Search results for query: *

Yep, so lets say 375 + 15 + 120 (assuming half the fed money gets clawed back) Thats $510m into the stadium and precinct from the government, which we will say is going to cost $850m to build. So for the price of $300m or so (the gap), a private consortium will Fund a slice of the stadium...

Yes, because you need to look beyond simply "the stadium". The privates wont be, and arent, interested in the stadium in and of itself. They want access to the entire site. And why wouldnt they? Its one of the most attractive parcels of lands in the country for development. The car park will...

My understanding of this is that the car park is only partly for stadium use, but mostly for broader precinct use including prospective hotel and antarctic precinct. It was included in the PoSS submission so they could get planning approval for it to be built. I believe the carpark wont be...

Nah. I believe government is obligated to assess unsolicited proposals of this nature, rightly or wrongly. What advantages or benefits would 2.0 have that 1.0 doesn’t? I can’t see any. In fact, I think 2.0 has far more challenges and obstacles. If 1.0 doesn’t pass, then 2.0 is no chance

Its possible for the right price. I dont think its crazy spending $2m or so for another 4 fixtures, 2 of which would feature the Tasmanian team. You'd get your money back on those pretty easily I think. Remember, the Hawthorn deal has been constantly renewed for 25 years because it makes...

I'd be surprised if Hawthorn didnt maintain a presence in Tasmania. They have a lot of fans and members in the state, and have been there for nearly 25 years. I can see 2 fixtures in Launceston per year Hawthorn v a usual away opponent (Freo/GWS etc) Hawthorn v Tasmania with Tasmania the...

There are no privates currently signed up. They’re awaiting to see the nature of the procurement process, and like the rest of us are awaiting the submission to the TPC. From there, they can see precisely what they’re dealing with. And then, the government can commence an EOI process. Here’s...

Unlikely as I dont think there is a specific guideline that refers to the privates. However there will be financial impact and economic reports, so there may be some detail there. The procurement of the stadium as a PPP will be handled by State Growth/Stadiums Tasmania rather than MPDC

It’ll be the submission that MPDC makes to the Tas Planning Commission. Basically a 2000 page document that addresses all the guidelines as set by the TPC. It’ll go to the TPC then be made public. I am told it’s extremely comprehensive

Stadium earnt the approval of Cricket Australia following negotiations over the height of the roof. With that sorted, all that would need to happen is a number of Sheffield Shield trial games to ascertain whether or not the stadium can host multi-day red ball cricket. I suspect it could as its...

I’ll side with you here, because I believe you’re referring to an EOI process that the Government is planning to open up for private backers. I’d say that’s going to happen after the stadium is lodged into the PoSS. Unless something has changed, then I’d expect interest from the Plenary Group...

I heard a few interviews with Geoff Jones, the head of TEG, and one of the interesting points was that Tasmania is no more or less expensive to get to than Townsville and Perth. While you have to pay to get trucks on the boat, this is offset by not having to pay for fuel to drive them while...

The private involvement is for the entire precinct, not just the stadium. Read up on how PPPs work and it’ll begin to make some sense

That’s wrong sorry mate, the PoSS process is yet to commence. MPDC is still finalising the submission to the planning commission.

I can assure you I’m following the stadium issue and debate extremely closely and speak to high level in the knows fairly regularly. I have heard nothing of the sort regarding Plenary or other private backers withdrawing interest. In fact it’s only grown with Tetris and WeBuild also reportedly...

Source?

No. The RSLs stadium position is 85% political, 10% financial and 5% out of sightline concern. Why else would they actively endorse the Stadium 2.0 proposal, which Casts shadow directly over the Cenotaph grounds at 6am on ANZAC Day Would see the Queens Battery which is currently entombed...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-07/new-images-hobart-proposed-afl-macquarie-point-stadium-released/104034208

What are you referring to where the AFL has said its willing to pitch in more money? Can you point us to quotes or a source? I think the $15m is pretty firm

Designs are done and have been viewed by AFL heirachy. Roof is on and not going anywhere.

A Public Private Partnership is hard without the "public" part. There wont be any state or federal money committed to 2.0. This is extremely well established. AFL wont be pivoting, and they've made this public. EOI process for private backers will be open for 1.0 in the coming weeks, as...

A matter of time? It's been knocked back like 3 times now. Fully backed financially? By who? We've never been told No public funding, no land, no approvals, no AFL support and a ton of flaws which have been detailed. Its not happening.

This is bunkum. It doesn’t tick the AFL boxes, the AFL has flatly rejected it. It’s has $0 of government funding (state or fed) and has been rejected multiple times by the state. The 2.0 proponents do not even have a site as half of its broader development encompasses the Mac Point site. The...