TAS Will a team go to Tassie

[Walshawk]

So how much did it cost to develop docklands?

Will it cost 300 milllon to do up Princes park?

How much money was spent on Kardinia Park?

Docklands was $460m more than 20 years ago. Would be $1billion now. The 45K stadium next to the SCG is costing $735m. The infrastructure at Princes Park or Whitten is old, so a gradual refit like like Geelong Over time would not work. It would be a virtual rebuild.

 

[Freomaniac]

If my club moved to the Gold Coast, it would be dead. Loaded up with debt, locals unwilling to get behind a struggling team dumped in a place they didn't want to go, the Victorian supporter base completely disenfranchised. It would have been wound up by now. That's why we fought so hard to stay. And we're better off now financially than we've been for decades.

And before you continue, North Melbourne doesn't want to go to Tasmania, and Tasmania don't want us either. So any further argument is just wasting your breath.


JeanLucGoddard loves to stir the point, but take the s**t-stirring out of it and look at it objectively. The AFL owning Docklands is what will get all 18 clubs through this. It's the only reason they've been able get so much money so quickly. And if the flow of money from the AFL and its clubs through to grassroots footy stopped, then we're talking dozens, maybe even hundreds of country and suburban clubs nationwide going under.

So tell me again what good would come from the AFL supporting a new venue that destroys the value of its biggest asset?

Do you love Norths generous deal with docklands?

 

[big_e]

Do you love Norths generous deal with docklands?

 

[Freomaniac]

so i take that as a yes lol

 

[big_e]

so i take that as a yes lol

Please tell me everything you know about North Melbourne's deal with Docklands.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

The factor that you're not taking into account is politics. Geelong contains a swing seat at both state and federal level, so it gets showered with money for things like stadium upgrades. Western and Northern Melbourne are incredibly solid for the Labor Party at all levels, so there's no incentive for candidates to make extra promises there. That's also why Launceston gets plenty of stadium upgrades and Hobart doesn't.

Blundstone is in a bad location but the stadium facilities itself are a lot better and more modern then utas were a large majority is

Both areas at Mac Point and Glenorchy get a mention:

Precincts — Hobart Rail

www.hobartrail.com

The state govt was angling for cash from the Feds as part of the "city deal".

It help when you tie in footy, rail renewal and redevelopment all in one thing

Rail wo

Also the club that voted itself out of existence in a merger proposal.

if I’m not mistaken north also voted its self out of existence in the mid nineties the merger with Fitzroy was agreed to buy both clubs the only thing that stopped it happing was the other Victorian clubs and the afl !

 

[Walshawk]

I'm confused, you say they don't need a new stadium but you're also advocating for one.


How long do you think they can last getting 18k to Bellerive, when as madmug has described at length, it's hard to get in and out of and there's inadequate public transport or parking? Poor logistics is one of the reasons why Sydney gets poor crowds in the NRL, and I see Bellerive repeating that trend if it isn't replaced with a better-located stadium.

I said they don’t need one to enter the AFL as they already have two acceptable stadiums. But of course it would be good to have, if economics and politics allow. Otherwise all finals would be in Launceston which would struggle to accomodate 12k Collngwood fans (for example).
What I am saying is that they should not spend more money at Bellerive. It is fine to use initially as is, but not the place to invest another $100m or add 10k to the capacity. You can get 15k - 18k in and out, but not 25k.

 

[Freomaniac]

Please tell me everything you know about North Melbourne's deal with Docklands.

No I dont. you tell me.

You are not giving me a straight out answer. How much does North pay to rent out games at Docklands? $500,000 a game?

I remember Freo paying 3.1 million a year to play 11 games at Subiaco oval.

 

[big_e]

No I dont. you tell me.

You are not giving me a straight out answer. How much does North pay to rent out games at Docklands? $500,000 a game?

I remember Freo paying 3.1 million a year to play 11 games at Subiaco oval.

I never said anything about our deal at Docklands. My interest in Docklands is what it does for the whole league.

And what Fremantle - owned the the WAFC - paid to play at Subiaco Oval - managed by the WAFC - is irrelevant. Literally taking from the left pocket and putting into the right pocket.

 

[Freomaniac]

I never said anything about our deal at Docklands. My interest in Docklands is what it does for the whole league.

And what Fremantle - owned the the WAFC - paid to play at Subiaco Oval - managed by the WAFC - is irrelevant. Literally taking from the left pocket and putting into the right pocket.

You still didnt answer my question.

How much money per game do you have to pay rent for a docklands game

 

[Freomaniac]

Nah. North do so well down there. ;-)

Fancy that, Saints and north fans are happy to have a victorian team in tassie, but they wont nominate themselves down there. lol

Hell, Send ross Lyon at tassie, no one would complain. lol

It is striking that a Port fan is calling out the financial situation of North given their own troubles

Hear Hear......

It would be like A freo fan like me, pot shotting all other 17 sides for playing defensive tactics consdiering Ross Lyons was freos coach for 8 years.

 

[big_e]

You still didnt answer my question.

How much money per game do you have to pay rent for a docklands game

In what bizarre parallel universe would I be expected to know that?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

My Point was look at Brisbanes history at the GABBA from 1993-2003. the point was Brisbane struggled in the Early 1990s but by the late 1990s, the crowds increased due to Brisbane being good and the stadium capacity increased too. Then they made grand finals in 2001-04 and the crowds increased due to the on field success and geting regular sell outs.

1993-4 Brisbane struggled but the Gabbas capacity was around 15-16,000. 1995-6 Brisbane made finals. It was around 1995-6 Brisbane started getting the occasional sell out at the gabbas, the capacity was around 25,000.

Then you had 2001, Brisbanes 1st flag, Gabbas Capacity was around 37,500. Brisbanes average crowds was around 25,000.

In 2002-3, that crowd average was around 30,000 and getting a few sell outs.

Once again, this is interesting trivia, but has nothing at all to do with my point. My point was referring to the impact politics plays on stadium funding, specifically if there is a swing seat nearby.

 

[Roylion]

If I’m not mistaken north also voted its self out of existence in the mid nineties the merger with Fitzroy

You are mistaken. Not sure where you got this from.

No vote to merge was ever put to the North Melbourne members.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Ok

You are mistaken. Not sure where you got this from.

No vote to merge was ever put to the North Melbourne members.

ok fair enough my memory might be of I thought Pryor to the Brisbane merger one between Fitzroy and north was being proposed and had support of the two boards ? The other Victorian clubs were against it as they were worried a super club would be formed!

 

[Roylion]

ok fair enough my memory might be of I thought Pryor to the Brisbane merger one between Fitzroy and north was being proposed and had support of the two boards ?

An in-principle agreement between boards is not voting "its self out of existence" as you claimed. Unlike the Melbourne - Hawthorn proposed merger, no vote by members of either club was ever taken.

 

[deltablues]

The very same city is a one hour flight from Hobart.

Do you really think Geelong footballers are always travelling to Melbourne to get their fix of the high-life? It's an occasional trip. People get all excited about all the things they can do in a big city, but the reality is they don't do much of them. Being a professional footballer is a pretty regimented lifestyle. Pretty much every person I've ever spoken to who argued they have to live in Melbourne because they need all the big city excitement, had a very boring existence. I do more stuff here in Hobart than when I lived in Melbourne (my home town). It's just easier to get around and be spontaneous here. Try not to take that opinion personally. You aren't your city. Where you live doesn't imply anything about how active you are in doing things.

I'm for a Tas team [not a failed AFL mainland club re-locating], but re the bold, more like 5 hours door-to-door, unless you have a private helicopter in the backyard.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

An in-principle agreement between boards is not voting "its self out of existence" as you claimed. Unlike the Melbourne - Hawthorn proposed merger, no vote by members of either club was ever taken.

So the boards didn’t vote on it ?

 

[Ando727]

I'm for a Tas team [not a failed AFL mainland club re-locating], but re the bold, more like 5 hours door-to-door, unless you have a private helicopter in the backyard.

5 hours? You need to streamline your time-management!

At Hobart you can show up for your flight 30 minutes before it takes off. Also I can be at the airport in exactly 12 minutes from my place.

It's the quickest airport experience in Australia. But probably still too slow for the insatiable excitement devourers of Melbourne - who still do exactly the same day to day s**t as everybody else.

 

[Roylion]

So the boards didn’t vote on it ?

They came to a final in-principle agreement on the morning of July 4th 1996. However that was only Stage one in the process. The Fitzroy board didnt even have control of their club at that time.

 

[Freomaniac]

Once again, this is interesting trivia, but has nothing at all to do with my point. My point was referring to the impact politics plays on stadium funding, specifically if there is a swing seat nearby.

Ok, So who was responsible for re developing the gabba when Brisbane won their flags?

 

[raymond35]

They came to a final in-principle agreement on the morning of July 4th 1996. However that was only Stage one in the process. The Fitzroy board didnt even have control of their club at that time.

So no vote was required because Fitzroy was broke and North had that strange shareholders situation?

 

[big_e]

Ok, So who was responsible for re developing the gabba when Brisbane won their flags?

Was done so it could host soccer in the 2000 Olympics, wasn't it?

 

[Roylion]

So no vote was required because Fitzroy was broke and North had that strange shareholders situation?

Fitzroy was under the control of the administrator Michael Brennan. He surrendered the licence and Fitzroy left the AFL competition.

Both Fitzroy and North Melbourne were controlled by shareholders. I am one of them. They had to vote to merge the clubs. Dyson Hore-Lacy made it clear at the time that before any final decision was made, he would take the proposal to Fitzroy members.

 

[The Warlord]

The factor that you're not taking into account is politics. Geelong contains a swing seat at both state and federal level, so it gets showered with money for things like stadium upgrades. Western and Northern Melbourne are incredibly solid for the Labor Party at all levels, so there's no incentive for candidates to make extra promises there. That's also why Launceston gets plenty of stadium upgrades and Hobart doesn't.

Rapidly turning marginal, hence the Dogs getting showered with goodies like the Ballarat upgrade and the Whitten Oval upgrade.