The Stadium!

[Jazny]

You need to look pass all the political games that have and are being played.
The big "test" for me was it passing through upper house - which it has. That was a major hurdle to get over. This was the time for naysayers and opponents in government to knock it on the head.
Planning commission have a lot to access but I reckon we've passed the biggest hurdle now.

Gives us time to build the high performance centre, have team named, sell memberships, and do a bunch of things in the next year to make it harder for Labor to kill it (if they even want to).

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

When you hear all the negative stuff about the government proposal, I just struggle to see it passing.

The negativity is being spread by people with agendas against the stadium and of course the media are sharing these to promote controversy about the project. It doesn’t mean that ultimately their arguments will stack up or if the final proposal won’t have plans to mitigate those concerns when it is completed in another 12-18 months.

Hasnt there only ever been 2 other major projects go through the process? I would be worried if there was hundreds of PoSS and none of them passed, but if only 2 have been tried and both failed, it doesnt mean a lot. Especially when one of them was a pulp mill that nobody wanted.

Yes, the Pulp Mill and Ralph’s Bay property and marina development. Two isn’t exactly a great sample size. There was an interview on a podcast with a former government advisor (forgot his name). He is very anti-stadium and said “it’s where projects go to die” and used that to justify why the stadium POSS process is “doomed to fail”. There is still a lot to play out so talk of it failing already is premature.

 

[Feraligatr]

Gives us time to build the high performance centre, have team named, sell memberships, and do a bunch of things in the next year to make it harder for Labor to kill it (if they even want to).

I think Tassie will easily do 20k plus of foundation memberships.

But the anti stadium people shit me to no end. They can see what they JackJumpers are doing for the state but are so dead set against that and more with an AFL team because "new stadium scary".

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

I think Tassie will easily do 20k plus of foundation memberships.

But the anti stadium people s**t me to no end. They can see what they JackJumpers are doing for the state but are so dead set against that and more with an AFL team because "new stadium scary".

Unfortunately, I don’t think they see what the Jack Jumpers are doing. People who don’t like sport are almost oblivious to it. I suspect half of these people also don’t realise how the NBL is a an absolute minnow of a competition compared to the AFL, so they don’t consider how much more of an impact that an AFL team will bring.

 

[Jazny]

I think Tassie will easily do 20k plus of foundation memberships.

But the anti stadium people s**t me to no end. They can see what they JackJumpers are doing for the state but are so dead set against that and more with an AFL team because "new stadium scary".

There isn't many anti-stadium people. Couldn't even get 100 protesters to the last no stadium rally with Jacqi Lambi

 

[Feraligatr]

Unfortunately, I don’t think they see what the Jack Jumpers are doing. People who don’t like sport are almost oblivious to it. I suspect half of these people also don’t realise how the NBL is a an absolute minnow of a competition compared to the AFL, so they don’t consider how much more of an impact that an AFL team will bring.

It's the blind sightedness of how dare you like and enjoy what I don't like.

Surely there are enough knitting groups in the state to keep them happy.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

When you hear all the negative stuff about the government proposal, I just struggle to see it passing.

Negative people in Tasmania are very noisy. It's like an industry.

 

[TassieSaint]

The only two other POSS were the pulp mill, which technically Gunn's collapsed before the process finished (although I doubt it would ever get up) and Ralph's Bay development which was absolute garbage from the get go and I'm not sure how it even got that far.

The stadium is a completely different proposition imo and there's a good chance the findings are broadly positive. For the anti stadium element of Labor I think they're hoping it will give them enough rope to hang the project with. I personally think an objective assessment can only be a good thing.

 

[TassieSaint]

Re: Stadium 2.0 it makes zero sense to me. From and engineering and cost perspective how does it make any sense to build out onto reclaimed land vs an existing site? And why would the anti development people who are against the govt building a stadium on a currently disused site accept a stadium allowing private money to essentially buy a bit of the Derwent? And it still requires millions of taxpayer money anyway?

It's handy to have as a backup as someone else mentioned I guess, fundamentally I prefer any stadium to no stadium (and no team) but building out into the river when you've got the perfect spot sitting idle around the corner makes no sense to me.

 

[BoomerRoo]

Re: Stadium 2.0 it makes zero sense to me. From and engineering and cost perspective how does it make any sense to build out onto reclaimed land vs an existing site? And why would the anti development people who are against the govt building a stadium on a currently disused site accept a stadium allowing private money to essentially buy a bit of the Derwent? And it still requires millions of taxpayer money anyway?

It's handy to have as a backup as someone else mentioned I guess, fundamentally I prefer any stadium to no stadium (and no team) but building out into the river when you've got the perfect spot sitting idle around the corner makes no sense to me.

I’m “restricted” in what I can say due to my work/role and background… but you’ve pretty much nailed it TassieSaint

Think on this: “Who gains from stadia owned by government, compared to who gains from stadia owned by private consortiums?”

 

[Mr Taswegian]

I’m “restricted” in what I can say due to my work/role and background… but you’ve pretty much nailed it TassieSaint

Think on this: “Who gains from stadia owned by government, compared to who gains from stadia owned by private consortiums?”

Dean Coleman has said many times the Tasmanian people will own it.

 

[Hodgey 15]

Dean Coleman has said many times the Tasmanian people will own it.

He's just saying what he thinks people want to hear.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

The only two other POSS were the pulp mill, which technically Gunn's collapsed before the process finished (although I doubt it would ever get up) and Ralph's Bay development which was absolute garbage from the get go and I'm not sure how it even got that far.

The stadium is a completely different proposition imo and there's a good chance the findings are broadly positive. For the anti stadium element of Labor I think they're hoping it will give them enough rope to hang the project with. I personally think an objective assessment can only be a good thing.

I totally agree with your reading of the situation. Let’s not forget that the ‘no stadium’ mafia have been peddling BS ever since the license was announced. By and large they have absolutely NFI what they’re on about. Therefore, it’s going to be useful to have all the facts on the table, so everyone can see how much they’ve been lying. Don’t forget about the parliamentary committee that questioned Andrew Dillon about the license agreement a few months back. Some of the questions directed to Dillon were so stupid that they had to be heard to be believed: courtesy of Josh Willie, Shane Broad and Lisa Alexander (to name a few).

 

[BoomerRoo]

Dean Coleman has said many times the Tasmanian people will own it.

No we won't Mr Taswegian, look at where the money is coming from in Deans proposal.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

No we won't Mr Taswegian, look at where the money is coming from in Deans proposal.

I know where some of its coming from but he said the investors will run the services and Tasmanians will run the stadium.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Interesting to see that MLC Meg Webb has said that she thinks the stadium 02 proposal could be the saving grace for the government. I think this proposal is a very serious possibility and the proponents have a meeting planned with the AFL this week,so things are getting very interesting.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

Interesting to see that MLC Meg Webb has said that she thinks the stadium 02 proposal could be the saving grace for the government. I think this proposal is a very serious possibility and the proponents have a meeting planned with the AFL this week,so things are getting very interesting.

Stadium 2.0 would be a disaster for everybody except the investors.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Stadium 2.0 would be a disaster for everybody except the investors.

They said the stadium will be owned by Tasmanian's but the investors will own all the services so I think that will still be good for Tasmanian's.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

They said the stadium will be owned by Tasmanian's but the investors will own all the services so I think that will still be good for Tasmanian's.

Owning and controlling are two completely different things.

 

[Jazny]

So funny how pro-stadium people act like anti-stadium when it comes to 2.0

 

[nobbyiscool]

From the northern rag today

NEW STADIUM WOULD NEED 'FIVE OR SIX AC/DC CONCERTS EACH YEAR'

Matt Maloney


An AC/DC show held in Hobart in 2001 was the largest single musical content to be held at the state, but only attracted 16,000 people and was a significant financial loss for the band.

A Tasmanian concert promoter says the state does not have the money or population to sustain a new stadium and entertainment venue.

Concert promoter Charles Touber has an impressive record of bringing the biggest names to the state over his career - such as the Ramones, Iggy Pop, Tina Turner, Foo Fighters, Beastie Boys, AC/DC and Bryan Adams.

Aside from the new development at Macquarie Point in Hobart being contingent on an AFL team licence, it has been argued that the stadium will attract sporting and musical events and that the state needs an appropriate venue to stage them.

Mr Touber appeared before the Public Accounts Committee inquiring into the feasibility of the Macquarie Point development.

Drawing a comparison with the AC/DC concert attendance and the figures from MI Global Partners, Mr Touber said the stadium would need to host the equivalent of five or six AC/DC concerts each year.

He said the business case's forecast crowd estimates did not stack up, which was an acknowledgement of the stadium's financial unsustainability.

"As a business case, it's a basket case," he said.

"That's not a business model; that's just wishful thinking."

MI Global Partners has proposed an annual event calendar of 44 events at the proposed venue, of which 28 would be new to Tasmania.

It has said it could be achieved by an estimated acquisition budget of $5.3 million.

The consultants estimated that the stadium would attract three tier-one international concerts with an attendance of 30,000 people and five international or big Australian acts with an attendance of 15,000 people.

Outside of festivals held in Tasmania, Mr Touber said the largest concert to be held in Tasmania was at the TCA Ground with AC/DC in 2001, which attracted 16,000 people.

He said the show did not sell out and was a significant financial loss for the band on that tour.

Mr Touber said the Tasmanian public was fickle when it came to buying tickets to significant musical events, and there was not the disposable income within the community to pay the ticket prices demanded by significant musical acts.

He said a big international act had limited spaces in a tour schedule, which meant venues with a 50,000-seat capacity would be selected over smaller venues.

It's what a few of us have been saying all along. Whether you support the stadium/roof or not, let's not let our excitement delude us into thinking that anyone is going to Hobart when they could just play another Melbourne show. Yeah, there are exceptions, but for every "global act" who might consider Hobart I could name at least 9 or 10 that wouldn't.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

From the northern rag today

This is actually incorrect. Dire straits hosted two concerts well before my time at North Hobart oval in the 80s I believe and attracted approximately 19,000 the first day and 20,000 on the second day. One other concert by another massive band also attracted similar numbers around the same time at KG5 I believe.

 

[BoomerRoo]

From the northern rag today



It's what a few of us have been saying all along. Whether you support the stadium/roof or not, let's not let our excitement delude us into thinking that anyone is going to Hobart when they could just play another Melbourne show. Yeah, there are exceptions, but for every "global act" who might consider Hobart I could name at least 9 or 10 that wouldn't.

I disagree with him 100%, for many reasons.

I've known Charles for a very long time (I worked in the music industry in my early years), he certainly rolls to the beat of his own drum......... and runs his own agenda, which sadly, is outdated. Bon Jovi, Pearl Jam, Metallica & Bruce Springsteen are just a few of the acts that have wanted to play Tasmania over the last 5 years.

The amount of friends that went to Melbourne for concerts last week was staggering.

I love my music with a passion (I'm off to see The War on Drugs in Melbourne next week), Charles is not the only music promoter going around, Chuggy shits all over him as an "organiser".

Charles Touber - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Mr Taswegian]

I disagree with him 100%, for many reasons.

I've known Charles for a very long time (I worked in the music industry in my early years), he certainly rolls to the beat of his own drum......... and runs his own agenda, which sadly, is outdated. Bon Jovi, Pearl Jam, Metallica & Bruce Springsteen are just a few of the acts that have wanted to play Tasmania over the last 5 years.

The amount of friends that went to Melbourne for concerts last week was staggering.


I love my music with a passion (I'm off to see The War on Drugs in Melbourne next week), Charles is not the only music promoter going around, Chuggy shits all over him as an "organiser".

Yes and it will be even more likely with a roofed stadium and a number of other promoters have said that we would attract concerts.

 

[nobbyiscool]

I disagree with him 100%, for many reasons.

I've known Charles for a very long time (I worked in the music industry in my early years), he certainly rolls to the beat of his own drum......... and runs his own agenda, which sadly, is outdated. Bon Jovi, Pearl Jam, Metallica & Bruce Springsteen are just a few of the acts that have wanted to play Tasmania over the last 5 years.

The amount of friends that went to Melbourne for concerts last week was staggering.

I love my music with a passion (I'm off to see The War on Drugs in Melbourne next week), Charles is not the only music promoter going around, Chuggy shits all over him as an "organiser".

Charles Touber - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I'm not sure that on one hand you can say he's not the only promoter in town, then cite bands that supposedly wanted to play in Tassie according to you (including 1 who haven't played Australia in the last 5 years, and including 2 whose Austalian tours were COVID rescheduled and are over the next couple of months.)