Hobart Stadium: $750 million cost

[Ratdweller]

How about we agree to disagree.... I'm 100% in support of a multipurpose stadium and you aren't, that's fine.

Agreed

 

[Ratdweller]

The Tas govt's unsolicited proposal involved spending $300m+ on a new CBD-based roofed stadium. The AFL accepted it, promised to throw in $15m on top of that, and will also give them another $350m to get the club up and running.

This in turn led to the Federal government contributing an additional $240m, so there goes the sob story about poor Tassie taxpayers being left to fend for themselves.

And the AFL contribution will be a mighty $15 million. It would be a different story if they were being asked to stump up some cash for NSW or QLD. Let's face it, and acknowledge the Elephant in the room, which is that the AFL were never seriously keen on a Tassie team in the first place. It's only my opinion, but I do believe that the insistence of a roof was always about ensuring that the costs and conditions associated with establishing a team there would be too prohibitive from the outset. If the whole thing falls over before 2028, the AFL will probably be popping champagne corks at their Melbourne HQ.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Let's face it, and acknowledge the Elephant in the room, which is that the AFL were never seriously keen on a Tassie team in the first place.

Congrats for figuring that out. It was only mentioned by numerous posters just on the last page alone.

 

[Ratdweller]

Why would the AFL pay for a stadium? They're not the owner, nor are they even a tenant.
It's an extremely generous offer to kick in $15m given the above.

They will be the primary tennant and user. They will make most of the money from games there as well as reap a percentage from merchandise and membership sales for the Tasmanian Devils.

We might equally ask why would the Victorian taxpayers pay for $300 million to upgrade the AFL's Marvel Stadium? By your reasoning, the AFL should completely fund any upgrades to Marvel because that's their property. We shouldn't forget that two decades ago, the AFL kicked in $142 million of the total $430 million that it costed for the Northern Stand redevelopment at the MCG.

 

[The_Wookie]

And the AFL contribution will be a mighty $15 million. It would be a different story if they were being asked to stump up some cash for NSW or QLD. Let's face it, and acknowledge the Elephant in the room, which is that the AFL were never seriously keen on a Tassie team in the first place.

Its not an elephant in the room at all, its been brought up a number of times. The AFL repeatedly said they didnt want a te4am.

It's only my opinion, but I do believe that the insistence of a roof was always about ensuring that the costs and conditions associated with establishing a team there would be too prohibitive from the outset.

Stadium first suggested by Task Force, taken by the Tas Gov and agreed upon by the AFL

If the whole thing falls over before 2028, the AFL will probably be popping champagne corks at their Melbourne HQ.

Not really, its going to be hard to put that genie back in the bottle. There'll be a compromise on something at some point.

 

[Ratdweller]

Congrats for figuring that out. It was only mentioned by numerous posters just on the last page alone.

Onya Captain Sarcastic! Perhaps it just goes to show that me and other "great minds think alike".

 

[Ratdweller]

Not really, its going to be hard to put that genie back in the bottle. There'll be a compromise on something at some point.

That's what I think that most people want. At some point that common sense will prevail.

 

[The_Wookie]

They will be the primary tennant and user. They will make most of the money from games there

That depends on how the stadium agreement is. Outside of Victoria, the AFL makes very little from gate and reserved seating as they are generally club and venue operator revenues, with clubs responsible for match costs (and thats true even in Victoria)

as well as reap a percentage from merchandise and membership sales for the Tasmanian Devils.

We might equally ask why would the Victorian taxpayers pay for $300 million to upgrade the AFL's Marvel Stadium?

Well established that this purchased 20 years of Grand final hosting. And it was 225m.

By your reasoning, the AFL should completely fund any upgrades to Marvel because that's their property. We shouldn't forget that two decades ago, the AFL kicked in $142 million of the total $430 million that it costed for the Northern Stand redevelopment at the MCG.

Two decades ago the AFL did no such thing. The AFL has paid an amount that is indexed annually since the Southern Stand contract was first signed. In return for that, they get the use of a the Southern Stand for the AFL members - a members area that is the same capacity as the entire MacPoint stadium will be.

 

[The_Wookie]

That's what I think that most people want. At some point that common sense will prevail.

That said, theres a signed and binding contract that no one forced the Tasmanian Government into. The AFL well within their rights to hold them to its terms now.

 

[Ratdweller]

That said, theres a signed and binding contract that no one forced the Tasmanian Government into. The AFL well within their rights to hold them to its terms now.

The "Devil" (no pun intended) will be in the details. It certainly is dividing the State over there. It's a massive issue over there and may be the undoing of the current Tasmanian Government. Somebody pointed out in a much earlier post the $325 million to Tasmania with a population of 530,000 would be like Victorians spending 4.3 billion to build a new stadium. Is there anybody here who thinks that Victorians would accept that? Oh yes, I just answered my own question. We've taken tens of billions in cost blow outs on a couple of freeways and tunnels in Melbourne laying down while the rest of the state drives on what's left of our roads. Those in Tasmania arguing for a billion dollars (plus) stadium better get used to hospital ramping, cops not turning up when you need them and roads like Victoria's.

 

[Rob]

They will be the primary tennant and user. They will make most of the money from games there as well as reap a percentage from merchandise and membership sales for the Tasmanian Devils.

The AFL won't be a tenant. The Tasmania Football Club will. Maybe you could argue the AFL might rent the ground for the occasional final, but presumably they'll pay a fee for that.

We might equally ask why would the Victorian taxpayers pay for $300 million to upgrade the AFL's Marvel Stadium? By your reasoning, the AFL should completely fund any upgrades to Marvel because that's their property. We shouldn't forget that two decades ago, the AFL kicked in $142 million of the total $430 million that it costed for the Northern Stand redevelopment at the MCG.

Wasn't that part of the deal to hand the grand final to Victoria until kingdom come?

But hey, if it was up to me the AFL would get out of the stadium business. They don't need stadiums as they don't host games outside of the grand final. Clubs host games. Let them invest in stadiums if they want to.

 

[Bjo187]

The AFL won't be a tenant. The Tasmania Football Club will. Maybe you could argue the AFL might rent the ground for the occasional final, but presumably they'll pay a fee for that.




Wasn't that part of the deal to hand the grand final to Victoria until kingdom come?

But hey, if it was up to me the AFL would get out of the stadium business. They don't need stadiums as they don't host games outside of the grand final. Clubs host games. Let them invest in stadiums if they want to.

Actually that deal for the 230 mill upgrade to marvel the afl got reamed on it in my opinion. If you went to market, the grand final would be worth about 20 mill per year to the afl from different cities bidding.

So even if not allowing for inflation, it should be well over $1 billion the Vic government should have paid. I think there was also something else in the deal, but yeah it was another dumb deal from the afl and a bit lazy.

I think they thought they never wanted to change the location at the time, so it was basically free money. The success of the Brisbane and Perth games showed how this deal is a mistake though, as moving it around is good for the growth of the game nationally and they could have raked in the cash by doing so.

 

[kurt_kb]

No other sport is paying for their stadiums either. A stadium was proposed by the Government. It will be a state asset. Why would the AFL pay for that>

The AFL doesn't even pay for the stadium it does own. Docklands was built for free for it on a 25 year lease to private equity firms, and the latest $225 million redevelopment to it was funded by the Victorian Government. The only money the AFL has ever paid is the $200 million to end the lease a decade early so its tenant clubs would stop being rorted.

 

[The_Wookie]

The AFL doesn't even pay for the stadium it does own.

Sure. Other than

1. The AFL paid $30 million for the freehold title to the land.
2. The AFL paid $270 million in November 2016 to take over the stadium, essentially paying off the ownership consortiums remaining debt in the venue and the assets of Stadium Operations Limited.

Docklands was built for free for it on a 25 year lease to private equity firms

and here another profound misunderstanding of the Docklands project manifests itself.

Docklands was designed from the start as a BOOT project - Build, own, operation, transfer. Essentially it was a rent to own scheme, where the AFL and its clubs paid higher venue costs to the owners ahead of the AFL taking over in 2025.

In the construction phase, the Seven Network had formed a partnership with Baulderstone Hornibrook, Merril Lynch, Westpac and News Limited to form the Docklands Stadium Consortium which was to build an operate the stadium. This was announced by the Premier of Victoria, Jeff Kennet in September 1997. The joint company was known as Stadium Operations Limited.

Upon completion Channel 7 took control of the Stadium, before selling out for $330 million in 2006 to a consortium consisting of National Australia Bank Group’s staff super fund and industry funds such as Retail Employees Superannuation Trust, Western Australia’s Westscheme and South Australia’s Statewide, and managed by a joint entity of Mirvac/Leighton Holdings – Melbourne Stadiums Limited.

, and the latest $225 million redevelopment to it was funded by the Victorian Government. The only money the AFL has ever paid is the $200 million to end the lease a decade early so its tenant clubs would stop being rorted.

Im confused. So the AFL does pay money for the stadium it owns? If it was sold in 2006 for 330 million, by 2016 its depreciated value was probably worth about the 200m the league paid for it, given it already owned the land title. But I mean other than $300m, yeah the AFL never paid anything for it.

 

[Rob]

Actually that deal for the 230 mill upgrade to marvel the afl got reamed on it in my opinion. If you went to market, the grand final would be worth about 20 mill per year to the afl from different cities bidding.

So even if not allowing for inflation, it should be well over $1 billion the Vic government should have paid. I think there was also something else in the deal, but yeah it was another dumb deal from the afl and a bit lazy.

I think they thought they never wanted to change the location at the time, so it was basically free money. The success of the Brisbane and Perth games showed how this deal is a mistake though, as moving it around is good for the growth of the game nationally and they could have raked in the cash by doing so.

No question. It was such a bad deal it reeks of corruption. Certainly makes you wonder if there was a deal off the books with the decision makers at the AFL. The secrecy of the deal adds to the suspicion.

 

[The_Wookie]

No question. It was such a bad deal it reeks of corruption. Certainly makes you wonder if there was a deal off the books with the decision makers at the AFL. The secrecy of the deal adds to the suspicion.

it was all about timing. The total AFL deal also included 65 million in facility upgrades for various Melbourne grounds as well as the 225 million - but this was needed at the time for what the AFL considered to be urgent upgrades to Marvel Stadium.

If the AFL went to market, these grand finals werent going to be availlable for another 20 years. State Governments dont think that far ahead.

Theres also an undisclosed MCG component to this deal which includes the upgrade to the MCG when that takes place in the 2030s.

 

[kurt_kb]

Theres also an undisclosed MCG component to this deal which includes the upgrade to the MCG when that takes place in the 2030s.

It'll be interesting to see how that's funded when it happens given at the moment the MCG is built predominantly on MCC and a little bit of AFL money. At the moment it doesn't seem like any of the parties, MCC, state government, or the AFL have any incentive to invest big money into the ground without either the AFL contract or the MCC lease being lengthened significantly again.

 

[Rob]

it was all about timing. The total AFL deal also included 65 million in facility upgrades for various Melbourne grounds as well as the 225 million - but this was needed at the time for what the AFL considered to be urgent upgrades to Marvel Stadium.

4 years before they signed that deal, the AFL spent $270 million buying out the remaining term on the lease.
And you're saying they were so skint they desperately needed cash so they got sucked into signing a dud deal? That they couldn't take to market because no government would sign it (except the Victorian government of course, cos they're the epitome of good financial management)?

Don't buy it. It's either gross incompetence or corruption on the AFL's part. Or maybe a bit of both.

 

[Bjo187]

it was all about timing. The total AFL deal also included 65 million in facility upgrades for various Melbourne grounds as well as the 225 million - but this was needed at the time for what the AFL considered to be urgent upgrades to Marvel Stadium.

If the AFL went to market, these grand finals werent going to be availlable for another 20 years. State Governments dont think that far ahead.

Theres also an undisclosed MCG component to this deal which includes the upgrade to the MCG when that takes place in the 2030s.

I think this is a case of the afl again doing deals on something that they likely could have gotten the funding for anyway (other than the 230 mill for marvel).

So the facilities, every sport gets these upgraded and paid in full by the government and the mcg great southern stand, why is that even in their remit? It's something the mcc and government are responsible for anyway, when the stand reaches its use by date.

As we have discussed before, they have gotten into the habit of doing deals and chipping in for everything, when they really don't need to, as no other sport does. It's become a significant competitive disadvantage, where they're now expected to pay every time they get some government funding.

 

[kurt_kb]

the mcg great southern stand, why is that even in their remit?

Probably because there was already going to be at least 40-50 games a year there for decades prior to the new deal, and half the southern stand is AFL seating, not tenant club's, so they have an interest in the future of the ground even if they don't like it.

 

[The_Wookie]

4 years before they signed that deal, the AFL spent $270 million buying out the remaining term on the lease.
And you're saying they were so skint they desperately needed cash so they got sucked into signing a dud deal?

It wasnt 4 years, it was 14 months. They took out a 270m loan and took over Docklands in November 2016, the funding deed was signed on April 13 2018.

I dont think it was a dud deal. I think it was a deal they took for the reasons I outlined earlier.

That they couldn't take to market because no government would sign it (except the Victorian government of course, cos they're the epitome of good financial management)?

For the Victorian Government its an extension of an existing agreement. For every other government they arent going to see that a Grand Final before 2038 at the earliest. No state government would do that deal.

Don't buy it. It's either gross incompetence or corruption on the AFL's part. Or maybe a bit of both.

I dont particularly think it was either. I predicted this scenario 4 years before the AFL did the deal when they first started talking about buying out the lease in 2014. Frankly was amazed that more wasnt made of that before hand. They were always going to go to the Government for funding in exchange for Grand Finals.

I think this is a case of the afl again doing deals on something that they likely could have gotten the funding for anyway (other than the 230 mill for marvel).

Not and be tied in with its MCG arrangements they couldnt. That deal was renegotiated as a result.

So the facilities, every sport gets these upgraded and paid in full by the government and the mcg great southern stand, why is that even in their remit? It's something the mcc and government are responsible for anyway, when the stand reaches its use by date.

The MCG usages agreement is a tri partite one between the AFL, the MCC and the Victorian Government. The Southern Stand includes the AFL Reserve - something the AFL very much wanted and wants for its 60,000 odd members, and the AFL pays an annually indexed sum to the MCC as its contribution to the debt funding. Its been this way since 1988, and continued for the Northern Stand development in 2004 ( a development the AFL didnt particularly want or see a need for, but they managed to get their deal renegotiated as a result).

The AFL is STILL on the original 40 year deal - that ends in 2033, but has been extended time and time again. Even without the 20 year extension, it runs to 2059 (thanks to COVID).

As we have discussed before, they have gotten into the habit of doing deals and chipping in for everything, when they really don't need to, as no other sport does.

Stop comparing the AFL to other sports then. It doesnt operate the same way, it doesnt do funding the same way, it doesnt fund its clubs the same way and its a better sport overall for it. The AFL believes it gets better access and more facilities done through partnerships with the Government than just going for handouts.

That said, they put nothing into Optus oval, and literally 5m into Adelaide Oval. Nothing into the SCG reno work. Money into the Showgrounds, Blacktown and Carrara as part of their expansion support. Not entirely sure why they gave any money to Kardinia Park.

It's become a significant competitive disadvantage, where they're now expected to pay every time they get some government funding.

Has it really put them at a competitive disadvantage though? I dont think anyone at the AFL agrees with you.

 

[The_Wookie]

It'll be interesting to see how that's funded when it happens given at the moment the MCG is built predominantly on MCC and a little bit of AFL money.

Its not exactly a little bit, its $7m a year at the moment and indexed annually. And thats outside match costs.

At the moment it doesn't seem like any of the parties, MCC, state government, or the AFL have any incentive to invest big money into the ground without either the AFL contract or the MCC lease being lengthened significantly again.

Both of these have been done already. The AFL contract extension is part and parcel of the 2018 funding deal - according to the deed, the existing agreement was extended for another 20 years, and according to the MCC they renegotiated match returns which took effect from 2019.



The MCC's tenancy at the MCG was extended in 2023 through to 31 October 2059 - with an option to extend for another 25 years, along with its role as ground manager which was also extended through 31 October 2059.

 

[LordLucifer]

‘Stick it’: Senator shreds ‘dud’ AFL deal as damning report reveals Tassie stadium concerns

‘Stick it’: Senator shreds ‘dud’ AFL deal as damning report reveals Tassie stadium concerns

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[Aussie in exile]

‘Stick it’: Senator shreds ‘dud’ AFL deal as damning report reveals Tassie stadium concerns

‘Stick it’: Senator shreds ‘dud’ AFL deal as damning report reveals Tassie stadium concerns

www.foxsports.com.au

Digging into my memory bank i can't think of a large project like this ever being within budget and it surprises me to think that people thought it would be.

 

[Billy ray]

Perth stadium was in budget wasntit