Tasmania Tasmania Devils, welcome to the AFL. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5 (Part 2)

[cfc to aufc]

The plan is to play at Blundstone and Utas the first year because the stadium isn't due to be built until 2029. If the stadium isn't built by the 2029 then the Tasmanian government is required to pay several million a year in late fees to the AFL until it's built.

Well, that will generate a lot of goodwill for the afl.

 

[3207]

Well, that will generate a lot of goodwill for the afl.

The AFL have done their bit.

 

[Rob]

System didn't cause a -12.1% swing against the Liberals

As I understand it you'd need a 45% or so primary vote to have a genuine chance at a majority. A huge ask for any party, especially where there is a third party with a significant share of the vote.

 

[Cuzz09]

Is the stadium being in the dick area an AFL need?

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Cuzz09]

dock

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Jazny]

dock

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

yes. There is no plan for it to be anywhere else at the moment.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Well, that will generate a lot of goodwill for the afl.

I think the late fees for non-delivery of the new stadium for 2029 is indicative of how inadequate an 11k-seat Bellerive is in terms of revenue generation. The Tas gov is tipping in $12m per year towards the club. Any additional losses incurred by the team beyond that would need to be covered by the AFL through ASD funding. At worst, they want Tassie to be cost-neutral; however, that’s not possible unless they’re playing out of a new stadium with more reserved seating and corporate facilities. Hence, the necessity of the stadium needing to be completed by the agreed timelines or it will be costing the AFL money - so essentially they’re transferring that risk onto the government. Cannot begrudge them for that at all, when Tassie has been the party pushing for the license from the beginning.

 

[3207]

yes. There is no plan for it to be anywhere else at the moment.

Wouldn’t that be optimal spot for other events though, not just footy?

 

[cfc to aufc]

I think the late fees for non-delivery of the new stadium for 2029 is indicative of how inadequate an 11k-seat Bellerive is in terms of revenue generation. The Tas gov is tipping in $12m per year towards the club. Any additional losses incurred by the team beyond that would need to be covered by the AFL through ASD funding. At worst, they want Tassie to be cost-neutral; however, that’s not possible unless they’re playing out of a new stadium with more reserved seating and corporate facilities. Hence, the necessity of the stadium needing to be completed by the agreed timelines or it will be costing the AFL money - so essentially they’re transferring that risk onto the government. Cannot begrudge them for that at all, when Tassie has been the party pushing for the license from the beginning.

"Tassie pushing" ? Well a few in Tassie have been pushing !

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

"Tassie pushing" ? Well a few in Tassie have been pushing !

There has been huge public support for an AFL team, even tri-partisan political support. The point of contention has only ever been about the condition of a new, roofed stadium in Hobart.

 

[cfc to aufc]

There has been huge public support for an AFL team, even tri-partisan political support. The point of contention has only ever been about the condition of a new, roofed stadium in Hobart.

Agreed, and the funding of the stadium is the issue which will be coming to a head soon

 

[peetoo]

Moderate liberal state parties should be showing the feds the way. Talent should be moving from state to federal not dinosaurs like Abetz stinking up state govts

Apologies if too political

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Agreed, and the funding of the stadium is the issue which will be coming to a head soon

This was from the policy section of the Jacqui Lambie Network’s website. For me, this infers that they might be able to hop on board the stadium if the Rockliff government agrees to some of their other demands around cost of living, the impact on the RSL etc. It certainly reads a lot more positive than Kirstie Johnstone’s stance.

If the Libs get 15 seats + the support of O’Byrne and the Lambie party members then that will give them the 18 votes they need to get the stadium passed through the parliament (even without needing the support of Johnstone or Labor). I think that Rockliff announcing the $375m state gov funding cap on the stadium will also prove to be a shrewd move in terms of getting Lambie support.

 

[cfc to aufc]

This was from the policy section of the Jacqui Lambie Network’s website. For me, this infers that they might be able to hop on board the stadium if the Rockliff government agrees to some of their other demands around cost of living, the impact on the RSL etc. It certainly reads a lot more positive than Kirstie Johnstone’s stance.

If the Libs get 15 seats + the support of O’Byrne and the Lambie party members then that will give them the 18 votes they need to get the stadium passed through the parliament (even without needing the support of Johnstone or Labor). I think that Rockliff announcing the $375m state gov funding cap on the stadium will also prove to be a shrewd move in terms of getting Lambie support.

Yes it's a possibility but it'd be a 180 degree u turn from her recent stance on the funding position but yeah things do change when push comes to shove

 

[Professor Knowall]

Yes it's a possibility but it'd be a 180 degree u turn from her recent stance on the funding position but yeah things do change when push comes to shove

The other thing to keep in mind is that even if Lambe maintains her personal opposition to the new stadium, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the newly elected members of her “Party” - who essentially are independents that got her endorsement to use the “Jacqui Lambie Party” name in the election - will oppose the stadium. In fact, they can each make up their own minds whether to support the stadium or not, regardless of what Lambie thinks.

She has even admitted she has no say at all as to whether each elected member that used her name will choose to make a deal with the Libs or not to form the new government. Lambie herself, being a Federal Senator, has no vote in the Tasmanian Parliament.

 

[The_Wookie]

I think the late fees for non-delivery of the new stadium for 2029 is indicative of how inadequate an 11k-seat Bellerive is in terms of revenue generation. The Tas gov is tipping in $12m per year towards the club. Any additional losses incurred by the team beyond that would need to be covered by the AFL through ASD funding. At worst, they want Tassie to be cost-neutral; however, that’s not possible unless they’re playing out of a new stadium with more reserved seating and corporate facilities. Hence, the necessity of the stadium needing to be completed by the agreed timelines or it will be costing the AFL money - so essentially they’re transferring that risk onto the government. Cannot begrudge them for that at all, when Tassie has been the party pushing for the license from the beginning.

These sort of Government shenanigans are part of why the license was always a non starter historically. Its bad enough - even if fair enough - that they want North levels of AFL support, but Government support can waver from election to election. Its a hell of a way to run a railroad.

 

[pattymalone00]

 

[Carringbush2010]

So, it looks like a compromise situation, whoever opposes the stadium, well I hope you enjoy the venom that with warrant will come your way.

If those in opposition can't come to agree it'll be on them.

Will be a major mistake to oppose this now and will forever haunt and you'll be known to be on the wrong side of history.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

So, it looks like a compromise situation, whoever opposes the stadium, well I hope you enjoy the venom that with warrant will come your way.

If those in opposition can't come to agree it'll be on them.

Will be a major mistake to oppose this now and will forever haunt and you'll be known to be on the wrong side of history.

Unfortunately, I don’t think being on the wrong side of history is a deterrent to any of them. Look at the disgraceful conduct of most Australian politicians (of all persuasions) over the past five years or so. When it comes to the priorities of many elected representatives, public service and legacy trail a long way behind self-service, protecting corporate and IGO interests, and the next election cycle. Half of them would sell their grandma if it helped them to get re-elected.

 

[pattymalone00]

 

[3207]

Unfortunately, I don’t think being on the wrong side of history is a deterrent to any of them. Look at the disgraceful conduct of most Australian politicians (of all persuasions) over the past five years or so. When it comes to the priorities of many elected representatives, public service and legacy trail a long way behind self-service, protecting corporate and IGO interests, and the next election cycle. Half of them would sell their grandma if it helped them to get re-elected.

Bit short.

155 years probably closer to the mark.

 

[Professor Knowall]

… Look at the disgraceful conduct of most Australian politicians (of all persuasions) over the past five years or so. … Half of them would sell their grandma if it helped them to get re-elected.

Oh, come on, that can’t be right ….



Surely it’d be much more than just half!

 

[The_Wookie]

ON the membership:

Im being told 75% of them are Tasmanian, second most from Victoria.
Sales sold in 45 countries, second most being America.

Same source being told by highers ups at the AFL that they dont care if they get a million members, the deal wont change.

 

[Financialpanther]

ON the membership:

Im being told 75% of them are Tasmanian, second most from Victoria.
Sales sold in 45 countries, second most being America.

Same source being told by highers ups at the AFL that they dont care if they get a million members, the deal wont change.

The amount of expat Tasmanians taking memberships would be high.

 

[weewilly]

ON the membership:

Im being told 75% of them are Tasmanian, second most from Victoria.
Sales sold in 45 countries, second most being America.

Same source being told by highers ups at the AFL that they dont care if they get a million members, the deal wont change.

And the AFL deal should not change so it will be up to the next Tasmanian Parliament whatever the make up is to make the decision NOT the AFL!
Also a lot of anti Stadium people are conveniently forgetting that the Albanese govt is also stumping up $240 million dollars so NOT ALL the funds are coming from the Tassie govt and another option would be to borrow some more of the funding from the Feds at a low interest rate.