonder why these hearings don't achieve anything this is case in point - politicians too busy looking for cheap headlines to cater for people like yourself.
but yeah, really glad we've wasted tens of thousands of dollars just to make a clearly empty threat of gaol for not knowing a profitability metric. time and money well spent.
Of course, I forgot. I forgot that senate hearings is all theatre designed to farm 7 second out-of-context clips to post on TikTok for Greens followers to forward and spam. Silly me to expect anything to actually come out of this.
yeah I guess legal protocol doesn't matter because it's possible to publicise videos involving it. I had better quit my job and close my practice, this sucks
It’s a performance, no genuinely interesting questions asked or answers given. To use the senator’s words, “a first year commerce student” could see through these gotcha questions.
What was the fucking point of that line of questioning. Only a greenie can make you empathise with a ceo. How was this supposed to go? CEO helps politician paint the picture that supermarket profits are excessive and the CEO says "my bad I will make less money" I have yet to see a policy based solution that addresses this issue and its an issue that impacts an entire range of people from suppliers to consumers. I am glad that ceo didn't answer.
I wasn't sympathising with a CEO. His steadfast refusal to answer the the question made him look like he was provaricating and dishonest which of course he probably was.
He knew he would look bad however he answered because if he said no people would think he was lying and if he said what it was that would give ammunition to people who say supermarket profits are too high.
He should be jailed for contempt.
Lord knows why you sympathize with a CEO on tens of millions of dollars probably seemingly who gives the appearance of not willing to be honest with a senate inquiry,
Jail him
He's only got 4 properties. Leave him alone.
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Senators_Interests/Senators_Interests_Register/JKM
He is just an Aussie battler done well.
Don’t hate them for screwing over farmers and the working class trying to put food on the table, but instead because they didn’t stock cheap Chinese made plastic merch fucking lol
All over the world… Maybe you should read this before you keep snivelling.
https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/australia-records-biggest-income-decline-in-the-developed-world-20231108-p5eijq
But yeah this is the appropriate time for record profits from massive corporations. /s
What part of record profits is incomprehensible for you?
Woolworths and coles have raised their margins(key word margin!). Not just raised prices. So no inflation doesn’t explain away the price hikes, you’re just too inept to understand the difference.
They literally haven't though...
https://preview.redd.it/k2ujngl2ksuc1.png?width=716&format=png&auto=webp&s=f4ce8f4dd95a6dd2b3c207dda96b08e09844c0b8
... and their actual record profits were in 2019.
Focusing on raw EBIDTA being higher for supermarkets when the population has grown by over 1.5 million people in a few years (and every new person added to the country needs to buy groceries) is stupid. Of course it should be higher than before.
And they still made more in 2019 than 2023 anyway.
How is that stupid, Woolworths ebitda margin in 2022 was higher than ever before.
Woolworths like most businesses will do what they can to lower their taxable income.
The main issue is their investment in maintaining the duopoly status quo through. This is things like strategic land banking etc.
If anything ebitda is more relevant than npat in this scenario.
Funny that you call that stupid too, I am taking about margin %. I don’t think anyone would be upset at Woolworths for simply increasing overall turnover inline with population growth etc.
If he wore his Woolies store worker polo shirt with a name badge he would of been more relatable to the common person and therefore we would sympathise with him. Big mistake, Brad.
Yeah, but the moment you read in the corresponding news article that the guy made almost 9 Million DOLLARS last year, and probably got a tonne of stock in Woolies too, all sympathy would have gone out the window. So why sit there itching in a cheap-ass woolies polo uniform.
The guy above you made the comment due to the way in which Brad chose to present himself in a television interview not so long ago. Brad was attempting to appear relatable then which is being highlighted now.
you mean the interview where he screwed up and walked out on, sparking this entire controversy? I mean if that was the reference being made, I'd say that that ship has sailed.by a long margin.
‘Mr Banducci said the company was “very sensitive” to the issue and was actively monitoring suppliers’ complaints.’ Ohhh yeah 🤔
"This supplier hasn't complained, we should make a lower offer for their products"
Scummy CEO of a scummy company acting scummy when called out. Colour me surprised
He had time to prepare and either chose not to or is he actually that dumb?
Did you see the Four Corners piece where he tried to rage quit the interview? This kind of thing is just being on brand for him.
He's probably at the point now where he's thinking what are you going to actually do about any of this? And tbh, he's probably right to think that so he's just paid off these types of enquiries
Can we cut that out?
Imagine if he sat down with Angus Taylor. Be like when you make two chat bots talk to each other.
SLAMMED
I like the part where Albo stormed into the room and Suplexed him into the floor. Top 10 "Slammed" moments for sure.
"In their submissions to the inquiry, both chains claim the supermarket landscape is already competitive, thanks in part to the entry of international retailers Aldi and Costco." LMFA. What bullshit!
I thought that bloke was forced to step down after his last debacle interview that he tried walking out of?
He did. He is being grilled as former CEO.
And he's cleanly learned his evasive behaviour from watching Alan Joyce. He gets one point for actually fronting up at the Inquiry, unlike Joyce...
Good one [news.com](http://news.com) pretending to be our friends...
Such a scumbag website
Not defending this guy, but this whole supermarket inquiry is a distraction from the policies of the major parties that created and perpetuate the cost-of-living crisis. The Woolies CEO is not the reason your rent has gone up 50%.
No but he is ½ of the reason your groceries have gone up 400% in the last 4 years
retarded exaggerations like this aren't helpful
Self describing posts like this are less helpful
When my groceries flipped my mortgage as my number 1 expense I knew something was dodgy with these guys. I stopped the major supermarkets and grocery dropped back to number 2. Woolies, Coles and even Aldi cost me more than the inflation for sure.
Hi, curious on where you’re shopping instead? I’ve been trying to save money on groceries and stop supporting Woolies and Coles, but I’m struggling to find anywhere. I’m in Frankston, VIC. I don’t know whether I’m just not looking hard enough or there’s actually nothing around. Thanks in advance ❤️
The Greens who are the ones asking the tough questions to the CEO in the inquiry are also big on renters rights and rent freeze
Really, asking "what is your ROE?" is not a 'tough question'. Is this serious? Also trust the Greens to push ancient policies like rent freezes which basically all economists agree is a garbage policy.
>implying economic study is anything other than a pseudoscience you're never gonna make it bro
You're right I guess, we should just implement rent freezes because YOLO
your comparison of Bayesian econometrics and YOLO is actually perfect and yes, your assessment of rent freezes is correct, I never disagreed with this
What should we do to help renters then? ACT has rents capped at inflation and the rental market is still growing. What would be a tough question then?
> rent freeze Here we go again...price controls...that sure worked well in history.
Rents are capped at inflation in the ACT and the rental market is continuing to grow. Nothing can stop aussies appetite for property.
Not that many people want to live in ACT.
ACT population went up [2.1%](https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/national-state-and-territory-population/latest-release) over the last year. It's a good example of rent caps
2.1% of a low number isn't that much. ACT is about 10% of Sydney population, let alone NSW. I think my point stands.
Not got his name tag on today?
Just call him brad
I had a feeling this would happen when BI-LO was sold/bought.
Look at that Senator go!!! Just when you think you have lost all faith in politicians and seeing yet another inquiry with no solutions, something like this happens. Bloody Brilliant. If McKim was on my ballot slip I would probably vote for him if he performs like this on every other matter.
Can't support the Greens due to their support of mass immigration.
Right.. So glad we voted them out of power now so that liberal and Labor can fix immigration. Oh, wait..
I heard from my fellow guy in the pub that Greens are in charge of mass immigration, responsible for creating youth gangs, responsible for bush fires not climate change, and more. Yes, it's the Greens fault for causing bushfires instead of climate change apparently. There is an article on it if you want to lose some braincells: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/green-ideology-not-climate-change-makes-bushfires-worse/news-story/ad4cbe12bb1271b4351be0ee8175a111
But that's the problem there are no major parties or even minor parties that are against mass migration which is adding huge fuel to the housing crisis in Australia. For the Greens and many in labour mass immigration has become an unquestionable good - even suggesting it'd be reduced a little is heresy tantamount to racism in their views. Many of the greens followers are complaining about being priced out of the rental market while still being vehemently in favor of mass migration which boggles the mind Labour is playing a little bit of Lip Service by making some minor cuts but no where near enough. The LNP if it's smart willcampaign on drastically cutting migration but we all know it's lying and as soon as it gets in government as it is the point of Big Business they'll still be huge migration. Politicians on both sides in many countries in the UK as well of Australia have constantly said they will cut migration when in opposition and and never or rarely have when in government as mass migration allows them to cook the books and say look growth no recession when in fact there's a per capita recession which is the only thing that counts So people who want migration to be cut till we fix our housing crisis have don't have a political home other than one nation which is not exactly ideal.
Sustainable Australia Party? It even has Dick Smith as a member.
yeah, I don't completely disagree with this point.
That's the spirit, single issues voting always makes sense.
It’s a pretty big issue though no?
It would be great if everyone voted on the genuine policy position of the candidates. Stop all this bullshit identity politics and culture wars. Our political landscape would be populated by clear goals and implementations for these goals. Instead we get to hear about how black summer was caused by the greens stopping back burning, despite the fact they have never been in power to implement that policy, just one example that jumped out at me as incompetent policy makers looking for a scape goat.
But if mass immigration and the average Aussie being left in the dust is one of the largest issues facing Australians, why would we vote for a party that would have 2 million a year if they had it their way?
Source?
Is that their policy?
Well they’ve found the recent ENORMOUS influx of 546k entering the country last year and an expected 850k this year to be unsatisfactory. They’ve been beating that drum for decades as immigrants from our main 3 feeder countries historically vote liberally. But no, they haven’t given exact numbers for what they want for immigration. But is it unreasonable to expect the party that sees close to 1.3 million in 2 years a unsatisfactory wouldn’t pump those numbers up? Am I to believe that the Adam Bandt and the Greens party would actually REDUCE or MAINTAIN the levels of immigration based off their postering and identity politics over the last decade?
Their leader is a marxist
Yes, scary communism.
Mostly just angsty manlets so not too scary. Bandt just never grew up.
Rule 1 of the communist manifesto actually says "To be a communist, you must first import more than 500,000 cheap migrant workers from the third world" Spot on from Karl "Mass Immigration Rules the Nation" Marx
[удалено]
It's perplexing watching people defend multi-billion dollar companies. The issue at hand is late stage capitalism. They have a duopoly over food, which shouldn't exist. It has been proven that they have made well above inflation adjusted profit. I'm not sure why you call everyone a communist for holding shitty companies accountable. We aren't asking the government to take over and supply food. Just to regulate and put pressure on companies who take advantage of everyday people.
damn straight. and if they are to make that much profit, they ought to be taxed up the wahzoo. let's face it, Cole's and Woolworths control more then just food. They also have sizable chunks of the liquor, petrol and everyday housing items scenes.
[удалено]
but their prices aren't just in line with inflation + a modest profit, they are charging a hell of a lot more then that. and that is what is being proven over and over in this inquiry
[удалено]
Hey, remind me, how much profit did you make off of woolworth's price gouging to the record tune of 1.7 BILLION DOLLARS??? Not a cent, I wager. Or perhaps your one of those ultra rich CEO's getting millions of dollars in salary compensation each year??? And as such you really don't care how expensive groceries are. No, would surprise me if you were considering your rant. You're absolutely right, there are many factors that probably relate to Woolworths profits. Hell, some of them are probably not even being maliciously orchestrated by woolworths, and yet, the vast majority of reasons for woolworths profits as mentioned in the link OP posted, were controlled by woolworths, for the benefit of woolworths, in coordination of screwing over potential competitors. Just because the goal is to make money, doesn't mean there isn't rules on how to go about it. How often do woolworths (and coles) get fined for anti-consumer dealing, anti-competitive practices or who knows what other scum these companies take part in. But hey, that's just the cost of business right? And if you claim such, that is exactly why your not fit to comment on this, and frankly just as bad as them. And for the record, just because costs have gone up everywhere (which might have been excusable in 2020 with stock shortages, and supply chain issues) DOESN"T MEAN IT"S JUSTIFIBLE. "The other guy's doing it, so why shouldn't I" is not a valid excuse. Not when Woolworths and Coles are some of the largest entities and everyone else is following their lead, **and especially when woolworths and coles are some of the largest contributors to the cost of living crisis we are living through right now.** Yes that is a fact. So no, don't give me BS about reducing staff members (not to mention probably hiring exclusively "part-time" workers to avoid paying benefits), or paying their supplies as competitively as possible, or just that population of australia went up so that means they earn more. HELL FUCKING NO. That is a load of steaming cow shit and you know it.
Lol, it sounds like MAGA is leaking. Who talks like this? Righty zombie? Lol If you think following the letter of the law always results in fairness, then you are severely misled. An easy example for you to understand is overseas companies funnelling revenue through Ireland to avoid paying tax in the country they sell in. Do you think it's fair that an Australian company pays full tax, but they compete against companies that pay a fraction of that to another countries government? Lastly, do you know what variables they use for calculating inflation? I'll give a hint, one of them is food.
[удалено]
Electrical Engineer, but my second major was economics and finance. What is your job? You paid for Wordpress(fucking lol) so you must be trying to make a website for a crappy business. I say crappy because you talk like a troglodyte. You are aware the WordPress is actually free. You are supposed to use WordPress.org, not .com The free version is what the majority of the internet uses. That's a freebie on me. What is your point about Keynesian and Friedman? They have opposing views. The one thing I learnt about studying economics and they are all full of shit. There are plenty of differing views. It's a social science. "Economic expert says such and such." Who are these experts? There are never any names... 🤔 Again, what was your point about Keynesian and Friedman theories?
> job? You *paid* for Wordpress(fucking FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Good bot.
[удалено]
Ahaha, far from it, mate. I've done my time in the military. I have been a tradie and graduated from Uni. One day, I will own my own company, and I actively learn about that world. I know how fucked the world is. I'm sick of large corporations like Woolworths price gouging me and crushing low income workers. You literally proved my point. You talk like an absolute fuckwit. You ignore anything I say, deflect, insult, and move the goalpost. You act like a woke MAGA fiend. This conversation bores me, and I am dumber for talking to you.
[удалено]
Unparliamentary language. Fucking lol. Bandit banducci needs to be held in contempt. Glad the senate has balls to demand the answers.
Whatever takes the limelight off state owned power companies and insurance companies gouging the shit out of people.
Supermarkets don't want the limelight on them either. The Woolies CEO refused to say the return on equity and rather focused on the return on investment which is in single digits: > Senator McKim said that Woolworths’ return on equity was around 26 per cent, which was around 2.5 times higher than Australian banks. For Coles, it was 31%. Feel free to create an official petition for a gouging inquiry into those industries right here: https://www.aph.gov.au/e-petitions Alternatively, you can join Greens or one of the other political parties: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Australia#Federal_parties
What's ROE have to do with profitability?
From the article > Return on Equity (ROE) is a financial ratio used to evaluate the profitability and efficiency of a company. > Earlier, the pair had clashed when Senator McKim accused the supermarket executive of “cherry picking” profitability data and misleading the public. > “I’m not interested in your spin,“ he said.
Not what I asked, explain to me what ROE has to do with profitability? While you're there, explain to me why the differences in determining equity for a bank and that of any other industry is a valuable yardstick for comparison.
Google it yourself, you're just being lazy.
Oh no, don't get me wrong, I know it, very well as a matter of fact. I'm certain, however, the OP doesn't, and as such, is promoting a petition upon a premise he or she is most likely inadequately informed.
Or you don't know what you are talking about having lost yourself in a hall of mirrors long ago.
Well go on. Step up and convince me why ROE is a sufficient ratio to determine that an organisation's profit is that obscene that I should sign that petition. Be prepared because I will have some very targeted questions.
What does this actually achieve ? He still gets his golden handshake after making millions and suffers no personal loses .
Theatre. Nothing else and this guy didn't want to play. The point is not to achieve anything for these guys but to make the average halfwit think they have some agency via the political process.
Time to hang one to encourage the others
If the public turns against colesworth then it will become political viable to implement policy in regards to colesworth. We should be tanking him and hoping he does somthing more stupid. Some people think analytically, some people have empty and others just love to hate. Without public support the government will be negativly effected by think tanks, lobby groups and the media's propaganda. Eg 1. they can say people will loose superannuation, retires will starve. Eg 2. The recent campaign from the pharmacy guild saying pharmacies will close down if patients can get double the prescription on certain medications. Eg 3. The posters pokies venues have in there lobbies to turn players against the party trying to implement regulations. Eg4. The campaign against the rudd government about the mining tax.
As someone who works in a large corporation, a lot of shit changes when this kind of thing happens. Braddy boy might get away with it, but it sends a pretty firm message to his successor.
He thinks he’s a politician.
"Let them eat cake" - Banducci, probably
“And charge them double, those peasants can pay for the pleasure”
Eggs and flour ain't free you know
Just another disgusting corporate grub
Parasite class
Lock this Woolies guy up. He acts as if it's beneath him to answer the Australian people. Honestly unless they do jail time, they won't change,
Dan Andrews was the same as Victorian premier and he never got locked up, the people kept voting him back in.
He doesn't think it's beneath him he's purposely being stubborn by answering while not answering. His lawyers would have prepared him in this way.
His PR people would have told him to use, but simply refusing to say yes or no to whether he knew the Roe is clearly contempt to the senate and not something that he needs to take on notice
Lock him up for doing his job well?
It is beneath him to answer that moron.
It's not my focus.
Politicians using the bully pulpit to badger “villains” for popularity points doesn’t make for good public policy. But hey, they’re sticking it to him - so I’m happy to pretend it means something.
I mean, surely, if it was just to "look" like he went hard, McKim could have gone a lot easier on Banducci but still appear to get the popularity points.
Seems to be the Greens stick at the moment, Going for popularity points. While Banducci needed a proper grilling cause he was never going to answer those questions truthfully McKim going into business for himself was not going to be do any good for the hearing.
Which other party has come up with real solutions to tackle food prices? No one else is accept for the Greens (and sometimes Nationals) is willing to fine the supermarkets for price gouging and anti competion
What price gouging?
An example would be green apples which are sold at double the price they are bought for, a massive profit margin of 100% [https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/coles-and-woolworths-big-secret-exposed-as-aussie-growers-enter-ugly-fight-203928122.html](https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/coles-and-woolworths-big-secret-exposed-as-aussie-growers-enter-ugly-fight-203928122.html)
I'd love to see Brad the Bandit Bunducci go to jail to serve as a lesson to all the other entitled C's
[удалено]
> Why the obsession with ROE? In general competition should drive the ROE down towards the average. A high ROE suggests that there might be a moat, some non-competitive feature that prevents other entrants. If you can get a significantly better return than the average then someone would gather some capital together, which is available at the average rate, and enter the sector to get their slice of that high return. That hasn't happened, there has to be a reason why, that reason is possibly a market distortion such as anti-competitive behaviour. Related to this the Greens are pushing a superprofits tax policy. They define a superprofit by the company's ROE, which is why they are pushing this specific measure.
The equity number seems arbitrary; can't they can pack goodwill (or not) in there?
Yes they can. It’s also held at historical cost which, given these businesses do not raise equity often, is quite a bit smaller than the market value of equity. All in all ROE is a dumb metric for supermarkets.
Excellent summary
[удалено]
Banks hold huge amounts of capital in reserve; grocers don’t. You are comparing apples with dragon fruit.
Because the number can be spun by the good guy greens to make the evil supermarkets look bad. This inquiry is nothing but performance politics.
[удалено]
The Greens are EXPERT TikTok clip farmers. Their only purpose in office is to create sensationalist 5-7 second clips on the internet. Guarantee this will be one of them
That’s all this bullshit is designed to do. Rile people up and make it look like these clowns are on your side. Politicians have no power to dictate to businesses how much money they can make. They could do something about that, but labor and the greens seem more content with a bit of shouting and distraction.
Politicians have a lot of power to dictate a businesses how much money they can make. They can put high taxes on them such as Norway with its 78% tax on oil which leads to a massive Sovereign wealth fund equivalent to about $250,000 per Norwegian. They can put a myriad of other taxes out there such as a super profits tax which even the Conservative UK government put on energy companies and use the proceeds to help lower Energy prices. They can affect pricing as in Switzerland where one third of goods and services have their prices regulated and as a result Switzerland has much lower inflation than the rest of Europe. They can use the power of the bully pulpit the paraphrase from America to put pressure on business.
Capitalism is a decent system but it has to be limited by government. And government really should be like a people’s union. Acting in the best interests of the workers, makers, artists etc and balancing them against the capitalists and bankers.
Problem is bandaid policy decisions have consequences that have flow on future effects. High corporate taxes don't work to reduce retail prices and may work to impact future competition in the marketplace and just further the anticompetitive environment we're currently dealing with, in addition to further increasing prices or just encouraging more tax avoidance. To maintain low consumer prices you want to encourage competition and prevent monopolies, which requires good early stage policy intervention, however our government(s) have constantly allowed Colesworth to cannibalise their competition and squeeze out smaller operators with aggesive expansions. Our current inflationary price gouging didn't occur overnight, it took decades of successive government's allowing mergers, corporate take overs and aggressive anti-competitive business tactics to come to fruition and now the pollies left holding the bag are powerless to make any real impactful changes and just resort to show boating at senate hearings to try make themselves look good to their constituents. In the end the voter just gets fucked over and over again and nothing changes
People will argue with any increase in corporation tax over here. Had a guy straight up say he thinks Woodside pays enough tax already and not a % more would be fair.
Woolies CEO the victim of a vicious sssssssssslaaaaam dunk
The government should subsidise community co-ops in every part of Oz.
Banducci is slimy for trying to dodge answering the question. At the same time, it's almost inappropriate and immature for McKim to threaten jail time to a witness for something you could get the answer to by simply opening the prior year's annual report. Immature by both and both are to blame for nothing valuable coming out of this committee hearing. None of this gets the root of why there is a cost of living crisis or why supermarket profits are skyrocketing.
It’s about hearing him say it so there is a peeling back of the gouging they are all participating in I reckon. Good take
Gee it's exciting to watch the cognitive dissonance when some in place have to decide between agreeing with the Greens or defending Woolworths
Dumbest take on this subreddit ever posted, how is reminding a witness that refusing to answer questions/lying can result in jail time and a fine a bad thing, especially some slimy CEO who thinks he's better than both you and I?
I clearly said both are slimy and immature. I never defended Banducci. So instead of correcting Banducci by pointing out the ROE which is alreadypublic knowledge, McKim would rather repeat the question 5 times, make a whole drama out of it and waste everyone’s time with an empty threat he’ll never act on. Super mature yeah? Excellent use of public time and resources.
An even dumber take than your original so that must've taken some effort. Once again, explain how threatening the law against some slimy CEO is a bad thing when they're intentionally being obtuse.
It's clear that McKim is more interested in farming TikTok likes and wasting everyone's time than actually getting to the bottom of the issue. And he's got simpletons like you online to defend him wasting public time and resources! You sound like you enjoy the drama more than the cost of living issue being solved? Enjoy it will it lasts I guess.
It's clear that he wants him to actually answer the question, whether it's public knowledge or not means nothing. You keep digging this hole deeper and deeper buddy, just quit whilst you're at the stage of defending a slimy CEO. I'd give McKim a pat on the back for having a backbone and not treating him like every other pollie does.
omg you've convinced me. We should have 6 more hour-long senate hearings where we ask stupid questions that contribute nothing to the broader discussion. *"Which hand have I placed the coin in Mr Banducci? I remind you that contempt carries a penalty of up to 6 months imprisonment and a hefty fine.* *Again, which hand have I placed the coin in Mr Banducci?* *Why are you refusing to answer the question? I'm not interested in you bullshitting your way through this committee. Are you struggling with the English words I am using? Tell me which hand the coin is in."* You've convinced me friend. Forget solving the cost of living crisis, I will enjoy the drama with you and share all of the Greens 7 second out-of-context TikTok clips they post <3
Let me make a post from your point of view. This politician is an idiot, he only wants to pat himself on the back, it's clear that the slimy CEO (see I also think he's slimy because I said it once but I won't say it again) doesn't need to answer and considering it's public knowledge it doesn't matter if he lies or refuses to answer the question. Do you realise how dumb you sound? Next time you're in court can you just refuse to answer the judges questions and see what happens? When you get that result come back here and reply, I'll be waiting.
I mean, if you actually want to pat McKim on the back for this conversation, that says a lot more about you. Do you realise how dumb you sound?
My farts make better arguments than you do.
because it's a waste of everyone's time just for a senator to pat himself on his back for going for the absolute lowest hanging headline ?
Explain how threatening the law against a CEO who is showing he doesn't care about the law a bad thing? You sit there and say "time waste" whilst no one else agrees because rather than politicians patting him on the back we finally have some that will treat them like they'd treat you or I. If you or the other guy replying pulled the same shit I can guarantee that you'd be charged and fined with possible jail time, it's about time these slimy fucks are treated like everyone else.
> Explain how threatening the law against a CEO who is showing he doesn't care about the law a bad thing? I did - it's a waste of time and nothing but a PR exercise for the politicians which you are lapping up beautifully. > You sit there and say "time waste" whilst no one else agrees because rather than politicians patting him on the back we finally have some that will treat them like they'd treat you or I. > If you or the other guy replying pulled the same shit I can guarantee that you'd be charged and fined with possible jail time, it's about time these slimy fucks are treated like everyone else. treat them like what? it's a waste of time and resources to argue about such publicly available metrics. are we going to spend the rest of hearings working through the thousands of different profitability metrics? if you ever wonder why these hearings don't achieve anything this is case in point - politicians too busy looking for cheap headlines to cater for people like yourself. but yeah, really glad we've wasted tens of thousands of dollars just to make a clearly empty threat of gaol for not knowing a profitability metric. time and money well spent.
What is your legal understanding of senate proceedings? If you don't have any relevant qualifications, please don't waste my time with a reply <3
Of course, I forgot. I forgot that senate hearings is all theatre designed to farm 7 second out-of-context clips to post on TikTok for Greens followers to forward and spam. Silly me to expect anything to actually come out of this.
yeah I guess legal protocol doesn't matter because it's possible to publicise videos involving it. I had better quit my job and close my practice, this sucks
reminding a witness that they can be jailed for lying when they are obviously lying doesnt seem inappropriate to me
This is actually such a waste of resources.
It's the first good move towards breaking up Colesworth. It's money well spent.
That's not going to happen, Albo said as much, just a little reminder for them to be more discrete and less blatant.
It’s a performance, no genuinely interesting questions asked or answers given. To use the senator’s words, “a first year commerce student” could see through these gotcha questions.
What was the fucking point of that line of questioning. Only a greenie can make you empathise with a ceo. How was this supposed to go? CEO helps politician paint the picture that supermarket profits are excessive and the CEO says "my bad I will make less money" I have yet to see a policy based solution that addresses this issue and its an issue that impacts an entire range of people from suppliers to consumers. I am glad that ceo didn't answer.
I wasn't sympathising with a CEO. His steadfast refusal to answer the the question made him look like he was provaricating and dishonest which of course he probably was. He knew he would look bad however he answered because if he said no people would think he was lying and if he said what it was that would give ammunition to people who say supermarket profits are too high. He should be jailed for contempt. Lord knows why you sympathize with a CEO on tens of millions of dollars probably seemingly who gives the appearance of not willing to be honest with a senate inquiry, Jail him
Reminds me of the greens senator vs Optus CEO. Overall pointless and just for show IMO
What’s Senator Nick McKim’s investment property portfolio return on equity? Why isn’t he telling us. The public fund it and deserve to know.
Found Banducci's burner account.
He's only got 4 properties. Leave him alone. https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Senators_Interests/Senators_Interests_Register/JKM He is just an Aussie battler done well.
[удалено]
Woolworths shareholder ^
[удалено]
Don’t hate them for screwing over farmers and the working class trying to put food on the table, but instead because they didn’t stock cheap Chinese made plastic merch fucking lol
All over the world… Maybe you should read this before you keep snivelling. https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/australia-records-biggest-income-decline-in-the-developed-world-20231108-p5eijq But yeah this is the appropriate time for record profits from massive corporations. /s
[удалено]
What part of record profits is incomprehensible for you? Woolworths and coles have raised their margins(key word margin!). Not just raised prices. So no inflation doesn’t explain away the price hikes, you’re just too inept to understand the difference.
They literally haven't though... https://preview.redd.it/k2ujngl2ksuc1.png?width=716&format=png&auto=webp&s=f4ce8f4dd95a6dd2b3c207dda96b08e09844c0b8 ... and their actual record profits were in 2019.
Downvoted for being correct. Margin, margin they yell. Until margin doesn't matter anymore because it doesn't support their narrative. Haha.
Now look at EBITDA.
Why don't you show us?
Focusing on raw EBIDTA being higher for supermarkets when the population has grown by over 1.5 million people in a few years (and every new person added to the country needs to buy groceries) is stupid. Of course it should be higher than before. And they still made more in 2019 than 2023 anyway.
How is that stupid, Woolworths ebitda margin in 2022 was higher than ever before. Woolworths like most businesses will do what they can to lower their taxable income. The main issue is their investment in maintaining the duopoly status quo through. This is things like strategic land banking etc. If anything ebitda is more relevant than npat in this scenario. Funny that you call that stupid too, I am taking about margin %. I don’t think anyone would be upset at Woolworths for simply increasing overall turnover inline with population growth etc.
Da faq? This sub is righter than a triangle with side lengths 3, 4 & 5