logo
As suitors circle Healthscope, its management mulls a different path

As suitors circle Healthscope, its management mulls a different path

The sales process for Healthscope's failed private hospital business kicks off in earnest this Monday with up to 30 potential suitors due to file their tentative offers for its 37 Australian hospitals, employing 19,000 staff nationally.
But the non-binding offers won't include a bid from Healthscope's current management, who are contemplating a scheme to convert the company into a not-for-profit entity.
It would mirror the resurrection of Australia's largest child care provider Goodstart Early learning, from the ashes of the collapsed ABC Learning empire, as a not-for-profit provider.
Healthscope insiders have confirmed reports in the Australian Financial Review last week that its chief executive, Tino La Spina, is working on the plan as an alternative to a sale of the business to either commercial interests or other Australian not-for-profit operators like St Vincent's Health Australia.
Healthscope declined to comment. People with knowledge of the proposal, who are not authorised to discuss the matter, confirmed that the plans are not advanced enough to put in a non-binding indicative offer by the Monday, July 21 deadline.
But La Spina's team have been consulting with the receivers from McGrathNicol who are managing the sale, with a view to putting in a proposal during the second stage of the sales process where interested parties are expected to lodge binding offers for the business.
This includes local not-for-profit operators, ASX-listed Ramsay Health Care, privately owned Healthe Care and a potential debt-for-equity swap that could see lenders like UK-based Polus Capital take control.
The receivers are acting for lenders which are owed $1.7 billion, according to documents lodged with the corporate regulator, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). Australia's Big Four banks are among the lenders which will be hit with significant losses as the sales price is not expected to get anywhere near what is owed to them.
The debt includes $52 million owed to the former owner, Canadian financial giant, Brookfield, which had $2 billion in equity wiped out when the group collapsed into administration earlier this year.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Sezzle sizzles at $7b: The unlikely comeback king of buy now, pay later
Sezzle sizzles at $7b: The unlikely comeback king of buy now, pay later

AU Financial Review

time2 hours ago

  • AU Financial Review

Sezzle sizzles at $7b: The unlikely comeback king of buy now, pay later

It's the ultimate corporate comeback story. This is a company that was constantly targeted on social media as a worthless sham, abandoned at the altar by its merger partner, and had its price target cut to 1¢ by a research analyst who, like many, believed it didn't have a viable future. A lack of investor interest saw the loss-making fintech delist from the Australian exchange in January last year when it was valued at less than $50 million. Wall Street was equally hostile: the market's most feared short-seller targeted the company with allegations of bad customer reviews, unaffordable funding structures, and mass insider selling.

Trade minister admits gaffe over Trump-Albanese beef talks
Trade minister admits gaffe over Trump-Albanese beef talks

Sydney Morning Herald

time4 hours ago

  • Sydney Morning Herald

Trade minister admits gaffe over Trump-Albanese beef talks

Trade Minister Don Farrell says he was wrong to claim that US President Donald Trump raised Australian restrictions on beef imports from North America in phone conversations with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese ahead of the decision to scrap the de facto ban. The opposition is calling for both a Senate inquiry and an independent scientific review of the decision to end the restrictions, which they have suggested was made to help secure a trade deal with the Trump administration. Asked about diplomatic discussions leading up to last week's announcement, Farrell said on Sunday that: 'Of course, the president of the United States has raised it with the prime minister'. Pressed on when Trump and Albanese had discussed the issue, Farrell told Sky News: 'I couldn't tell you off the top of my head which of the discussions, but I'm aware that this issue was raised by the president of the United States, but that will not change the way in which we conduct and examine our biosecurity issues.' Opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Michaelia Cash leapt upon Farrell's 'extraordinary' comments, saying they had raised more questions about whether the process to ease restrictions on beef imports was purely science-based. Loading Albanese later told the ABC's Insiders that he had not discussed the issue with Trump in any of their three phone conversations, refuting Farrell's initial claim. 'I made a mistake,' Farrell told this masthead, adding that he had confused Trump's remarks about Australian beef in the White House rose garden with a conversation between the two leaders. Asked whether Trump had raised the issue with him, Albanese said: 'No. Donald Trump, though, did raise it at the so-called Liberation Day, of course – he raised it publicly, so his views were well-known.'

Trade minister admits gaffe over Trump-Albanese beef talks
Trade minister admits gaffe over Trump-Albanese beef talks

The Age

time4 hours ago

  • The Age

Trade minister admits gaffe over Trump-Albanese beef talks

Trade Minister Don Farrell says he was wrong to claim that US President Donald Trump raised Australian restrictions on beef imports from North America in phone conversations with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese ahead of the decision to scrap the de facto ban. The opposition is calling for both a Senate inquiry and an independent scientific review of the decision to end the restrictions, which they have suggested was made to help secure a trade deal with the Trump administration. Asked about diplomatic discussions leading up to last week's announcement, Farrell said on Sunday that: 'Of course, the president of the United States has raised it with the prime minister'. Pressed on when Trump and Albanese had discussed the issue, Farrell told Sky News: 'I couldn't tell you off the top of my head which of the discussions, but I'm aware that this issue was raised by the president of the United States, but that will not change the way in which we conduct and examine our biosecurity issues.' Opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Michaelia Cash leapt upon Farrell's 'extraordinary' comments, saying they had raised more questions about whether the process to ease restrictions on beef imports was purely science-based. Loading Albanese later told the ABC's Insiders that he had not discussed the issue with Trump in any of their three phone conversations, refuting Farrell's initial claim. 'I made a mistake,' Farrell told this masthead, adding that he had confused Trump's remarks about Australian beef in the White House rose garden with a conversation between the two leaders. Asked whether Trump had raised the issue with him, Albanese said: 'No. Donald Trump, though, did raise it at the so-called Liberation Day, of course – he raised it publicly, so his views were well-known.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store