Remove this Banner Ad

Mac Point Construction Progress

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Daka said:
That was pretty much to be expected given all the politics involved in delaying it, I watched a bit of Footy Classified last night, and Eddie couldn't help himself being negative, now that Tasmania is linked to Daicos.

Saying "Why would you want to play at Bellerive Oval"
funny how he was all for Tasmania at the start now, is starting become a bit negative towards it.
Click to expand...
Sounds like most of the games will be in Launceston in the early years.

Bellerive will only be able to handle the low drawing teams.
 
It is interesting to hear that only one company has lodged an interest in building the stadium. I think this could show that companies see it as very complicated when it comes to building such a complex project and doubt whether they could build it for the allocated budget.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Islander said:
It is interesting to hear that only one company has lodged an interest in building the stadium. I think this could show that companies see it as very complicated when it comes to building such a complex project and doubt whether they could build it for the allocated budget.
Click to expand...
Source? Realistically though you can probably count on one hand the number of builders with the size and experience for a job like this.
 
Islander said:
Reported by Tasmanian independent Kristie Johnston on her facebook page.
Click to expand...
Kristie Johnson couldn't of been more anti-stadium.
She's a politican and with that comes an agenda. Says it all.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I'm surprised people are still whinging about the Stadium.

I mean, surprised probably isn't the right word for it, but it's like they want tassie to be stuck with no growth.
 
Feraligatr said:
I'm surprised people are still whinging about the Stadium.

I mean, surprised probably isn't the right word for it, but it's like they want tassie to be stuck with no growth.
Click to expand...
People are scared of change. And Tasmania tends to attract NIMBY types like this from the mainland.

Like Adelaide and Perth, the overwhelming majority will grow to love the stadium when it's built.
 
If the chosen builder comes back with a quote of $2 to $3 billion do people believe the government will be put under big pressure from those opposed to reassess the proposal? I just think big questions would then have to be asked about where all the extra money will come from. I'm hopeful it comes back a lot lower, but many experts have said it's likely to cost this sort of money.
 
Islander said:
If the chosen builder comes back with a quote of $2 to $3 billion do people believe the government will be put under big pressure from those opposed to reassess the proposal? I just think big questions would then have to be asked about where all the extra money will come from. I'm hopeful it comes back a lot lower, but many experts have said it's likely to cost this sort of money.
Click to expand...
'Many experts' like who? Kristie Johnston? Take your concern trolling elsewhere champ
 
TassieSaint said:
'Many experts' like who? Kristie Johnston? Take your concern trolling elsewhere champ
Click to expand...
I'm definitely not a troll ,I'm just concerned we could still lose the stadium and in turn our team. I'm just interested in people's opinions in what could happen if a very high quote is given. I understood that you may think I'm a troll, but I'm honestly just interested in people's opinions. Are you saying you honestly believe it can be built for the current estimate?
 
Worth a watch....

 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Islander said:
If the chosen builder comes back with a quote of $2 to $3 billion do people believe the government will be put under big pressure from those opposed to reassess the proposal? I just think big questions would then have to be asked about where all the extra money will come from. I'm hopeful it comes back a lot lower, but many experts have said it's likely to cost this sort of money.
Click to expand...

People need to understand that this is a Design and Construct build. It isn't a case of a builder walking in and quoting the job at whatever price they want, and then being forced to pay it. We have two builders fighting for the contract, in order to drive the cost as low as possible. For a D and C, the contractor will need to work within the parameters of the budget/cost estimate set by the MPDC and then an agreement be made for who is liable for what overruns and how much.

If it simply cant be done for 1.1b, then it will be value managed down to the price. There is also something like $150m of contingency and escalation built into that price already.
 
footyscribe said:
People need to understand that this is a Design and Construct build. It isn't a case of a builder walking in and quoting the job at whatever price they want, and then being forced to pay it. We have two builders fighting for the contract, in order to drive the cost as low as possible. For a D and C, the contractor will need to work within the parameters of the budget/cost estimate set by the MPDC and then an agreement be made for who is liable for what overruns and how much.

If it simply cant be done for 1.1b, then it will be value managed down to the price. There is also something like $150m of contingency and escalation built into that price already.
Click to expand...
I have tried telling members of the No stadium page this and they have told me that's it's rubbish. They go straight on to say the government has basically never delivered anything on budget and use the Spirit's situation as an example.

I don't understand why if this is the case that the government or MPCD don't explain this to the people. I think this is important information people opposed need to know. I'm not sure if this is true but I have also seen one individual say that the builder is responsible for any cost over runs with this type of contract and that their insurance covers it.

I have seen people saying they believe it will cost as much as $5 billion and they have honestly believed that. I think if this was explained to people it would likely lead to considerably less opposition.
 
Islander said:
I'm definitely not a troll ,I'm just concerned we could still lose the stadium and in turn our team. I'm just interested in people's opinions in what could happen if a very high quote is given. I understood that you may think I'm a troll, but I'm honestly just interested in people's opinions. Are you saying you honestly believe it can be built for the current estimate?
Click to expand...
We are way too far down the line to "still lose the stadium and in turn our team".

That's not happening (as in losing stadium and team) and I think you know that.

And you sound a lot like a former poster (Mr. Taswegian) who always had a lot negative stuff to say but made it sound like concern.
 
Last edited:
Islander said:
I'm definitely not a troll ,I'm just concerned we could still lose the stadium and in turn our team. I'm just interested in people's opinions in what could happen if a very high quote is given. I understood that you may think I'm a troll, but I'm honestly just interested in people's opinions. Are you saying you honestly believe it can be built for the current estimate?
Click to expand...

It can absolutely be built within the current estimate.

The $1.13b estimate was an official P90 estimate, and included $147m for escalation, and about $300m for development, consultancies and contingencies. The actual 'construction' cost was about $650m from memory.

As above, if it drifts over, the MPDC is on record as saying they'll 'value manage' it down. For example, Anne Beach said this late year in relation to being able to cost-cut:

"An example I gave on Friday was the rakers, which are the steel structures that support the seating bowl. We did that as a double structure rather than a single and it produced an efficiency in the amount of steel and provided a saving. We can look for those types of things"

She also said that given the price of diesel and transport, the stadium being situated next to a working port could help cut some cost too. She added last month that there was currently no material change to the estimate.

Per ABC:

"They're not indicating any material issues with supply chains"

"We know in major projects this happens a lot. We know during the Bridgewater Bridge, they had the challenge of dealing with COVID, so we do allow some risk allocation for these types of escalations"

Even still, the boss of the National Civil Contractors Federation, Nicholas Proud said that increased diesel cost could add about $50m to the cost of the project. While $50m is not to be sneezed at, its hardly an extra billion or two.

There's also the broader precinct development which will include parcels of land being sold off for development which will recoup money.

Anything can happen and nothing is guaranteed, but given the nature of a DandC, a P90 estimate and general confidence and scrutiny being applied to the tendering process, I dont think we will see a major blowout to the extent that is being fearmongered by opponents.
 
I have always and still do wonder if they'd actually toss the license without a stadium.

I certainly feel like now that the club is so established and doing so well, that they'd have a hard time denying us if the stadium didn't end up happening for whatever reason.
 
I was talking to a few people I know who work in a couple of the pubs and accommodation hotels around the stadium area and they are saying how massive it will be when stadium is built for that area.

The amount of business it will generate once stadium is built, especially during footy season will go through the roof (no pun intended lol).

Imagine a Friday/Saturday night in the city on game night at Macq Point. Hobart will go off!

I simply can't wait.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom