The Stadium!

[Jazny]

The problem for the anti-stadium people is that hardcore die hard single issue voting against a stadium would be quite rare amongst those who are against the stadium, but die hard hardcore single issue voting for a stadium will be very common among those who want it. It's just not that exciting NOT getting a stadium.

 

[TheKanga]

It's interesting to note here in Launny that there has been little opposition (or talk on radio even) or the main stream media for that matter, to the AFL moving ahead with announcing Grant O'Brien as board chairman and Rocky announcing a new "stadia and events portfolio".

I get the feeling all the heat is dissipating from this issue and that the more 'small' developments that occur the harder it will be to undo the plan without great consequences for those who 'loose' us an AFL team. Labor seems to have lost their interest in this fight.

People have short attention spans and will move on to the next thing to be outraged about.

 

[BobbyMorri]

The fact that David O Byrne is making noises indicates Tas Labor inside politics are turning.

David is pro stadium and has used that position(and as President of the SFL) to become relevant again, in direct opposition to Bec White. Have no idea what the Feds think or what possie they are in.

 

[Hodgey 15]

The fact that David O Byrne is making noises indicates Tas Labor inside politics are turning.

David is pro stadium and has used that position(and as President of the SFL) to become relevant again, in direct opposition to Bec White. Have no idea what the Feds think or what possie they are in.

Looks like things are finally looking up.
Pro-stadium faction in Labor starting to gain serious traction within party now.

On SM-S906E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[madmug]

The fact that David O Byrne is making noises indicates Tas Labor inside politics are turning.

David is pro stadium and has used that position(and as President of the SFL) to become relevant again, in direct opposition to Bec White. Have no idea what the Feds think or what possie they are in.

Well yes & no. O'Byrne is on the outer of the party. He can say what he likes.
I've got no doubt they support his view, if not him, within the ALP.
Where this immediately gets us, I'm not too sure.
I think (hope) that the reality will be that the ALP attack over the Government process & other policies for as long as they can, then agree to the MacPoint stadium at the end of the drawn-out process.
They are getting media attention now, which is what they want.
At the end of the day, I don't think they'd really want to be the party that killed the dream, or the economic opportunity for the state.
(I hope!)

 

[Turbochook]

Nice little shot across the bow at Tas Labor there I rec

Not only that but the Libs will be going cap in hand to the feds for extra funding for all sorts of things as the GST cut falls, the back room power brokers of all parties here will pull them into line; for the betterment of the state.

 

[BoomerRoo]

With O'Byrne saying he wants to represent the Labor party at the next election, he'll need to be "Pre-Selected". If Rebecca White doesn't support this option.... then she's got another very big issue on her hands!

He does have the option of running has an "Independent", and if he does, he'll pull massive votes away from Rebecca and her Labor Party!

 

[Consolaçao]

Highly relevant article today in InDaily:

Whatever happened to… the people who wanted to vote ‘NO’ to Adelaide Oval?

'CityMag'’s co-founder and creative director at kwpx, Josh Fanning, wonders what happened to the way things were.

citymag.indaily.com.au

'There was NO WAY that a redeveloped Adelaide Oval, that bringing footy to the city, that a stupid footbridge in the future could be better than what he and every other footy fan had already… at Footy Park.

No way.

10 years later we bloody love Adelaide Oval. I can’t imagine winter in the city without half-cut footy fans, full of mirth and wrapped in scarves. 10 years later, the main complaint I hear about footy in the city is that, “the ******* footbridge is too goddam small and they should have built it bigger”.

Being able to imagine a future better than the present is easy.

Being able to research, design, engineer, pay for, and deliver a future that’s better than the present is very, very difficult.

Being able to convince everyone that the numbers add up, that the future can and will be better, and that everyone will be proud of themselves because we chose to do something good, and difficult, and beautiful is – in fact – impossible.

Some people will never believe that change today will create a better tomorrow.

Some people will vote ‘NO’ because they are sceptical, because they have been duped before, or because they’ve never experienced anything that has truly transformed their experience or our culture.

Adelaide Oval is a better future. It was built by the numbers and another thing. Belief. Belief that ‘YES’ we can have a better future.

In fact, saying ‘YES’ is the only way we ever move forward.'

 

[TassieSaint]

Super relevant, I didn't realise it had so many naysayers in Adelaide but not surprised. It's the classic small town, anti development, anti change mindset that is so pervasive in most Australian cities outside Melbourne and Sydney. We have a particularly high percentage of these types in Hobart though sadly.

 

[Consolaçao]

Super relevant, I didn't realise it had so many naysayers in Adelaide but not surprised. It's the classic small town, anti development, anti change mindset that is so pervasive in most Australian cities outside Melbourne and Sydney. We have a particularly high percentage of these types in Hobart though sadly.

Yeah, it’s a problem smaller cities have.

Hopefully there’re enough people with the vision to make it happen.

 

[robo_1]

I see a lot of comments from the anti stadium group about where people are going to park at the new stadium.

On Saturday at Bellerive oval there was a crowd of about 4,000 side streets were full of cars parking and traffic and still traffic jams after the game heading back towards the cbd from Bellerive quay all the way up to the Tasman bridge.

At least with Macquarie point there are multi level carparks throughout the cbd, all around the wharf and Salamanca and up and around the domain with supposed ferries from selected spots along the Derwent river

I remember going to a big bash game at Bellerive oval about 5/6 years ago on Boxing Day between hurricanes and stars and the whole area was gridlocked for over an hour after the game

 

[FlyingFortress]

It will be the best thing to happen to Hobart since MONA came to town. Breathe a bit of life into the old place.

 

[FlyingFortress]

I see a lot of comments from the anti stadium group about where people are going to park at the new stadium.

On Saturday at Bellerive oval there was a crowd of about 4,000 side streets were full of cars parking and traffic and still traffic jams after the game heading back towards the cbd from Bellerive quay all the way up to the Tasman bridge.

At least with Macquarie point there are multi level carparks throughout the cbd, all around the wharf and Salamanca and up and around the domain with supposed ferries from selected spots along the Derwent river

I remember going to a big bash game at Bellerive oval about 5/6 years ago on Boxing Day between hurricanes and stars and the whole area was gridlocked for over an hour after the game

Being the CBD, most public transport heads that way anyway

 

[BobbyMorri]

Anyone who says parking is a reason not to build in the CBD immediately lose all credibility with me.

Just a stupid excuse which fails basic logic tests.

 

[TassieSaint]

Yeah in what universe does the CBD with its existing parking, public transport hub, room for added parking, northern light rail even etc. make less sense than a ground in the suburbs with close to zero parking and no chance of building more, surrounded by narrow streets and a bottleneck to most of the city.

Almost is bad is complaints about the extra traffic. My mum was on about that the other day, I was like yeah mum I'm sure the 7 weekend days a year you'd be wanting to drive through the city at the exact time the game's on (she barely leaves home) would make a massive difference to your standard of living

 

[Truetiger]

It will be the best thing to happen to Hobart since MONA came to town. Breathe a bit of life into the old place.

The stadium more for it rather then against yet?

 

[Hodgey 15]

The stadium more for it rather then against yet?

Don't know if this means a lot but everywhere you look there are "Yes Stadium" stickers on cars. I've noticed one No Stadium sticker in last 6 months

There's even a business on the Brooker Highway ( main arterial into Hobart from Northern Suburbs) that has a huge "Yes Stadium" mural painted on side of wall facing incoming traffic.

I'm pretty sure anti stadium has cooled somewhat. When ever there's any mention of any aspect of Tassie team's entry into AFL in media it's always in the language of when not if.

On SM-S906E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[FlyingFortress]

The stadium more for it rather then against yet?

Depends on where you are. The hippy enclaves tend to have "No stadium" stickers, but plenty of regional centres are all for it.

 

[BoomerRoo]

The stadium more for it rather then against yet?

I had a few mates go to the "NO STADIUM" rally in Launceston on the weekend, as they were in town for junior footy, so the popped along for a laugh. One walked around the group and counted 78 people and that was including the 4 of them and the speakers. They also met half a dozen others they knew personally, that are 100% “Yes AFL Team, Yes Stadium” supporters, doing similar… so from what I'm seeing, the "No Stadium" are definitely in the minority!

 

[BobbyMorri]

I think it has shifted.

not sure who is the majority but the "YES team, YES Stadium" are much more vocal. Perhaps a silent majority are against it, but the vocal for it will vote for it, whereas I doubt the normal silent Tasmanian would care.

The No Stadium people are not normal Tasamnains. They would vote for it, but they seem a lot less numerous than the yes.

I did laugh at Hobart City Council Rejecting the team centre before any actual proposal. They are so anti-development that they reject a proposal before they actually receive one.

 

[Jazny]

Saul Estlake is a famous economist who mounted and incredible economic case for it in The Mercury today!

A NEW report into the economic benefits of Macquarie Point Stadium says it would be an intergenerational gold mine for the state’s economy and rival MONA as a landmark attraction and magnet for visitors and events.

Backed by renowned Australian economist, Saul Eslake, the report found Macquarie Point would generate $226.61m a year in economic benefits for Tasmania, adding up to an eye-watering $2.26 billion boost in its first 10 years.
In a glowing assessment of the analysis, Eslake called it a “powerful case” and hoped all interested parties, particularly the stadium naysayers, would find it a compelling indicator of what a bespoke 23,000-seat roofed stadium at Macquarie Point could achieve.
Pro-stadium interests say the report blows a hole in the side of the “no ship”.

Designs of what Hobart's new AFL stadium at Macquarie Point could look like. Images supplied by AFL
Even under the worst case scenario, it says Macquarie Point stadium would generate a total of $169.96m per year, calculated using all of the “common negative claims by the naysayers”.
“You have constructed a powerful case and I hope that other readers to whom it may be directed, who have understandable concerns about the business case, find it similarly persuasive,” Eslake said.
The report is authored by Tasmanian Russell Hanson, former Finance Director of FitzGerald’s Department Stores, CEO of the National body of The Wilderness Society and Managing Director Co-Operative Motors.
Video-link
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese reveals his hand on funding for AFL Stadium at Hobart’s Macquarie Point
Hanson is credited as the man who rescued the Wilderness Society from the brink of bankruptcy in the 1990s and was awarded the Centenary Medal for doing so.
The $226.61m economic boost found in the Hanson Report was derived using the same cost benefit analysis methodology used by PricewaterhouseCoopers to calculate the economic benefits generated by Hawthorn AFL games at UTAS Stadium in Launceston, a methodology accepted by both the state government and Labor Opposition.

Mr Hanson previously submitted a detailed report showing the economic return for Tas AFL team – now he’s doing it for the Mac Pt Stadium. Picture: Zak Simmonds
Using the exact PwC methodology, which all parties have long accepted to support the Hawthorn games at Launceston, it finds a $29.62m per annum benefit to the state’s economy, and for the Mac Point stadium, a whopping $226.61m per annum.
Hanson says: “Opponents cannot accept PwC to justify the Hawthorn spend, and then ignore it when it comes to Mac Point.”

Endorsement letter from leading economist Saul Eslake. Picture: Supplied.
The Hanson Report, titled Economic Benefits to Tasmania from the Introduction of a Tasmanian AFL Team and a New Stadium in Hobart at Macquarie Point, debunks claims the stadium would be a financial burden.
“It is quite clear the economic benefits to this state are every bit as compelling as the vitally-important and unquestioned social, health and wellbeing benefits,” Mr Hanson says in the report.
“Even when a worst-case scenario is looked at, with direct benefits substantially discounted, the new Stadium is no ‘dud’.
“It is not a 20-year loss of $306.2m, as has been claimed, it will generate additional visitation spend across the whole state in excess of $2 billion over the 20 years.
“This huge economic benefit is further demonstrated on examination of the PwC analysis of the Hawthorn games in Launceston and applying the same methodology to the new Stadium, the economic returns are substantially positive, ongoing and an opportunity this state can’t afford to lose.”
The Tasmanian government has handed down its state budget after a no-confidence motion against Premier Jeremy Rockliff was defeated. There has been a week of political chaos over an AFL deal which will see a $750 million stadium built at Hobart's Macquarie Point and its own licence to play in the league.
Macquarie Point stadium is set to cost $715m _ $240m in Federal Funding announced by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in Hobart on April 29, $15m from the AFL, $85m from land sales and leasing and naming rights, and the $375m balance from the state government.
MI Global uses the total cost of the stadium in its calculations, but from Tasmania’s perspective the cost is what the state puts in: $375m.
That alone changes the MI Global loss of $306.2m to a loss of $61.8 million (a $244.m turnaround) and this is before other benefits, that have previously not been included, are factored in.
Hanson says: “Intrastate incremental expenditure that would occur from Tasmanians utilising hospitality, tourism, goods and services associated with their attendance and use of the stadium precinct with a wide range of new events that previously required travel to the mainland to achieve their objectives. This represents $4.76 million per annum in real terms.”
Jobs and activity generated by construction of the stadium precinct add up to $14.5m, and activities created by the operation of the Tasmanian AFL and AFLW teams will produce $10.62m each year.
With all the benefits included, the discounted Net Benefits would be $527.9 million over 20 years.
“Even if you stress-test the calculation by allowing for cost blow outs, fewer events, combined with funds deducted from GST, and less flow-on benefits, we still end up with a profit of $54.30m,” he said.
Mr Hanson addresses “the question raised as to how the state would manage the increased debt associated with the $375 million contribution to the stadium as compared to spending the $375m on health”.
“The stadium would be generating economic activity from day one, opening the door to principal repayment and interest over a 20-year period, versus spending the $375m on health with no economic return and hence compounding interest over 20 years,” he said.
In layman’s terms, that means the stadium will make money, whereas adding an extra $375m to the health budget each year worsens state debt.
The Hanson report says: “The 2023-24 Budget for Tasmania shows the estimated health spend over four years will be $12.1 billion, or $8.3 million each and every day. The new stadium cost to Tasmania represents just 45 days of health spend over the same period.”
As owner of Macquarie Point stadium, the state government would have additional earnings to boost health and public housing spending, as well as other essential services.

The report also draws attention to the $130m in Federal funding being tipped into UTAS Stadium in Launceston and alludes to the long-accepted political battleground in the state’s north.
“It is ironic that there is criticism of the health spend and claims that a New Stadium is the wrong priority, yet there are no issues with the $130m currently being spent on York Park, for which there has been no rigorous examination at all, as compared to what is happening with the New Stadium; also, this expenditure is based on getting a Tasmania team which is currently under threat by opponents of the New Stadium,” Hanson says in the report.

The Cairns Post

The Cairns Post

www.cairnspost.com.au

 

[TassieSaint]

Great article. Economic benefits of this will be huge. The impact of Mona is pretty much impossible to quantify and that needed private funding to get done, no doubt if it was publicly funded people would have been sooking about it. Sincerely hope this gets some people to open their mind on it but I doubt it somehow.

 

[Jazny]

Great article. Economic benefits of this will be huge. The impact of Mona is pretty much impossible to quantify and that needed private funding to get done, no doubt if it was publicly funded people would have been sooking about it. Sincerely hope this gets some people to open their mind on it but I doubt it somehow.

Of course it will. There has been a good shift towards the yes side of things since it was announced. I still think polls will show a majority no, but not many would vehemently oppose it now and that's the only thing that matters. From a guess it would be about 40% in favour, 40% somewhat opposed, 10% absolutely opposed, 10% don't care.

 

[sherb]

Of course it will. There has been a good shift towards the yes side of things since it was announced. I still think polls will show a majority no, but not many would vehemently oppose it now and that's the only thing that matters. From a guess it would be about 40% in favour, 40% somewhat opposed, 10% absolutely opposed, 10% don't care.

The ongoing drama about the stadium has really dampened my excitement about the Tassie AFL team, I've really felt that I could only partly celebrate because of it. I still feel that the euphoria will only arrive for me once the stadium build is confirmed and the team is 100% locked in.

 

[Carlos Tilt]

I do have concerns re: the price tag for this stadium. It seems the AFL have us over a barrel though. It's a pity that we are locked into location and design.