Will the Adelaide Oval Redevelopment go ahead?

[Hondo]

I assume you were so consumed on ramming your own personal agenda down the rest of our throats. That you just forgot about that info.

Thanks pot ... or is it kettle?

You say this when you know you are voting based on a personal agenda completely in the face of what the SACA and the SANFL want. These being two organisations that you claim to passionately support. All because of a couple of $100 in membership fees and some pipe dream about a brand new stadium.

Mate, vote how you like! The word is you''ll get a second vote if the first one comes up negative.

I am happy to hear about the various proposed membership costs BTW .. you should have all the info soon. You tell us! Maybe we'll be more sympathetic. You often talk in this hyped up rhetoric spinning harder than Mike Rann's very best spin doctor, attacking other posters at the same time. Just tell us the facts.

[Royal City]

I assume you were so consumed on ramming your own personal agenda down the rest of our throats. That you just forgot about that info.

Thanks pot ... or is it kettle?

You know you are voting purely on a selfish personal agenda completely in the face of what the SACA and the SANFL want. These being two organisations that you claim to passionately support. All because of a couple of $100 in membership fees and some pipe dream about a brand new stadium.

Mate, vote how you like! The word is you''ll get a second vote if the first one comes up negative.

and you have proven beyond doubt you are trying to persuades peoples vote. In an organisation you aren't a member of Just to allign those with your own personal agenda. And as you concede you don't even know the relevant costs. You need to try and make it less obvious hondo.

For the record all I have stated is how I will vote and why. How one saca members vote can cause such an uproar amongst non-members of that organisation is astonishing. Just shows how desperate some have become.

[Hondo]

I am not trying to persuade your vote RC. I'd be better off trying to get Tony Abbott to vote Labor.

2% of the population seemingly have the fate of the development in their hands. Some of the other 98% are allowed to challenge the reasons being put up for why people are voting no. Most of the reasons I have seen are borne out of self-interest. I'll give credit where it's due at least Dutchy in asking about the drop in pitch is looking out for what is best for the SACA, not what's best for him personally. I respect that.

Just post up the proposed new membership costs and we can have a rational discussion about them.

[heater31]

Just post up the proposed new membership costs and we can have a rational discussion about them.

Problem is that in a recent members survey the sample membership options were vague and ridiculously overpriced compared to what SACA members already pay each year.

Members currently pay around $400 odd but the survey proposed figures of $1000 upwards for summer and winter options the SMA can go jump in the lake IMO.

[Hondo]

Was it an extra $600 for the 22 AFL games?

It would be good to get the latest proposed figures posted up for the sake of the debate.

[heater31]

Was it an extra $600 for the 22 AFL games?

It would be good to get the latest proposed figures posted up for the sake of the debate.

it was just a survey and worded in a way would you be prepared to..... I wish I wrote the figures down. I can recall one figure was in the region of $1500


the $1000 was for Summer/Crows or Power I think

[dedja]

well the 'expected windfall' has to come from somewhere ...

[Royal City]

Was it an extra $600 for the 22 AFL games?

It would be good to get the latest proposed figures posted up for the sake of the debate.

a Vital Bit of info I would of thought. Especially for someone so certain.

For the record I'm against drop in pitches at adelaide oval aswell. I wonder if that will be ok for me to think that ???

I love how a saca member defending the value of his own membership is seen as selfish and looking after own interest.

But someone who admits they haven't got any idea on the costs for the new memberships. Who has been assuring all and sundry this is the way to go without even considering this very vital bit of info. A very deliberate and selfish act in my books.

If your not trying to persuade people how to vote. Why you arguing with how I'm voting ??? Why not as I have suggested 5 times move on. let me guess everyone elseS opinion fine but you 100% know my motivation is wrong.
Hondo IMHO you simply do not have a clue and need to stop guessing.

[smac]

What's your issue with drop in pitches? Les Burdett and Damian Hough both have no issue with them, players have rated the MCG drop in pitch equal to the Adelaide Oval pitch in recent seasons... If the curators and players are ok with it, what issue can a spectator have as they look just the same?

[Hondo]

So doesn't Royal City know for sure on membership prices either then?

Why wouldn't that surprise me?

[Hondo]

But someone who admits they haven't got any idea on the costs for the new memberships. Who has been assuring all and sundry this is the way to go without even considering this very vital bit of info. A very deliberate and selfish act in my books.

It seems you don't know either!

Mate, this development is bigger than a couple of $100 on your membership fee IMO. Even if it was $300 I still think it's the right thing for the state. So you'll need to try another argument on me.

If that's a reason to vote no then you've proved my point .... ie, member self interest v the bigger picture. It's not you I have an issue with BTW. I would expect members to look after their own interests to some extent. It's the system that's given you the final say (with the conflict of interest you admit to) that's wrong.

[Royal City]

But someone who admits they haven't got any idea on the costs for the new memberships. Who has been assuring all and sundry this is the way to go without even considering this very vital bit of info. A very deliberate and selfish act in my books.

It seems you don't know either!

Mate, this development is bigger than a couple of $100 on your membership fee IMO. Even if it was $300 I still think it's the right thing for the state. So you'll need to try another argument on me.

If that's a reason to vote know then you've proved my point .... ie, member self interest v the bigger picture. It's not you I have an issue with BTW. I would expect members to look after their own interests to some extent. It's the system that's given you the final say (with the conflict of interest you admit to) that's wrong.

hahahahah. all saca members received the survey on the membership costs I know the options unlike you. You'll be very surprised at the prices and as I have repeatedly suggested just wait until you have all the info before you make your decision.

You really need to stop this rc has no idea what he is talking about but every other saca member does.

The cost associated with Adelaide oval memberships is not an irrelevant issue like you would like to make out. Of not packaged correctly it will have a massive impact it's success.

So hondo you would label your own crows members who are struggling and refuse to pay the extra $300 as selfish for
not looking at the bigger picture ?? Or is it just me ??

[The Sleeping Giant]

I would argue that the drop in pitches are a hell of a lot better than the old MCG pitches. One day pitches certainly.

[whufc]

But someone who admits they haven't got any idea on the costs for the new memberships. Who has been assuring all and sundry this is the way to go without even considering this very vital bit of info. A very deliberate and selfish act in my books.

It seems you don't know either!

Mate, this development is bigger than a couple of $100 on your membership fee IMO. Even if it was $300 I still think it's the right thing for the state. So you'll need to try another argument on me.

If that's a reason to vote know then you've proved my point .... ie, member self interest v the bigger picture. It's not you I have an issue with BTW. I would expect members to look after their own interests to some extent. It's the system that's given you the final say (with the conflict of interest you admit to) that's wrong.

hahahahah. all saca members received the survey on the membership costs I know the options unlike you. You'll be very surprised at the prices and as I have repeatedly suggested just wait until you have all the info before you make your decision.

You really need to stop this rc has no idea what he is talking about but every other saca member does.

The cost associated with Adelaide oval memberships is not an irrelevant issue like you would like to make out. Of not packaged correctly it will have a massive impact it's success.

So hondo you would label your own crows members who are struggling and refuse to pay the extra $300 as selfish for
not looking at the bigger picture ?? Or is it just me ??

Mate, i think your arguing with a bloke who is feeling a tad insignificant and jealous because unlike yourself he doesnt have a voice in this decision!
So his trying to scare other people into making the decision he wants.

[cripple]

I have missed the last couple of pages of posts discussed on this topic so excuse me if this has already been brought up.

i fail to see how any SACA member can complain about value for money with a new year long membership proposed at $1000 bucks when most current SACA members are happy to spend upwards of $300 on 5 days of test cricket and 2 other international days of cricket. Now you will say you get other things included in that and what not but the reality for the majority is there happy spending this exorbitant amount at the moment and want even get to those 7 days of cricket. It would be an absolute travesty if these same members scuppered the whole project that is in the best interests of the state moving forward.

I was fortunate enough to speak with some heavies at the MCG this week past and was surprised to find out that at present, the oldest fixture there are the light towers which were built in 1985. The fact this decision for redevelopment is dragging out so long is beyond a joke and the fact it might still fall over has the potential to be a very big embarrassment for the state.

[whufc]

I have missed the last couple of pages of posts discussed on this topic so excuse me if this has already been brought up.

i fail to see how any SACA member can complain about value for money with a new year long membership proposed at $1000 bucks when most current SACA members are happy to spend upwards of $300 on 5 days of test cricket and 2 other international days of cricket. Now you will say you get other things included in that and what not but the reality for the majority is there happy spending this exorbitant amount at the moment and want even get to those 7 days of cricket. It would be an absolute travesty if these same members scuppered the whole project that is in the best interests of the state moving forward.

I was fortunate enough to speak with some heavies at the MCG this week past and was surprised to find out that at present, the oldest fixture there are the light towers which were built in 1985. The fact this decision for redevelopment is dragging out so long is beyond a joke and the fact it might still fall over has the potential to be a very big embarrassment for the state.

im guessing if your a SACA member and you have absolutly no interest in the AFL then any price increase would be a decrease in your value for money!

[cripple]

I have missed the last couple of pages of posts discussed on this topic so excuse me if this has already been brought up.

i fail to see how any SACA member can complain about value for money with a new year long membership proposed at $1000 bucks when most current SACA members are happy to spend upwards of $300 on 5 days of test cricket and 2 other international days of cricket. Now you will say you get other things included in that and what not but the reality for the majority is there happy spending this exorbitant amount at the moment and want even get to those 7 days of cricket. It would be an absolute travesty if these same members scuppered the whole project that is in the best interests of the state moving forward.

I was fortunate enough to speak with some heavies at the MCG this week past and was surprised to find out that at present, the oldest fixture there are the light towers which were built in 1985. The fact this decision for redevelopment is dragging out so long is beyond a joke and the fact it might still fall over has the potential to be a very big embarrassment for the state.

im guessing if your a SACA member and you have absolutly no interest in the AFL then any price increase would be a decrease in your value for money!

Then you get the summer only membership and dont miss out on anything you dont currently have. Why deprive the rest of the state of better facilities because you might lose access to a ground that is barely used in winter at present.

[Gingernuts]

You lay it out for me ginger. So you can prove to all you have your finger on the pulse and are really doing the best thing for all. Not just running your own agenda


Lay out for me what you crows/ power fans pay for your membership now . Pointing out all the benefits that come with the memberships currently.

Then run me thru what you'll pay under the new sma agreement. And do a comparison on the benefits for me.

Cos i'm sure you'd know that before blindly committing yourself to this deveopement for the good of all.

I look forward to your response .

Got to love the personal agenda calls from you boys!!!

So - took you half a week and the best you can do is deflect back to me.

"I know you are but what am I? Na na na na na." Still getting the spoilt kid who won't share his play pen vibe RC.

Well - here's my answer (because I actually have the balls to post more than hot air on the topic).

As far as I'm concerned I don't care what will happen to my membership, because this project isn't about me. It's about what's best for the people of Adelaide and South Australia.

I trust the AFC, AFL, and SANFL to work with the SACA and the State Govt to work a deal that will benefit us all.

Anyways, I've wasted enough breath in this thread.

[dedja]

This thread is ...

[smac]

Of course it is, the arguing parties are talking about different things because one party took a lot of posts to get to his point. And his point is moot at this stage because membership costs have yet to be released.