Let's hope the new owners can use the land in a more sustainable manner.

One wonders if tonypolony has ever set foot in Qld, let alone Dirranbandi, let alone Cubbie. How many jobs and how much export income has he created?

Well said, Brindi.

Just watch the NAB and the administrators fill their pockets, while the operation is run down, and then carved up, to suit the bean counters in the NAB. Most banks only see numbers on the ledger before they quit it for a pittance, without regard to any of the important farming or community factors.

The entire loss associated with Cubbie would already be written off on the banks books, and they'll just want to square the ledger away neatly before June 30, so they can finish the annual report, and mention Cubbie in passing, in one sentence, at the AGM.

Meantimes, the community will die, the farm will lie idle, and the barest minimum of land activity, that is needed to keep in line with shire laws, will be all that's authorised.

With $320m in debts, I wonder what the purchase price of Cubbie Station was. A great concept the irrigation set-up on Cubbie Station: but a high risk operation, with high equity purchase strategy called for.

Cubbie was never viable. I remember when it was first cleared back in the mid eighties, and large scale irrigation was mooted, we scratched our heads and wondered how they could rely on the intermitant flows of the Condamine/Ballone. I am surprised it has survived this long

Ron, you have a strange idea about borrowing money. The basic fact is you have to pay interest and pay back the loan. Cubbie has been unable to do that because their cash flow has not been enough. Why should an unviable business be protected just because it is a farm?

Brian - I'm not saying that Cubbie needs to be protected - but banks take the short term, month to month view - and farming finance has to be done over the long term. Once a bank decides to call in their lending, they care little about their social responsibilities. These are the same people who advance $25,000 pre-approved limits on Credit Cards to people who do not have the ability to repay. The NAB has all the expertise it needs to draw on, as to whether it lends business enterprises money. This bank saw fit to advance $320M to Cubbie - that must have been done with the knowledge that it was repayable. Now that it turns out that it isn't - who is to blame? Cubbie's managers who presented a highly optimistic outlook? Or bank senior management who don't really give a rats whether the loan can be repaid because they can foreclose, with 24-48 hrs notice, on ANY loan, and sell the lender up with no regard to any social or community consequences? Banks got, and get, their wealth from farming and rural communities - it's high time they exercised responsibility to the communities they serve - not just the shareholders, and the senior management, who never miss out.

If you want a classic example of what I am referring to, maybe the following link to a report on the current examination of the behaviour of the BoQ, with regard to Storm Financial clients, is a classic example, of a bank with no social responsibility. The BoQ is guilty of not following prudent lending practices - not ensuring that clients have an ability to repay - and with managers involved, having a vested interest in lending money to anybody that's warm and breathing, without even basic financial checks - because they are on commission. The bottom line is that the banks don't care about lending levels, or repayment ability, because they know, they can sell you up at the drop of a hankerchief. It's all about financial corporate greed - which I seem to recall, is the precise reason we ended up with the Global Financial Crash. http://www.thebull.com.au/article s_detail.php?id=6966

Hope the Federal Government buys back all the water that has been held back from those downstream of those monstrous dams - NSW and South Australia should be cheering. There are also jobs downstream that have been lost because of Cubbie. Good riddens.