Earlier this year, the company had been forecasting a $33.8million loss over the next two years.
But yesterday, during debate on the latest results posted by Dunedin City Holdings Ltd and its subsidiaries, DCHL chairman Keith Cooper confirmed the numbers were set to get worse.
Asked by Cr Lee Vandervis if the expected losses were forecast to reach $44.7million, Mr Cooper confirmed they were.
Debt was also expected to climb higher, sooner, to top $803million over the same period, he confirmed.
The exchange came as councillors digested the companies' results, made public last week, which included a loss of almost $11million by Aurora and slashed profits for DCHL, down from $24.3million last year to $10.4million.
Mr Cooper, asked by Cr Vandervis when the ''bleeding is going to stop'', told the meeting he was now ''highly confident'' of a return to profitability for Aurora, as forecast, in 2021.
However, there remained an element of uncertainty about revenue streams pending the outcome of the Commerce Commission determination into Aurora's request for a customised price path, to lift lines charges and help pay for its significant network upgrade, he said.
Mr Cooper said the upside was the spending would leave Aurora in a better position, with revenue-producing and long-term assets - rather than sunk costs - which helped underpin the value of the company.
The company had also set aside $5million to cover the cost of financial penalties from the Commerce Commission, following breaches of network reliability standards over the past four years.
Mr Cooper said the provision reflected ''the best knowledge we have'', based on talks with the commission, although the penalty would eventually be determined by the courts.
Despite the costs, Mr Cooper told councillors Aurora's outlook was positive from 2021 onwards.
''We are going to have to grin and bear another year of what will be a worse result for Aurora.''
Responding to a question from Cr Jim O'Malley, Mr Cooper remained confident the company was in a safe place.
There was no danger of the company collapsing, and therefore no risk of ratepayers becoming liable for its debts, he believed.
''That's not on our horizon.''
Other councillors backed the assessment, arguing the council was fixing a mess it had inherited.
Cr Mike Lord said he had ''confidence we are going in the right direction'', while Cr Damian Newell said the council was ''recovering from past sins''.
Cr Vandervis said the problems with the companies dated back more than a decade, but he was not confident all issues had been rectified, despite the increased candour and detail provided by Mr Cooper.
The companies had failed to provide dividends in recent years, and were still not doing so, and instead continued to accumulate debt, he said.
Cr Christine Garey responded, saying '''I told you so' is not helpful'', while Cr Andrew Whiley believed the council and its companies had ''come a long way''.
Comments
"to lift lines charges and help pay for its significant network upgrade",
Where has the lines charges gone that we have already paid?, not on maintaining the network as evidenced by the pole debacle but on fat bonuses and pay raises it seems.
Where's your evidence of "fat bonuses and pay raises"?
Where is your evidence there isn't any?.
Any mention of the stadium...?
DCC= SPEND> Tax> BOROW>
in English DCC spends more and more, taxes the ratepayers more and more, and borrows more and more on non-core items. Why does the DCC have assets in Christchurch, Hamilton, Queenstown? All fixed assets should be within DUNEDIN boundaries. Also, we need to sell non-core assets. The DCC should provide: water, sewage, roads/foot paths/parking/street lighting and a few parks (including cemetries). We need to have the debate; do we need so many community centres/halls/libraries/buses/pools/ recreation parks/other businesses? Otherwise the octopus will keep growing.
DCC doesn't have buses, unless you are referring to the Book Bus.
By inference, the DCC subsidises the ORC with bus contractual payments, use of assets etc-we pay for that. Secondly, the main cost of buses is through our ORC rates. This was purposely done in the past to hide/split the costs for ratepayers. If that is not deceit then I do not know what is...