Independent report into Hobart's proposed new stadium has found the costs of the project have been significantly underestimated

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

It started the turnaround in high picks leaving them and was a deliberate strategy from the club that appeared to work well. I thought everybody knew this, they couldn't retain any high picks prior to this.

View attachment 2201334

A Recruiting strategy that produced 4 of their 23 premiership players isn’t sustainable and imo is also crap. The very next draft they used two first round picks on players from the city. No doubt you take the player who is less likely to leave but as it’s been shown with Brisbane, it’s unlikely you can build a side around country Vic kids.

 

[Rotayjay]

An infrastructure project going over budget? Never!

 

[errant bounce]

An infrastructure project going over budget? Never!

It's such a stupid pearl clutching, alarmist tangent. it's impossible to budget for a household – phone dies, bills go up, Christmas is coming around – so with as many moving parts as a highway, hospital, or stadium, what do you think is going to happen? a material becomes scarce, workers strike, new legislation or standards inevitably change over four years, a political party might even turn over.

Taxes are constantly pissed away. Robbie Williams 'free concerts,' getting an extra person or two on that interstate work junket, dodgy contracts and agreements, some ex-mayor of a bumpkin small town on a pension and going to parliament house for his free roast dinner...

It's not even worth worrying about, like 70% of public funds are probably grossly or ineptly pissed away.

It is also not a dichotomy. people love the old 'but we need a new hospital!' well that hospital wasn't built in the last 25 years, why will it be now? rail projects are built for plenty of reasons, but it's not because of a straw poll against resourcing services, putting up wages, or a new tourism campaign.

The only known is that you very very rarely look back and go 'jeez that was the wrong time to build that.' there's proposals for 20,000 capacity stadiums with intentionally cheap amenities like no concourses, few exits, food trucks instead of built in kitchens that are budgeted to cost as much as Optus Stadium. and that budget included significant rail creations and upgrades.

 

[T2B_]

It's such a stupid pearl clutching, alarmist tangent. it's impossible to budget for a household – phone dies, bills go up, Christmas is coming around – so with as many moving parts as a highway, hospital, or stadium, what do you think is going to happen? a material becomes scarce, workers strike, new legislation or standards inevitably change over four years, a political party might even turn over.

Taxes are constantly pissed away. Robbie Williams 'free concerts,' getting an extra person or two on that interstate work junket, dodgy contracts and agreements, some ex-mayor of a bumpkin small town on a pension and going to parliament house for his free roast dinner...

It's not even worth worrying about, like 70% of public funds are probably grossly or ineptly pissed away.

It is also not a dichotomy. people love the old 'but we need a new hospital!' well that hospital wasn't built in the last 25 years, why will it be now? rail projects are built for plenty of reasons, but it's not because of a straw poll against resourcing services, putting up wages, or a new tourism campaign.

The only known is that you very very rarely look back and go 'jeez that was the wrong time to build that.' there's proposals for 20,000 capacity stadiums with intentionally cheap amenities like no concourses, few exits, food trucks instead of built in kitchens that are budgeted to cost as much as Optus Stadium. and that budget included significant rail creations and upgrades.

Nail. Head. Hammer

 

[ApplecrossWC]

It's such a stupid pearl clutching, alarmist tangent. it's impossible to budget for a household – phone dies, bills go up, Christmas is coming around – so with as many moving parts as a highway, hospital, or stadium, what do you think is going to happen? a material becomes scarce, workers strike, new legislation or standards inevitably change over four years, a political party might even turn over.

You are missing the main one, the construction companies deliberately underquote to get the contract. The government probably knows this and goes along with it anyway because it's more palatable to the public.

 

[ApplecrossWC]

Giants, Tassie, GC will all be seen as the right move in the years come, and from then on.

People keep saying this but GWS is 14 years old and GC is already 16. How many more years do you think it will be before it will be seen as the "right move"?

 

[Jezzitizle]

People keep saying this but GWS is 14 years old and GC is already 16. How many more years do you think it will be before it will be seen as the "right move"?

I mean, I think many people would already understand why it was the right move.

But if you mean by getting larger crowds, I think that is a 2-3 generations+ thing. I think people need to grow up with the team, bring their kids along and so on.

16 years is nothing, it is a very long term move starting a new club.

 

[errant bounce]

I mean, I think many people would already understand why it was the right move.

But if you mean by getting larger crowds, I think that is a 2-3 generations+ thing. I think people need to grow up with the team, bring their kids along and so on.

16 years is nothing, it is a very long term move starting a new club.

Total cope, I think the Suns have done pretty well considering all the other codes' failures there and the pitiful existence they've had. still not outstanding, though. but GWS is horrible. very very minimal crowd growth, a third of their games outside their own state, but fairly consistent finals and a Grand Final. they are horrible, but Victorians especially have a weird hard on for them.

 

[Saucery]

Yes, but to get back on topic Tasmania is one of the poorest states in the country with by far the lowest GDP and almost zero population growth. Around 1/3 of the 500,000 residents live in the North, so at least 2 hours away from Hobart (up to 4 for some).

The whole "well you all wanted your own team" thing is mostly true, but no one was told it would cost 1 billion dollars plus to set one up. In truth if the government spent even half that on freight equalization support (so Tasmanian farmers could compete equally on the mainland) the benefits would be extraordinary. We have little to no heavy industry here and no financial or IT sector at all, it's just agriculture/aquaculture and a bit of mining and forestry. And it's the same in terms
of costs in bringing goods from the mainland, we call it the "Tassie tax".

A 25,000-seat stadium will only cater to those who can afford such a largess, even though each and every Tasmanian will have to fork out around $1400 to just build the thing.

I am for a Tasmanian team, but not at this cost.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Yes, but to get back on topic Tasmania is one of the poorest states in the country with by far the lowest GDP and almost zero population growth.

That's why Tasmania has been given $240m by the Federal government.

The whole "well you all wanted your own team" is mostly true, but no one was told it would cost 1 billion dollars plus to set one up.

No independent economist is supporting that $1b+ claim. Gruen couldn't find any peer willing to go above $860m (i.e. about 10% over budget, the same as every comparable project in the last 15 years). Next.

 

[Saucery]

That's why Tasmania has been given $240m by the Federal government.


No independent economist is supporting that $1b+ claim. Gruen couldn't find any peer willing to go above $860m (i.e. about 10% over budget, the same as every comparable project in the last 15 years). Next.

Yes and it's nice they have finally told us it won't come out of our GST budget. I'm not sure what "Next" is supposed to mean, I'm concerned about my state's finances, I think I have a right to be.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Yes, but to get back on topic Tasmania is one of the poorest states in the country with by far the lowest GDP and almost zero population growth. Around 1/3 of the 500,000 residents live in the North, so at least 2 hours away from Hobart (up to 4 for some).

The whole "well you all wanted your own team" thing is mostly true, but no one was told it would cost 1 billion dollars plus to set one up. In truth if the government spent even half that on freight equalization support (so Tasmanian farmers could compete equally on the mainland) the benefits would be extraordinary. We have little to no heavy industry here and no financial or IT sector at all, it's just agriculture/aquaculture and a bit of mining and forestry. And it's the same in terms
of costs in bringing goods from the mainland, we call it the "Tassie tax".

A 25,000-seat stadium will only cater to those who can afford such a largess, even though each and every Tasmanian will have to fork out around $1400 to just build the thing.

I am for a Tasmanian team, but not at this cost.

One of the things that amused me when I moved to the mainland is that, because it's such a pain in the arse to get anywhere, pretty much any time mainlanders get in the car it's a journey (unless you're going to work.)

Having grown up in Launceston it always struck as me as strange, cos trips to Devonport or Scotsdale or even Hobart weren't "a journey". You might just get up one day and decide to go visit someone, or decide to get up and go to the cricket, or your mum felt like going to Big W on the eastern shore.

What I'm saying is that, while 2 hours sounds very significant to mainlanders who would never do that on a whim, it kind of aint shit to most Tasmanians.

There are a lot of anti-stadium arguments that have some merit, I've made some of them myself. But this north/south issue, tyranny of distance argument isn't one of those with merit IMO.

 

[Saucery]

One of the things that amused me when I moved to the mainland is that, because it's such a pain in the arse to get anywhere, pretty much any time mainlanders get in the car it's a journey (unless you're going to work.)

Having grown up in Launceston it always struck as me as strange, cos trips to Devonport or Scotsdale or even Hobart weren't "a journey". You might just get up one day and decide to go visit someone, or decide to get up and go to the cricket, or your mum felt like going to Big W on the eastern shore.

What I'm saying is that, while 2 hours sounds very significant to mainlanders who would never do that on a whim, it kind of aint shit to most Tasmanians.

There are a lot of anti-stadium arguments that have some merit, I've made some of them myself. But this north/south issue, tyranny of distance argument isn't one of those with merit IMO.

OK I acknowledge your experience, but I work at the Deloraine tip (some times Westbury) and the number of people who tell me it's to far to drive to one or the other (they are open different days) is astounding. Many say they rarely go to Launceston as it's too far (30 mins). There are many here who never or rarely leave their hometowns. To say it "ain't shit to most Tasmanians'" is not my experience at all.

 

[D-N-R]

That's why Tasmania has been given $240m by the Federal government.


No independent economist is supporting that $1b+ claim. Gruen couldn't find any peer willing to go above $860m (i.e. about 10% over budget, the same as every comparable project in the last 15 years). Next.

If they are budgeting for $860m then I can see it blowing out to a billion quite easily. There haven't been any blow outs in cost yet because the work hasn't started. This report has just moved the starting line.

Are there enough workers in Tassie to do the job or will they have to import them from the mainland at higher rates? What if commodity prices take a turn for the worse? Plus this thing has a big dome over it - that'll have teething issues for sure.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

One of the things that amused me when I moved to the mainland is that, because it's such a pain in the arse to get anywhere, pretty much any time mainlanders get in the car it's a journey (unless you're going to work.)

Having grown up in Launceston it always struck as me as strange, cos trips to Devonport or Scotsdale or even Hobart weren't "a journey". You might just get up one day and decide to go visit someone, or decide to get up and go to the cricket, or your mum felt like going to Big W on the eastern shore.

What I'm saying is that, while 2 hours sounds very significant to mainlanders who would never do that on a whim, it kind of aint shit to most Tasmanians.

There are a lot of anti-stadium arguments that have some merit, I've made some of them myself. But this north/south issue, tyranny of distance argument isn't one of those with merit IMO.

That's the exact opposite to when I was in Launceston. Two hours was psychologically more like five to mainlanders (and about 2.5 to 3 in petrol costs). You might do a day trip to Hobart, but not often (we did one or two a year for cricket).

Because nobody's commute was more than 20 minutes, anything much over an hour was a "long drive". Devonport was sort of the extent of how far people would travel without much thought.
No way would anyone have gone to Hobart every second week for a footy game. But no way would anyone have supported a Hobart dominated team anyway.

 

[Teen Wolf]

If they are budgeting for $860m

? They aren't.

The guy who wrote this hamfisted report searched high and low to find a peer to agree with his $1b+ claim. He failed.

Closest he could get was the Xmirus report, which said it might blow out by about 10% to $860m, factoring in things like delays and market changes etc.

 

[Saucery]

? They aren't.

The guy who wrote this hamfisted report searched high and low to find a peer to agree with his $1b+ claim. He failed.

Closest he could get was the Xmirus report, which said it might blow out by about 10% to $860m, factoring in things like delays and market changes etc.

Does that also factor in relocation of the goods shed or others as the car park, kitchens and food and beverage facilities and the CCTV system? I know they are being touted as being privately funded but that will mean they will want to make a profit from those services. We still don't know who is in the mix for this and if the parent companies are on the mainland this money will just go offshore. I'm not trying to be smart I am genuinely interested as it seems everyone is lying to some extent; it's just my experiences and trust of the AFL (after they killed my club) is not great. As for this state government I'd rather have Mr Bean in charge.

 

[errant bounce]

Yes, but to get back on topic Tasmania is one of the poorest states in the country with by far the lowest GDP and almost zero population growth. Around 1/3 of the 500,000 residents live in the North, so at least 2 hours away from Hobart (up to 4 for some).

The whole "well you all wanted your own team" thing is mostly true, but no one was told it would cost 1 billion dollars plus to set one up. In truth if the government spent even half that on freight equalization support (so Tasmanian farmers could compete equally on the mainland) the benefits would be extraordinary. We have little to no heavy industry here and no financial or IT sector at all, it's just agriculture/aquaculture and a bit of mining and forestry. And it's the same in terms
of costs in bringing goods from the mainland, we call it the "Tassie tax".

A 25,000-seat stadium will only cater to those who can afford such a largess, even though each and every Tasmanian will have to fork out around $1400 to just build the thing.

I am for a Tasmanian team, but not at this cost.

How much do you think it costs to start a brand new team in one of the world's most lucrative domestic competitions?

Sometimes when you're treading water you need to take a risk. how else is Tasmania's economy going to grow?

A billion dollars really isn't that much, either. they're spending $300 million on a pissy upgrade to a second rate stadium in Penrith.

Governments don't just decide between this and that, and putting a billion dollars into 'farmers' will result in about a third of that going to consultancy fees, analysing ways of using the money, planning...

Like, do you think it just costs a few bucks or something to hire 100 full time staff, heaps of planners, to build a suitably modern stadium, get some light rail involved, clubrooms and secondary sites in the north...

 

[errant bounce]

That's the exact opposite to when I was in Launceston. Two hours was psychologically more like five to mainlanders (and about 2.5 to 3 in petrol costs). You might do a day trip to Hobart, but not often (we did one or two a year for cricket).

Because nobody's commute was more than 20 minutes, anything much over an hour was a "long drive". Devonport was sort of the extent of how far people would travel without much thought.
No way would anyone have gone to Hobart every second week for a footy game. But no way would anyone have supported a Hobart dominated team anyway.

You're not after people going every second week, though, and with Launceston probably getting two games a season and the Hobart stadium having a 30-ish-thousand capacity, the proximity to Melbourne, people from WA or SA who have never been and might duck down, you only need the average non-Hobart resident to go once a year. which isn't that wild at all considering it is just a drive.

If the state government do it well and market it around art events and the AFL set up academies in say Launceston, Devonport, and Burnie then you'll end up with a pretty good financial and committed ecosystem of keen locals and enough fly in tourists.

It's why the stadium can't be half arsed. I wouldn't care about going to watch Freo at shitty cold Blundstone but if it's a genuinely unique stadium and there's heaps of effort put into its presentation and they get trams or light rail in and people say 'seriously, go down' then I'd probably go yearly.

 

[Saucery]

How much do you think it costs to start a brand new team in one of the world's most lucrative domestic competitions?

Sometimes when you're treading water you need to take a risk. how else is Tasmania's economy going to grow?

A billion dollars really isn't that much, either. they're spending $300 million on a pissy upgrade to a second rate stadium in Penrith.

Governments don't just decide between this and that, and putting a billion dollars into 'farmers' will result in about a third of that going to consultancy fees, analysing ways of using the money, planning...

Like, do you think it just costs a few bucks or something to hire 100 full time staff, heaps of planners, to build a suitably modern stadium, get some light rail involved, clubrooms and secondary sites in the north...

Well I think I already made my point (though I hate quoting myself, but it's just easier if you missed it).

" In truth if the government spent even half that on freight equalization support (so Tasmanian farmers could compete equally on the mainland) the benefits would be extraordinary. We have little to no heavy industry here and no financial or IT sector at all, it's just agriculture/aquaculture and a bit of mining and forestry. And it's the same in terms of costs in bringing goods from the mainland, we call it the "Tassie tax"."

A billion dollars isn't a lot to a state which generates an enormous amount of income, but to quote myself again.

" Tasmania is one of the poorest states in the country with by far the lowest GDP and almost zero population growth. Around 1/3 of the 500,000 residents live in the North, so at least 2 hours away from Hobart (up to 4 for some)."

As for your assertion that most of the freight equalization money going into "consultancy fees", it's nonsense. Freight equalization already exists here, I'm just talking about putting more funds into this. Once again, this state's economy mostly relies upon primary producers e.g. the farmers, you obviously don't know that.

 

[Saucery]

You're not after people going every second week, though, and with Launceston probably getting two games a season and the Hobart stadium having a 30-ish-thousand capacity, the proximity to Melbourne, people from WA or SA who have never been and might duck down, you only need the average non-Hobart resident to go once a year. which isn't that wild at all considering it is just a drive.

If the state government do it well and market it around art events and the AFL set up academies in say Launceston, Devonport, and Burnie then you'll end up with a pretty good financial and committed ecosystem of keen locals and enough fly in tourists.

It's why the stadium can't be half arsed. I wouldn't care about going to watch Freo at shitty cold Blundstone but if it's a genuinely unique stadium and there's heaps of effort put into its presentation and they get trams or light rail in and people say 'seriously, go down' then I'd probably go yearly.

So, some interstate supporters "might duck down"? How much do you like eastern states telling you westerners how to run your state, make decisions? You seem to have no understanding of my state's unique situations and problems, so your opinions don't really hold a lot of weight with us.

The whole state will have to pay for this, but very, very few will ever get to use the facility; you get that right? I want the team, but not the vanity project. If that means no team then so be it, we have bigger social problems to deal with here; right across the entire state; way beyond having our own football team.

 

[WillHayward]

Why does this thing have to have a roof?

Last I checked, AFL was a winter sport that could be played in wet weather.

By comparison Manchester gets the same amount of rainy days per year but 20 % higher annual rainfall when compared to Hobart.

Manchester is a lot colder than Hobart in winter.

Manchester City Etihad stadium does not have a roof.

 

[Freomaniac]

They’d want to start pulling their finger out with this or what?

I rather give the bloke on your avatar 100 million in cash to make the Tassie stadium.

Mr Nolan can get the right staff and resources to make the stadium. Probably get it done in time too.

 

[Sttew]

But if they don't build that stadium I reckon call the whole thing off. Like Adelaide, it will only work if a world-class stadium within waking distance of the city.

Did I hear a federal election is imminent? Watch the two major parties throw millions at the new stadium…

 

[Saucery]

Did I hear a federal election is imminent? Watch the two major parties throw millions at the new stadium…

God, I wish they would but there's only a handful of seats here, none really marginal. If that were the case, it should happen every election regardless of the project. The Liberals will concentrate on crushing the Teals to regain old ground and Labor will just try and shore up their gains. At least that's how I see it unfolding.