The Stadium!

[Perry Pie]

Do people know what sort of added cost bringing bands over the Bass Strait would be ?....... Many say they won't come here simply because of having to get across the sea and said this is why comparing us to Townsville that recently pulled Pink is not a good comparison.

In the context of an Australian tour the cost of getting to and from Tassie is not excessive. Moving from one city to another requires flights, hotels and trucks, the same things are needed every time you move city. Its all about selling tickets to gigs. That is where a + 20,000 all year round indoor venue makes a difference. All you need to know it how many tickets you sell per night to know if the cost in terms of time & money is worth it,

 

[doggie dog]

Fully agree and I don't think some of the anti's realise how much of an advantage having a roof will give us when attracting bands.

The anti argument is all about lack of opportunity for Tasmania's, whinging that we already have Bellerive for footy.
The new stadium 🏟 is so much more, big name bands/ JJJ sponsored music events, Dark Mofo, and food festivals that highlight tassie fine food and alcohol.

 

[Hodgey 15]

New images reveal Hobart Macquarie Point Stadium scale from Cenotaph

The RSL have previously warned the stadium could dwarf Tasmania’s oldest war memorial…

pulsetasmania.com.au

 

[3rd Grade Maggy]

Fair whiff of 'just asking (slanted) questions' going around here.

 

[fargothegreat]

Amazing that the RSL are complaining about the impact on views, when they currently overlook a bloody sewerage plant and a big gravel carpark and won't under this proposal.

My thinking is that the leadership of the RSL are receiving some sort of kickback from the Mac Point 2.0 proposal that they're not with the government's stadium.

 

[Devski]

Fair whiff of 'just asking (slanted) questions' going around here.

Nothing quite like the smell of Astroturf in the morning

 

[BoomerRoo]

Amazing that the RSL are complaining about the impact on views, when they currently overlook a bloody sewerage plant and a big gravel carpark and won't under this proposal.

My thinking is that the leadership of the RSL are receiving some sort of kickback from the Mac Point 2.0 proposal that they're not with the government's stadium.

Close

 

[fargothegreat]

Close

Care to elaborate?

 

[peetoo]

Rome isn’t so bothered

 

[Mr Tassie]

The investment group Capella Capital has been officially announced as the group that would part fund the Regatta point proposal if it got the go ahead. Let's hope this will lead the state government to soon announce the investment group to part fund their proposal because I'm hearing many say the Regatta Point proposal is the better proposal because they have an investor, but the government proposal doesn't.

 

[BoomerRoo]

The investment group Capella Capital has been officially announced as the group that would part fund the Regatta point proposal if it got the go ahead. Let's hope this will lead the state government to soon announce the investment group to part fund their proposal because I'm hearing many say the Regatta Point proposal is the better proposal because they have an investor, but the government proposal doesn't.

Is that you Daniel?

 

[GudOnya]

The investment group Capella Capital has been officially announced as the group that would part fund the Regatta point proposal if it got the go ahead. Let's hope this will lead the state government to soon announce the investment group to part fund their proposal because I'm hearing many say the Regatta Point proposal is the better proposal because they have an investor, but the government proposal doesn't.

If number of investors is the main criteria for being "better" then the Mac Point proposal is winning hands down.

Apart from a separate group of potential investors wanting to be involved it already has 3, the State Government, the Federal Government and the AFL. Regatta point has none of those.

 

[Red Bull]

Fair whiff of 'just asking (slanted) questions' going around here.

Yep … reckon the games pretty much up …

 

[The_Wookie]

If number of investors is the main criteria for being "better" then the Mac Point proposal is winning hands down.

Apart from a separate group of potential investors wanting to be involved it already has 3, the State Government, the Federal Government and the AFL. Regatta point has none of those.

yeah thats the fun part of this, The AFL is committed to Mac Point. Like contracted and everything.

 

[BoomerRoo]

Credit: Chris Rowbottom ABC News

Some of the issues in summary for 2.0

Huge site and excavation works required -
No site ownership -
AFL not interested -
Feds not interested-
2.0 “impedes sightlines” of bridge from TasPorts tower (per TasPorts)-
No provision for Northern address road -
No detailed traffic/pedestrian plan for 4500 cars-
Built on top of Spotted Handfish habitat-
Only 38m high, needs to be 50+ for cricket-
No detail on planned retractable roof -
Still requires minimum $375m from state (was originally $750m but may have changed)-
Casts shadow over cenotaph grounds on Anzac morning (per 2.0 website) and replaces former Queens Battery with underground carpark-
Aboriginal heritage concerns (Middens I believe)

 

[Mr Tassie]

Credit: Chris Rowbottom ABC News

Some of the issues in summary for 2.0

Huge site and excavation works required -
No site ownership -
AFL not interested -
Feds not interested-
2.0 “impedes sightlines” of bridge from TasPorts tower (per TasPorts)-
No provision for Northern address road -
No detailed traffic/pedestrian plan for 4500 cars-
Built on top of Spotted Handfish habitat-
Only 38m high, needs to be 50+ for cricket-
No detail on planned retractable roof -
Still requires minimum $375m from state (was originally $750m but may have changed)-
Casts shadow over cenotaph grounds on Anzac morning (per 2.0 website) and replaces former Queens Battery with underground carpark-
Aboriginal heritage concerns (Middens I believe)

With a retractable roof it wouldn't be an issue playing cricket there although I agree the detail on the roof isn't available.

 

[Hodgey 15]

Credit: Chris Rowbottom ABC News

Some of the issues in summary for 2.0

Huge site and excavation works required -
No site ownership -
AFL not interested -
Feds not interested-
2.0 “impedes sightlines” of bridge from TasPorts tower (per TasPorts)-
No provision for Northern address road -
No detailed traffic/pedestrian plan for 4500 cars-
Built on top of Spotted Handfish habitat-
Only 38m high, needs to be 50+ for cricket-
No detail on planned retractable roof -
Still requires minimum $375m from state (was originally $750m but may have changed)-
Casts shadow over cenotaph grounds on Anzac morning (per 2.0 website) and replaces former Queens Battery with underground carpark-
Aboriginal heritage concerns (Middens I believe)

That's a lot of hoops to jump through to get that up and running.

 

[Mr Tassie]

That's a lot of hoops to jump through to get that up and running.

The thing is I think we still need to have this as backup inçase the government proposal falls through.

 

[Jazny]

With a retractable roof it wouldn't be an issue playing cricket there although I agree the detail on the roof isn't available.

Calm down please, Paul Lennon.

 

[Mr Tassie]

Calm down please, Paul Lennon.

I support either stadium. We have to keep our options open on all three stadium options.

 

[madmug]

Credit: Chris Rowbottom ABC News

Some of the issues in summary for 2.0

Huge site and excavation works required -
No site ownership -
AFL not interested -
Feds not interested-
2.0 “impedes sightlines” of bridge from TasPorts tower (per TasPorts)-
No provision for Northern address road -
No detailed traffic/pedestrian plan for 4500 cars-
Built on top of Spotted Handfish habitat-
Only 38m high, needs to be 50+ for cricket-
No detail on planned retractable roof -
Still requires minimum $375m from state (was originally $750m but may have changed)-
Casts shadow over cenotaph grounds on Anzac morning (per 2.0 website) and replaces former Queens Battery with underground carpark-
Aboriginal heritage concerns (Middens I believe)

I think the Tasports concern is a bit silly. Haven't they heard of CAMERAS.

 

[Perry Pie]

The thing is I think we still need to have this as backup inçase the government proposal falls through.

If Mac Point fails we are back to the start... at that point TCA ground & Domain come back into play as does Stadium 3.0.

2.0 is a pipe dream, a money tree for developers and dire liability for taxpayers (far higher risk than Mac Point).

I just do not see Mac Point failing now. We need to keep going at pace with the team (that is happening). The team and stadium will be great for winter tourism and for state and city reputation.

 

[Mr Tassie]

Do people know how the ticketing works for afl games in Hobart. It was interesting to see this morning basically all seating was sold out and then suddenly they released lots more seating at around midday less than two hours before the game. I can't understand why they do this because it means people don't have any time to make arrangements to attend the game.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

If Mac Point fails we are back to the start... at that point TCA ground & Domain come back into play as does Stadium 3.0.

2.0 is a pipe dream, a money tree for developers and dire liability for taxpayers (far higher risk than Mac Point).

I just do not see Mac Point failing now. We need to keep going at pace with the team (that is happening). The team and stadium will be great for winter tourism and for state and city reputation.

Mac Point won’t fail. TCA and Domain are more problematic than Mac Point and Regatta Point. This is the summary of the site selection report that was undertaken before Mac Point was even chosen. As you can see, those other sites didn’t even come close.

 

[madmug]

If Mac Point fails we are back to the start... at that point TCA ground & Domain come back into play as does Stadium 3.0.

2.0 is a pipe dream, a money tree for developers and dire liability for taxpayers (far higher risk than Mac Point).

I just do not see Mac Point failing now. We need to keep going at pace with the team (that is happening). The team and stadium will be great for winter tourism and for state and city reputation.

No. 2.0 has Hotel, Apartments, Private Hospital & underground parking associated with it, All of which is what the big investors want to back. Facilities that Hobart could well do with. Its precisely why the Hobart city council unanimously support it, as well as local businesses. The extra facilities are what gives the stadium an income stream to pay the investment off over 30 years or less. Its why it creates many more jobs & makes it an overall better economic proposition.
The Stadium part has a guarantee limiting Government input at the $750million. The 'risk' is taken by the private investors. Its a classic public private partnership.