Remove this Banner Ad

Mac Point Stadium! - "Tas Says Yes!"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jazny
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

What kind of stadium do you want?


  • Total voters
    218

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Mate that distinction is semantics, whether you want to call it the precinct or the stadium, if the total cost is $945m the feds are funding $240m. That's a matter of public record.

And we don't need to get sucked into a North vs South thing here. The team benefits the whole state and the stadium will benefit the whole state.
I live in the north and I can tell you, myself and every person I know in my age group (40-50) definitely want the team and the stadium. No one has ever suggested to me the team needs to be based in Launceston.
 
I live in the north and I can tell you, myself and every person I know in my age group (40-50) definitely want the team and the stadium. No one has ever suggested to me the team needs to be based in Launceston.


same
 
Hmmm OK so grammar is about sentence structure not logic. I have always made it clear I am from the north and speak for those from the north, where 65% of people are against the stadium, but I am for it; always have been. But you don't know that now, do you?

It's getting to be a real trend, people from around Hobart putting me down for rasing the mood of the North.

Anyway, it's pretty cool coming home so kudos for that, how're the property prices down there from what you remember?
Mate I live in the north, can you please stop speaking for me.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Mate I live in the north, can you please stop speaking for me.

Yeah really? Where? Just a rough area. Ross? Oatlands? Oh no let me guess Campbell Town? Don't claim that which you don't wear with pride. And a real Tasmanian would have used cob or cobber, you are using mate here in a derisionary manner.

PS : Extra points to The King! for changing his location to Backwater, nice detail. ;)
 
Yeah really? Where? Just a rough area. Ross? Oatlands? Oh no let me guess Campbell Town? Don't claim that which you don't wear with pride. And a real Tasmanian would have used cob or cobber, you are using mate here in a derisionary manner
It must be exhausting being you.
 
Yeah really? Where? Just a rough area. Ross? Oatlands? Oh no let me guess Campbell Town? Don't claim that which you don't wear with pride. And a real Tasmanian would have used cob or cobber, you are using mate here in a derisionary manner.

PS : Extra points to The King! for changing his location to Backwater, nice detail. ;)
Newnham.
 
[/QUOTE]
Hmmm OK so grammar is about sentence structure not logic. I have always made it clear I am from the north and speak for those from the north, where 65% of people are against the stadium, but I am for it; always have been. But you don't know that now, do you?

It's getting to be a real trend, people from around Hobart putting me down for rasing the mood of the North.

Anyway, it's pretty cool coming home so kudos for that, how're the property prices down there from what you remember?

Nice one Einstein.
Insult somebody, talk down to them, then act like their best friend.
You're in the right profession anyway. You'd certainly never get a job in the real world.
 
This poll isn't a true reflection. Someone needs to do a poll asking if people support a stadium if not building it means no AFL team. The results would change dramatically.

There are a lot of people here buying into the political fantasy that we can somehow negotiate a team without the stadium. As soon as the reality hits home, stadium support will skyrocket.

When doing polls, they need to show how many people they asked. As polls don’t show a true reflection. Easily manipulated to get the result that you looking for.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I hate how the Greens and Independents are trying to manufacture a narrative that the state is in so much debt because of the stadium, when in reality it has very little impact. The state was in debt trouble before the stadium and will still be regardless of whether or not it's built.

The difference is that having a stadium and a team makes Tassie a more appealing place for people to visit and live, which creates opportunities for government revenue.
 
I can totally understand why we need a 🏟, it's the same reason in big overseas sports leagues need new stadiums....Corporate boxes. That's where the big investment and sponsorship comes from and UTAS and Bellerive can't bring in the big dollars.
This season GWS has an average home crowd of 11,715, while the average attendance for Gold Coast Suns home games is 13,625. These 2 teams have been a massive financial drain on the AFL for years with no return.
Add in games at Ballarat, Darwin, how do the AFL have the Gaul to force a Stadium 🏟 down upon us and no contribute more finances.
 
I hate how the Greens and Independents are trying to manufacture a narrative that the state is in so much debt because of the stadium, when in reality it has very little impact. The state was in debt trouble before the stadium and will still be regardless of whether or not it's built.

The difference is that having a stadium and a team makes Tassie a more appealing place for people to visit and live, which creates opportunities for government revenue.
If the greens let some tourism development into the state we might have more 💰 in the state coffers.
But those idiots what to stop any new ideas to bring tourists in.
They even stopped wooden board walk tracks into the south west hiking trail, even though it would help regenerate worn parts of the track under the guide of world heritage listing. You can't reason with the nuffies.
 
What's wrong with just going with the 2 supposed afl quality grounds they have now for a few seasons at least ?
The same reason other big sports grounds are built all over the world.
Corporate boxes, that where the big investment and sponsorship dollars come from.
General Tickets sales dont bring enough dollars.
 
I hate how the Greens and Independents are trying to manufacture a narrative that the state is in so much debt because of the stadium, when in reality it has very little impact. The state was in debt trouble before the stadium and will still be regardless of whether or not it's built.

The difference is that having a stadium and a team makes Tassie a more appealing place for people to visit and live, which creates opportunities for government revenue.
Since when did the Greens care about debt?!

The whole thing is opportunistic populist politicing of the worst kind.

If the whole thing falls over, those who have opposed the stadium should have it hung on them for all time.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

It's wild how people write off astronomical, unimaginable debt figures off as just numbers on a page.

The stadium already has a funding black hole. The cost has already blown out. It's going to require an effective blank cheque from the Tasmanian Government to underwrite the so-called private sector investment that no one is committing - a Government that has just forecast debt to double over the next 5 years despite the (budgeted) sell-off of public assets.

There might be a very harsh truth that needs to be considered here. I know we've all dreamed about this team for 35 years. I know we have stadium requirements with the AFL. But we have to at least consider the possibility that it's just not affordable.

Which leaves us needing to re-negotiate the stadium requirements, using our 200k members as leverage, and potentially throwing ourselves at the mercy of the Commission and other clubs.

I think those 200k "memberships" are significant though, and I think we have more leverage than anyone is really considering.
 
It's wild how people write off astronomical, unimaginable debt figures off as just numbers on a page.

The stadium already has a funding black hole. The cost has already blown out. It's going to require an effective blank cheque from the Tasmanian Government to underwrite the so-called private sector investment that no one is committing - a Government that has just forecast debt to double over the next 5 years despite the (budgeted) sell-off of public assets.

There might be a very harsh truth that needs to be considered here. I know we've all dreamed about this team for 35 years. I know we have stadium requirements with the AFL. But we have to at least consider the possibility that it's just not affordable.

Which leaves us needing to re-negotiate the stadium requirements, using our 200k members as leverage, and potentially throwing ourselves at the mercy of the Commission and other clubs.

I think those 200k "memberships" are significant though, and I think we have more leverage than anyone is really considering.
I'm really hoping that the government does consider the current memberships.
Of the 200k members, 130k + are tassie based.
That's almost 1 in 4 which is staggering of a population of 581k, that figure is even more remarkable when you take out people that hate the devils( greens professional whingers), children under 5, non sport or AFL supporter aligned population.
 
I'm really hoping that the government does consider the current memberships.
Of the 200k members, 130k + are tassie based.
That's almost 1 in 4 which is staggering of a population of 581k, that figure is even more remarkable when you take out people that hate the devils( greens professional whingers), children under 5, non sport or AFL supporter aligned population.
I had an argument re the numbers on facebook lol. This should show the government how successful it could be.
 
It's wild how people write off astronomical, unimaginable debt figures off as just numbers on a page.

The stadium already has a funding black hole. The cost has already blown out. It's going to require an effective blank cheque from the Tasmanian Government to underwrite the so-called private sector investment that no one is committing - a Government that has just forecast debt to double over the next 5 years despite the (budgeted) sell-off of public assets.

There might be a very harsh truth that needs to be considered here. I know we've all dreamed about this team for 35 years. I know we have stadium requirements with the AFL. But we have to at least consider the possibility that it's just not affordable.

Which leaves us needing to re-negotiate the stadium requirements, using our 200k members as leverage, and potentially throwing ourselves at the mercy of the Commission and other clubs.

I think those 200k "memberships" are significant though, and I think we have more leverage than anyone is really considering.
No one would deny the budget looks dire, but the stadium is small potatoes in the scheme of things. I believe the original $375m figure represented 45 days of health funding, even if you double it you aren't really making a dent. We're not gonna fix the budget by cancelling a single infrastructure project.

And that's without considering the benefits. I think it was HCCs independent report which out it at $140m per year during construction and $180m once built. I would argue in a lot of ways we can't afford not to build it. The amount of jobs it will create, the positive impact on tourism etc. will be huge. Conversely if it falls over, not only will those jobs evaporate, the hit to business confidence will be catastrophic. We won't be able to fix the budget with the economy going down the toilet.

And then there's the more existential issue at the heart of this. The reason we struggle and stagnate compared to mainland fundamentally is the continued brain drain and exodus of youth to the mainland. That's your tax base, that's the heart of your skilled professionals and economic activity continually bleeding interstate. We have a once in a generation opportunity to take some initiative and build a transformative project that might actually arrest and reverse that trend and leave us better off.
 
I live in the north and I can tell you, myself and every person I know in my age group (40-50) definitely want the team and the stadium. No one has ever suggested to me the team needs to be based in Launceston.

a sports commentator said much the same thing. but admitted he lives in a sports environment and that there have been broader surveys done, which show that is not the consensus. i’m optimistic, but there are many hurdles to surmount. not the least being who foots the bill for the inevitable cost blowout.

i quite like fagan interim idea.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom