Hobart stadium business case

[boncer34]

Is this for me?

Nope

 

[Saucery]

Have you already forgotten this post?

Why do you feel the need to repost someone else's post that I have already acknowledged and replied to? With all respect to Jim I don't agree with him, if you do a simple like on his post would suffice. Do you have anything of your own to add?

 

[Saucery]

Here's a very different opinion to Jim's from a veteran music promoter.

"For 25 years, music promoter Charles Touber brought world-class acts to Tasmania.....But he has major concerns about the state government's numbers underpinning the proposed Macquarie Point stadium in Hobart — a stadium the state government said would bring world-class acts to Tasmania.....Mr Touber told a parliamentary committee examining the stadium that the project was shaping as a "basket case".....The government's business case relied on the stadium attracting a large number of world-class music events. It estimated it could host three international-standard events per year that would attract 30,000 attendees, and another five that would attract 15,000. Mr Touber said only one standalone concert in Tasmania had exceeded 15,000 since the turn of the century: AC/DC in 2001."

Taylor Swift, other big name acts, unlikely at Hobart's promised stadium, promoter says

Charles Touber brought world-class acts to Tasmania for 25 years. He's sceptical a new, roofed stadium on Hobart's Macquarie Point will attract the international stars the government says it will.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Professor Knowall]

Here's a very different opinion to Jim's from a veteran music promoter.

"For 25 years, music promoter Charles Touber brought world-class acts to Tasmania.....But he has major concerns about the state government's numbers underpinning the proposed Macquarie Point stadium in Hobart — a stadium the state government said would bring world-class acts to Tasmania.....Mr Touber told a parliamentary committee examining the stadium that the project was shaping as a "basket case".....The government's business case relied on the stadium attracting a large number of world-class music events. It estimated it could host three international-standard events per year that would attract 30,000 attendees, and another five that would attract 15,000. Mr Touber said only one standalone concert in Tasmania had exceeded 15,000 since the turn of the century: AC/DC in 2001."

Taylor Swift, other big name acts, unlikely at Hobart's promised stadium, promoter says

Charles Touber brought world-class acts to Tasmania for 25 years. He's sceptical a new, roofed stadium on Hobart's Macquarie Point will attract the international stars the government says it will.

www.abc.net.au

Hmm, for some reason, you only quoted the first part of that article, from a retired promoter who’s been out of the industry for some years. You left out the contrary views of Tasmania’s current major music promoter -

« … Another music promoter had a more positive outlook. Tasmanian tour company Vandemonian recently brought the Corrs to perform at Launceston's York Park, in addition to a range of other internationally and nationally-recognised acts in recent years. Managing director Brendan Self said the lack of a large undercover venue in Tasmania was a challenge.

"The scariest parts of operating in Tasmania is the weather. One of the biggest pluses of having the stadium – outside of the seating – is the fact it will have a roof," he said. "Large touring companies won't look at Tasmania because they don't have the option of a roof."

Mr Self did not think the 30,000-attendees estimate was necessary, believing events with half that number could also be a boost to the state. "I think were we to get 15,000 people in there, that would have huge economic benefit for Hobart and for Tasmania in general," he said. "Half a dozen to a dozen concerts at 13,000 to 17,000 people is possible.

"There's never been a time in our history in Australia where we've had more international acts, and even local Australian acts, touring than today"

 

[Jim Prideaux]

Here's a very different opinion to Jim's from a veteran music promoter.

"For 25 years, music promoter Charles Touber brought world-class acts to Tasmania.....But he has major concerns about the state government's numbers underpinning the proposed Macquarie Point stadium in Hobart — a stadium the state government said would bring world-class acts to Tasmania.....Mr Touber told a parliamentary committee examining the stadium that the project was shaping as a "basket case".....The government's business case relied on the stadium attracting a large number of world-class music events. It estimated it could host three international-standard events per year that would attract 30,000 attendees, and another five that would attract 15,000. Mr Touber said only one standalone concert in Tasmania had exceeded 15,000 since the turn of the century: AC/DC in 2001."

Taylor Swift, other big name acts, unlikely at Hobart's promised stadium, promoter says

Charles Touber brought world-class acts to Tasmania for 25 years. He's sceptical a new, roofed stadium on Hobart's Macquarie Point will attract the international stars the government says it will.

www.abc.net.au

Listen, you’re obviously passionate big sauce, but post the whole article if you’re going to post anything. It looks like you have an agenda otherwise.

 

[Saucery]

Hmm, for some reason, you only quoted the first part of that article, from a retired promoter who’s been out of the industry for some years. You left out the contrary views of Tasmania’s current major music promoter -

« … Another music promoter had a more positive outlook. Tasmanian tour company Vandemonian recently brought the Corrs to perform at Launceston's York Park, in addition to a range of other internationally and nationally-recognised acts in recent years. Managing director Brendan Self said the lack of a large undercover venue in Tasmania was a challenge.

"The scariest parts of operating in Tasmania is the weather. One of the biggest pluses of having the stadium – outside of the seating – is the fact it will have a roof," he said. "Large touring companies won't look at Tasmania because they don't have the option of a roof."

Mr Self did not think the 30,000-attendees estimate was necessary, believing events with half that number could also be a boost to the state. "I think were we to get 15,000 people in there, that would have huge economic benefit for Hobart and for Tasmania in general," he said. "Half a dozen to a dozen concerts at 13,000 to 17,000 people is possible.

"There's never been a time in our history in Australia where we've had more international acts, and even local Australian acts, touring than today"

For some reason? I did place '....' to acknowledge that it was excerpts, you understand that right? Everyone cherry picks it's nothing new. So, the guy who is the current music promoter wants to back a concept that will help his business model? Well, you could knock me down with a feather. True any concerts will be a boost to the state, worth $250 million though? The cost and servicing of the roof? I think not, and all Tasmanians will have to pay for it though, most will never get to go there.

 

[Saucery]

Listen, you’re obviously passionate big sauce, but post the whole article if you’re going to post anything. It looks like you have an agenda otherwise.

See above, and I did post the link for anyone to read. And of course I'm passionate, I live here, watching our public services implode while we pour a billion dollars into a vanity project for politicians and the AFL.

 

[Jim Prideaux]

See above, and I did post the link for anyone to read.

That’s fair enough, and I appreciate your passion here, but I feel you’d be better served posting the whole of that and then arguing why one point is stronger.

I’ll put my point forward regarding freight to Tassie. It is a challenge, but by no means is impassible. Melbourne to Brisbane for example depending on what you need to move can be wildly expensive. Even Melbourne to Sydney sometimes. But, if you want to do it, and plan it, it can be done at the right price.

Please don’t feel that I’m trying to put you down, I love the discussion.

 

[Saucery]

That’s fair enough, and I appreciate your passion here, but I feel you’d be better served posting the whole of that and then arguing why one point is stronger.

I’ll put my point forward regarding freight to Tassie. It is a challenge, but by no means is impassible. Melbourne to Brisbane for example depending on what you need to move can be wildly expensive. Even Melbourne to Sydney sometimes. But, if you want to do it, and plan it, it can be done at the right price.

Please don’t feel that I’m trying to put you down, I love the discussion.

No, your insights are well received and much appreciated. I don't really have time to make a balanced argument as most others don't either. I just see it from the side of the community around me. I work at the local tip and talk to residents all day long. I am just trying to give them a voice.

 

[Saucery]

That’s fair enough, and I appreciate your passion here, but I feel you’d be better served posting the whole of that and then arguing why one point is stronger.

I’ll put my point forward regarding freight to Tassie. It is a challenge, but by no means is impassible. Melbourne to Brisbane for example depending on what you need to move can be wildly expensive. Even Melbourne to Sydney sometimes. But, if you want to do it, and plan it, it can be done at the right price.

Please don’t feel that I’m trying to put you down, I love the discussion.

Actually Jim, what do you think a freight equalization scheme worth say 25 million a year for 40 years might do for the Tasmanian economy (given 90% of our rural industries export goods through the port of Melbourne) as compared to say a 1-billion-dollar stadium? We all pay well over the mainland costs for everything from food to petrol here and our produce has a built-in transport tax. This would definitely be a broad-based boost to our economy, right?

 

[Jim Prideaux]

Actually Jim, what do you think a freight equalization scheme worth say 25 million a year for 40 years might do for the Tasmanian economy (given 90% of our rural industries export goods through the port of Melbourne) as compared to say a 1-billion-dollar stadium? We all pay well over the mainland costs for everything from food to petrol here and our produce has a built-in transport tax. This would definitely be a broad-based boost to our economy, right?

Well, I’d say, why not both? The 2 aren’t really related, and I’d add that more freight could potentially become more competitive with a higher demand. At the end of the day, both could grow the tas economy

 

[Saucery]

Well, I’d say, why not both? The 2 aren’t really related, and I’d add that more freight could potentially become more competitive with a higher demand. At the end of the day, both could grow the tas economy

Because a tiny island state, with 500,000 population, the lowest GDP of the nation by far and a current debt of 4.7 billion (projected to reach 10 billion by 2028) really can't afford both. Could grow the Tasmanian economy you say?

Sorry not even close to a good bet for a state whose social services are about to have a bus driven through them to reduce debt by the same government who is funding this absurd largess. $250 million for a roof?

A freight equalision fund will be a rising tide which lifts all boats, a stadium in Hobart will help the inner-city economy there, especially wrest point casino, but the flow on effects will be minimal.

 

[shintemaster]

Because a tiny island state, with 500,000 population, the lowest GDP of the nation by far and a current debt of 4.7 billion (projected to reach 10 billion by 2028) really can't afford both. Could grow the Tasmanian economy you say?

Sorry not even close to a good bet for a state whose social services are about to have a bus driven through them to reduce debt by the same government who is funding this absurd largess. $250 million for a roof?

A freight equalision fund will be a rising tide which lifts all boats, a stadium in Hobart will help the inner-city economy there, especially wrest point casino, but the flow on effects will be minimal.

It is huge money.
Even if you're generous with figures and assume that what Tassie pays say North to play a game is what the benefits might be to the state (which I think is overs) that $715M is a 1400+ year pay off. Maybe you treat the roof as a single line item and say it might mean an extra $250k per game. We're still talking insane years for payback even ignoring financing and lost costs.

I'm no expert on Hobart but given the lack of public transport I would have thought a greenfield stadium on cheaper land linked with a light rail / rail line designed to provide uplift on a proper corridor could be spruiked as providing much more community benefit.

 

[The Feeder Club]

Cooked

Planning Commission releases draft report on 'overbearing' Hobart stadium

A panel assessing the proposed Macquarie Point stadium in Hobart believes the government has grossly underestimated the cost and overestimated the benefits to such an extent that it risks Tasmania's credit rating.

www.abc.net.au

 

[BF Tiger]

There is not one piece of good news in that report.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

There is not one piece of good news in that report.

That depends on your perspective.
Its good news for those that want the stadium to go ahead. Its Tasmania. The more obvious the incompetence and corruption is, the less chance there is of any sort of public benefit, the more likely it is things go ahead with bipartisan support.

 

[Saint]

It's a bit of a gamble, but is it not also the only way of getting a 30,000 people venue up and running in Tassie? I'm surprised there's not more federal support for it, considering what has gone into Geelong in the past, which is about the same size as Hobart and all the Senate seats up for grabs.

Perhaps it's because there's as many votes against it as for it. I hope, if they go through with it, that the Feds kick in a bit before it opens so that the albatross tag is lifted and it can be a positive.

A 30,000 venue is twice the size of Rod Laver Arena and will attract interstate visitors.

 

[Philhawk]

After the game on the weekend, I’m starting to understand why a roof might be needed …

 

[fargothegreat]

After the game on the weekend, I’m starting to understand why a roof might be needed …

Do you think the Hawks end up playing an extra home game against the Devils at York Park?

Benny Gale is dead against it, but I think the AFL and Tas Gov are keen, as it makes it easier to split the home games more in the new stadium's favour.

 

[Philhawk]

Do you think the Hawks end up playing an extra home game against the Devils at York Park?

Benny Gale is dead against it, but I think the AFL and Tas Gov are keen, as it makes it easier to split the home games more in the new stadium's favour.

If Hawthorn had their way, I think ideally we would love 1 home game against the Devils and 2 additional games up north in Launceston.

Maintains our terrific support base down there, keep a lucrative contract, builds a rivalry against Tassie and brings 2 games back to Melb (assuming the fixture increases in games)

Win/Win.

 

[fargothegreat]

If Hawthorn had their way, I think ideally we would love 1 home game against the Devils and 2 additional games up north in Launceston.

Maintains our terrific support base down there, keep a lucrative contract, builds a rivalry against Tassie and brings 2 games back to Melb (assuming the fixture increases in games)

Win/Win.

I like the way it evens out the fixture. Every other state has at least two teams, so they get at least 12 games at home, so this gives Tassie the same.

 

[Philhawk]

I like the way it evens out the fixture. Every other state has at least two teams, so they get at least 12 games at home, so this gives Tassie the same.

The problem is Gale. He, smartly, wants the entire state for himself. Allowing the Hawks to keep replenishing their already strong supporter base down there doesn’t help the Devils.

 

[T2B_]

The problem is Gale. He, smartly, wants the entire state for himself. Allowing the Hawks to keep replenishing their already strong supporter base down there doesn’t help the Devils.

Wouldn't there be plenty that would have a membership with both?

 

[JackFlash]

I don't think the Stadium will happen! It appears the majority of Tasmanian people don't want it and i'm not certain they want an AFL team either? I can't see the Tassie Devils in the competition by 2028.

 

[Cleric]

Because a tiny island state, with 500,000 population, the lowest GDP of the nation by far and a current debt of 4.7 billion (projected to reach 10 billion by 2028) really can't afford both. Could grow the Tasmanian economy you say?

Sorry not even close to a good bet for a state whose social services are about to have a bus driven through them to reduce debt by the same government who is funding this absurd largess. $250 million for a roof?

A freight equalision fund will be a rising tide which lifts all boats, a stadium in Hobart will help the inner-city economy there, especially wrest point casino, but the flow on effects will be minimal.

You are acting like the stadium won't be making income.
If you have a world class stadium you will attract more world class events.
I remember when Adelaide didn't have an entertainment centre, and we would miss alot of the world class concerts. We had The Thebarton Theatre which held 3000 people and then you had to go outdoor like Adelaide Oval. Bon Jovi were doing a tour and missed Adelaide and they put out a video saying Adelaide needed to build an entertainment and they would come here.

SA did build an Entertainment Centre and it played a big role in getting more acts to come here, and has paid for itself many times over, without taking into account the buisness that came along with it.

There were cries about how spending 500 million to do up AO was a waste of money, yet now no one thinks it was a bad decision.
I'm sure there were similar cries in Perth when building Optus, but now it's there and is a world class stadium, no one would go back in time to not do it.