Independent report into Hobart's proposed new stadium has found the costs of the project have been significantly underestimated

[Freomaniac]

Push back Tassies start date I reckon.
2030.

Nah, bring them in the comp in 2028 then Canberra in 2029.

I don't want a 19th side for the sake of it. I hate regular byes.

I watch the SANFL, people dislike the crows in the SANFL. But they had to come in because the SANFL needed a 10th side.

 

[Freomaniac]

Tasmania makes more sense than either Gold Coast or Giants as they will attract more crowds from day 1.

It's a true football state & if we are fair dinkum about the A in AFL, they should have their own side, rather than Victorian leftovers.

I won't deny Tassie is an Aussie rules state.

There is 500,000 people live in Tassie. But there's like 200,000 each in Launceston and 200,000 in Hobart.

I wished there was 1 million people living in Tassie where 500,000 love in Launceston and 500,000 Live in Hobart so there's 2 AFL clubs in Tassie. It would be smaller version of South Australia.

No Victorian side wants to be relocated .

I would love ACT to have their own team in the AFL as they followed Aussie rules before the rugby sides came in

 

[Soul_Pie]

The recommendations in the review seem pretty reasonable and don't seem to jeopardise the quality of the stadium. You could use the extra money to upgrade the public transport and connect to areas outside of Hobart so that you can maximise the amount of people who can make it to games/events. The Federal government needs to be pushing for some of the population growth to be diverted away from the main cities and towards Tassie which could really do with a bit of a boost.

 

[Walshawk]

I won't deny Tassie is an Aussie rules state.

There is 500,000 people live in Tassie. But there's like 200,000 each in Launceston and 200,000 in Hobart.

I wished there was 1 million people living in Tassie where 500,000 love in Launceston and 500,000 Live in Hobart so there's 2 AFL clubs in Tassie. It would be smaller version of South Australia.

No Victorian side wants to be relocated .

I would love ACT to have their own team in the AFL as they followed Aussie rules before the rugby sides came in

90k Launceston and Hobart 260k.

 

[Walshawk]

Nah, bring them in the comp in 2028 then Canberra in 2029.

I don't want a 19th side for the sake of it. I hate regular byes.

I watch the SANFL, people dislike the crows in the SANFL. But they had to come in because the SANFL needed a 10th side.

This season clubs will have up to three byes. 19 teams means two byes each. What don’t you like about 19 teams?

 

[nobbyiscool]

I won't deny Tassie is an Aussie rules state.

There is 500,000 people live in Tassie. But there's like 200,000 each in Launceston and 200,000 in Hobart.

I wished there was 1 million people living in Tassie where 500,000 love in Launceston and 500,000 Live in Hobart so there's 2 AFL clubs in Tassie. It would be smaller version of South Australia.

No Victorian side wants to be relocated .

I would love ACT to have their own team in the AFL as they followed Aussie rules before the rugby sides came in

Where does your information come from?

And why should anyone listen to a thing you have to say when you just spout bullshit that a simple google would've informed you about?

 

[FlyHigh18]

Don't think I've ever kept anything under budget, not in my personal life with holidays, spending or unexpected costs, nor in my role in management where i was asked to stupidly downplay costs just to get important things approved.

But like everyone else i do enjoy pointing the finger when the government can't do it either.

 

[Saucery]

The recommendations in the review seem pretty reasonable and don't seem to jeopardise the quality of the stadium. You could use the extra money to upgrade the public transport and connect to areas outside of Hobart so that you can maximise the amount of people who can make it to games/events. The Federal government needs to be pushing for some of the population growth to be diverted away from the main cities and towards Tassie which could really do with a bit of a boost.

There are mechanisms to get migrants to move to regional areas, including Tasmania, Tasmania is not a destination state but a lifestyle choice. Theres very little here but agriculture, no heavy industry, financial or IT sectors either. Medical workers are in high demand but get paid less than in mainland states (inaccurate), as do teachers and there are few to no advancement pathways available.

That goes for pretty much any discipline you can imagine. Everything costs more due to the extra freight costs of shipping and the wages are lower. The one saving grace was once the housing here was extremely affordable but those days have long passed.

Tasmania has clean air, peace and quiet and magnificent scenery, but you can't eat scenery. I love it but understand why others don't.

 

[The Devils Advocate]

Best thing that could happen for this project, would be if Hobart was a marginal electorate suddenly.

Hopefully the Feds step in. Hell I'd almost vote for Dutton's mob if they fund it.

 

[The Devils Advocate]

Medical workers are in high demand but get paid less than in mainland states,

I agree with all that you've said, some excellent points but this isn't true now.

 

[Saucery]

I agree with all that you've said, some excellent points but this isn't true now.

OK I wasn't aware that at least they were being equally remunerated now, as you would know we still struggle to recruit them, although as basically a 'regional' state we are not alone there. This article captures the tragic truth country wide.

"In major cities vacancies for emergency medicine specialists are at 50 per cent, in regional and rural areas, that number increases to 75 per cent."

Emergency wait times blow out as hospitals struggle to discharge patients

The number of Australians experiencing lengthy waits in hospital emergency departments for admission to a ward is three times the target set by emergency medicine specialists, according to a new report.

www.abc.net.au

 

[footyscribe]

So, some interstate supporters "might duck down"? How much do you like eastern states telling you westerners how to run your state, make decisions? You seem to have no understanding of my state's unique situations and problems, so your opinions don't really hold a lot of weight with us.

The whole state will have to pay for this, but very, very few will ever get to use the facility; you get that right? I want the team, but not the vanity project. If that means no team then so be it, we have bigger social problems to deal with here; right across the entire state; way beyond having our own football team.

Far too much being made out of the Gruen report, which most people haven’t read past the executive summary.

Gruen accounts for every single stadium related cent as part of the project, including 10 seasons worth of Devils funding, broader Hobart works, non-tangibles like opportunity cost and spits out a grand total spend of $1.4b.

Minus benefits, federal money, AFL money and you’re back to about half that. He determines that the total Tasmanian Government cost will be $795m.

However what’s lost is that this is over 30+ years and as I said above, includes every single cent even vaguely related to the stadium. It doesn’t even take into account private money of which there will of course be at least some.

End of the day, Gruen, which is considered the harshest assessor of the stadium yet and hasn’t plugged in a variety of funding sources has the entire thing, plus funding the team, costing Tasmania about $20-30m a year each year until 2058.

Not to be flippant, but it’s really not that much money considering what the state gets.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The state government/developer should not be paying 3 x the building costs of somewhere like Manhattan. It's almost entirely attributed to labour costs also.

I'd like to see some proof for this please.

 

[Saucery]

Far too much being made out of the Gruen report, which most people haven’t read past the executive summary.

Gruen accounts for every single stadium related cent as part of the project, including 10 seasons worth of Devils funding, broader Hobart works, non-tangibles like opportunity cost and spits out a grand total spend of $1.4b.

Minus benefits, federal money, AFL money and you’re back to about half that. He determines that the total Tasmanian Government cost will be $795m.

However what’s lost is that this is over 30+ years and as I said above, includes every single cent even vaguely related to the stadium. It doesn’t even take into account private money of which there will of course be at least some.

End of the day, Gruen, which is considered the harshest assessor of the stadium yet and hasn’t plugged in a variety of funding sources has the entire thing, plus funding the team, costing Tasmania about $20-30m a year each year until 2058.

Not to be flippant, but it’s really not that much money considering what the state gets.

If you actually lived here, I might give some of your points credence. OK I accept that Gruen might me harsh; I have acknowledged this if you read further. Yes, you are being flippant, what exactly does the whole state get? No really, I would like you to tell me what my whole state gets? I live in the north and all we get is the bill. This deal is just a vanity project for the southern Liberals, up north we get shafted. It's always the way; Hobart get the cream, and we get the crumbs.

BTW it's interesting how you only post in the Tasminan boards 'Stadium' tread or here, biased much?

 

[The Devils Advocate]

OK I wasn't aware that at least they were being equally remunerated now, as you would know we still struggle to recruit them, although as basically a 'regional' state we are not alone there. This article captures the tragic truth country wide.

"In major cities vacancies for emergency medicine specialists are at 50 per cent, in regional and rural areas, that number increases to 75 per cent."

Emergency wait times blow out as hospitals struggle to discharge patients

The number of Australians experiencing lengthy waits in hospital emergency departments for admission to a ward is three times the target set by emergency medicine specialists, according to a new report.

www.abc.net.au

Yeah, still struggling for sure! We did get 75 medical interns in the most recent intake though, and thats the biggest in a long time! One of our big issues is that some areas don't have a training program in Hobart for certain specialties.

So many of our junior doctors have to move states to actually become a consultant. It's honestly one of the biggest barriers to recruitment in Tasmania. People want to go from intern to consultant in one hospital which is understandable.

 

[footyscribe]

If you actually lived here, I might give some of your points credence. OK I accept that Gruen might me harsh; I have acknowledged this if you read further. Yes, you are being flippant, what exactly does the whole state get? No really, I would like you to tell me what my whole state gets? I live in the north and all we get is the bill. This deal is just a vanity project for the southern Liberals, up north we get shafted. It's always the way; Hobart get the cream, and we get the crumbs.

BTW it's interesting how you only post in the Tasminan boards 'Stadium' tread or here, biased much?

I live in Tasmania. Have done all my life. It’s why I’m particularly interested in this topic, and why I post about it.

Judging from your post, it seems you are politically influenced.

Up north you get shafted? How? $130m into UTAS Stadium which will host the bulk of Devils games in the first year and four games a year after that. It’s likely Hawthorn will continue to play 2 games a year there too, with one of them as a home game v Tasmania. This has been publicly flagged by the club.

Launceston will have more AFL than it’s ever had.

That’s without mentioning $25m into Dial Park at Penguin which will likely host women’s and pre season games. Then there’s VFL footy too.

You ask what the whole state gets. The answer is a football club. Men’s, women’s, VFL and academies. Something it’s pushed for for 30 years.

It gets $385m from the AFL. It gets $305m from the Federal Government. Not including private investment, it’s $685m into the state.

Does Tasmania have to chip in on its end? Of course. If you don’t want a club that’s absolutely fine. But to say Tasmania, and in particularly the north, gets nothing is a genuine joke.

 

[JP Ollards]

Whys the stadium need a roof? American football and euro soccer play un the snow. The old saying you build it and they'll come. Tassie get an afl team and more people and businesses move there, there's not 10 clubs vying for your business down there

 

[Saucery]

I live in Tasmania. Have done all my life. It’s why I’m particularly interested in this topic, and why I post about it.

Judging from your post, it seems you are politically influenced.

Up north you get shafted? How? $130m into UTAS Stadium which will host the bulk of Devils games in the first year and four games a year after that. It’s likely Hawthorn will continue to play 2 games a year there too, with one of them as a home game v Tasmania. This has been publicly flagged by the club.

Launceston will have more AFL than it’s ever had.

That’s without mentioning $25m into Dial Park at Penguin which will likely host women’s and pre season games. Then there’s VFL footy too.

You ask what the whole state gets. The answer is a football club. Men’s, women’s, VFL and academies. Something it’s pushed for for 30 years.

It gets $385m from the AFL. It gets $305m from the Federal Government. Not including private investment, it’s $685m into the state.

Does Tasmania have to chip in on its end? Of course. If you don’t want a club that’s absolutely fine. But to say Tasmania, and in particularly the north, gets nothing is a genuine joke.

Yeah, my post was a bit harsh, can I ask if you live north or south? I'm not politically motivated and I'm not sure why you would say so, I always vote for independents on principle; neither party here deserves to have majority government.

Remember this thread only exists because the Liberals were forced to allow an independent report to be made into this stadium to ensure supply (they lost majority government over this very issue), they agreed to the investigator and then promptly ignored all the evidence he presented without explaining why and just said we're pushing ahead. They have also admitted that in order to reduce state debt they will be cutting community services again when there is no fat to cut, no meat even, just bone. So, we get an overpriced stadium at one end of the state, but everyone will be worse off because we are, in fact, broke?

All I want is for the AFL and the government to come clean on why this stadium is being built where it is and why it needs a roof? Why is it going to cost the poorest state in the nation so much just to have their own team? Why can't the deal be renegotiated in and open, bipartisan way? As it stands, I don't believe this project will pass through both houses of parliament anyway.

We get what $150 million up north? I have two memberships for the Devils and would love nothing better than a home state club, but not at this price. As I have said before, as it stands this is nothing more than a vanity project for the AFL and the Liberal party, the whole roof idea is an unnecessary burden on this state, the AFL just wants it this way, so it looks good on TV. I never said the north gets nothing did I? I said we get shafted again.

 

[Walshawk]

Whys the stadium need a roof? American football and euro soccer play un the snow. The old saying you build it and they'll come. Tassie get an afl team and more people and businesses move there, there's not 10 clubs vying for your business down there

It doesn’t. But the AFL were determined to make it as hard as possible for Tasmania, so they asked for a roof. Because the roof at Marvel makes it so popular.

 

[footyscribe]

Yeah my post was a bit harsh, can I ask if you live north or south?

Yeah, my post was a bit harsh, can I ask if you live north or south? I'm not politically motivated and I'm not sure why you would say so, I always vote for independents on principle; neither party here deserves to have majority government.

Remember this thread only exists because the Liberals were forced to allow an independent report to be made into this stadium to ensure supply (they lost majority government over this very issue), they agreed to the investigator and then promptly ignored all the evidence he presented without explaining why and just said we're pushing ahead. They have also admitted that in order to reduce state debt they will be cutting community services again when there is no fat to cut, no meat even, just bone. So, we get an overpriced stadium at one end of the state, but everyone will be worse off because we are, in fact, broke?

All I want is for the AFL and the government to come clean on why this stadium is being built where it is and why it needs a roof? Why is it going to cost the poorest state in the nation so much just to have their own team? Why can't the deal be renegotiated in and open, bipartisan way? As it stands, I don't believe this project will pass through both houses of parliament anyway.

We get what $150 million up north? I have two memberships for the Devils and would love nothing better than a home state club, but not at this price. As I have said before, as it stands this is nothing more than a vanity project for the AFL and the Liberal party, the whole roof idea is an unnecessary burden on this state, the AFL just wants it this way, so it looks good on TV. I never said the north gets nothing did I? I said we get shafted again.

I’m confused as to what you’re actually seeking here. You say you have Devils memberships, but seem to be against the deal that was signed that allows the Devils to exist in the first place?

You are aggrieved that the north gets “shafted” and “only” gets $150m? Again, what do you actually want? If you are asking for the team to be based in Launceston then you aren’t aren’t across the bevy of reports, analysis and literature that clearly states the team must be in Hobart. And why must it be in Hobart? Because 50% of the state lives south of Pontville. Because it’s the capital of the state in every facet.

You clearly aren’t across the role of the club presidents and the power they wield when it comes to AFL expansion also, and the enormous say they have when it comes to determining conditions. No club was letting Tasmania in without a commitment to a stadium. None.

You say all you want is for the AFL to come clean on why the stadium will be where it is, and why is needs a roof. These questions have been answered 1000 times.

A new club must be based in Hobart. Hobart has no venue befitting the size and scale of an AFL club. Therefore it must build one. What is the AFL model established over the past 25 years? City adjacent stadiums. Waverley to Docklands. Footy Park to AO. Subiaco to Perth. Where in Hobart should we build it? Perhaps the 10 hectare empty and remediated, flat industrial site 400m from Salamanca might be good.

Why does it need a roof? So spectators can attend fixtures and events with absolute certainty they won’t get wet or blown away. In fact, the Gruen report found that the stadiums BCR was lower if the roof was removed.

This whole ‘give us a team for free why do we have to pay so much’ thing is so tired and old hat and so easily explained away. If you are against a team and stadium then that makes sense, but to call the thing a vanity project while buying memberships to a club that only exists because of this deal is plain odd.

 

[Teen Wolf]

It doesn’t. But the AFL were determined to make it as hard as possible for Tasmania, so they asked for a roof.

Hacks still running with this lie. The truth, for the millionth time: The AFL did not ask for anything. They accepted the Tasmanian government's licence submission which included a new CBD-based roofed stadium.

Because the roof at Marvel makes it so popular.

It certainly helps. Example: The SCG would've averaged 10k more than Marvel for this year's BBL if the roof situation was reversed. Instead they both averaged 23k because the former lost a 40k crowd to rain, while the latter pulled in a 40k crowd to a game which would've otherwise been washed out.

 

[Saucery]

I’m confused as to what you’re actually seeking here. You say you have Devils memberships, but seem to be against the deal that was signed that allows the Devils to exist in the first place?

You are aggrieved that the north gets “shafted” and “only” gets $150m? Again, what do you actually want? If you are asking for the team to be based in Launceston then you aren’t aren’t across the bevy of reports, analysis and literature that clearly states the team must be in Hobart. And why must it be in Hobart? Because 50% of the state lives south of Pontville. Because it’s the capital of the state in every facet.

You clearly aren’t across the role of the club presidents and the power they wield when it comes to AFL expansion also, and the enormous say they have when it comes to determining conditions. No club was letting Tasmania in without a commitment to a stadium. None.

You say all you want is for the AFL to come clean on why the stadium will be where it is, and why is needs a roof. These questions have been answered 1000 times.

A new club must be based in Hobart. Hobart has no venue befitting the size and scale of an AFL club. Therefore it must build one. What is the AFL model established over the past 25 years? City adjacent stadiums. Waverley to Docklands. Footy Park to AO. Subiaco to Perth. Where in Hobart should we build it? Perhaps the 10 hectare empty and remediated, flat industrial site 400m from Salamanca might be good.

Why does it need a roof? So spectators can attend fixtures and events with absolute certainty they won’t get wet or blown away. In fact, the Gruen report found that the stadiums BCR was lower if the roof was removed.

This whole ‘give us a team for free why do we have to pay so much’ thing is so tired and old hat and so easily explained away. If you are against a team and stadium then that makes sense, but to call the thing a vanity project while buying memberships to a club that only exists because of this deal is plain odd.

You are right that I am becoming more aware of why first Gutwein and then Rockcliff fought tooth and nail to hide details of the project. This lead to two Liberal senators to quit the party over this very issue, throwing the government into minority. So Rockcliff called an early election based on this project and lost more seats and now cannot pass any legislation without the support of Labor (who have promised to keep him to his original costings) and several independents. Sounds like the people had their say right? Of course, you know all this, but it is worth revisiting in the context of things. So, when you say, “These questions have been answered 1000 times.” they clearly haven’t been.

I think I annunciate what I and many other Tasmanias want, especially up here in the North, transparent over site of what we are all going to foot the bill for. I work at the Deloraine tip and live in Launceston so I know quite a lot about how people feel up here and I can tell you the majority think it’s a huge wast of money. You talk like everyone here is into AFL or has a team, that might be true where you live but that’s not my experience at all. I never asked for a team to be based in Launceston, you extrapolated that for what you believe my motives to be. Once again, transparent over site of what we are all going to foot the bill for. That's all, no great conspiracy there.

Yeah 50% of the state lives in the south, so they will be the main beneficiaries of what I am more and more starting to see as a vanity project. I most certainly do understand the power of the club presidents as they stood by and let my beloved Fitzroy be destroyed by the league. They only care about what is in the best interest of their own teams and nearly destroyed the whole VFL back in the day. So, you are suggesting the state give the AFL a blank cheque or we don’t get a team? OK then I can live with that. Tasmanians deserve better than being blackmailed by a mainland corporate entity.

As someone pointed out above “Why's the stadium need a roof? American football and euro soccer play in the snow. The old saying you build it and they'll come. Tassie get an afl team and more people and businesses move there, there's not 10 clubs vying for your business down there” surely we Aussies arn’t so weak as we need a roof to go to events?

And I never said anything like ‘give us a team for free’ (you do like to put words into other people's mouths) and your inability to understand how I can buy memberships and yet still have issues with the largess of this project is something only the fanatical can fail to understand. You do get that this thread exists to discuss the Gruen report, titled

Independent report into Hobart's proposed new stadium has found the costs of the project have been significantly underestimated​

If you don't want to hear opposing opinions then go back to the echo chamber which is the team board, not to suggest the Tasmanian one is any different from the rest.

Oh, and here are my two membership packages, the sealed one is for my brother, who is returning from the UK later this year.

 

[The Devils Advocate]

Whys the stadium need a roof? American football and euro soccer play un the snow. The old saying you build it and they'll come. Tassie get an afl team and more people and businesses move there, there's not 10 clubs vying for your business down there

It's not just a footy stadium. If it were, I'd agree.

There is 500,000 people live in Tassie. But there's like 200,000 each in Launceston and 200,000 in Hobart.

When did Launceston get over 100k, let alone 200k.

 

[JP Ollards]

Hacks still running with this lie. The truth, for the millionth time: The AFL did not ask for anything. They accepted the Tasmanian government's licence submission which included a new CBD-based roofed stadium.


It certainly helps. Example: The SCG would've averaged 10k more than Marvel for this year's BBL if the roof situation was reversed. Instead they both averaged 23k because the former lost a 40k crowd to rain, while the latter pulled in a 40k crowd to a game which would've otherwise been washed out.

Footy is a winter sport

 

[JP Ollards]

It's not just a footy stadium. If it were, I'd agree.

When did Launceston get over 100k, let alone 200k.

93k for Launceston in 23 so you'd think by now on the 100k