Reasons to Vote "NO"

[Hondo]

How much $ are footy putting into this again?

God you guys are like repetitive parrots that belong to Greg Howe

How much are cricket putting in?

This is where May-Z tells us about the "contribution of assets to the proposal" it's close to the most ridiculous spin of the whole NO vote purely designed to create a footy v cricket mentality that clearly has sucked in the gullible. You guys thought you were avoiding SACA spin yet you were sucked right into the NO vote spin without realising it.

How can taking $18m out of SACA coffers per year for the next 10 years at least be "good for cricket" as you claim. A claim you made with no explanation other than your usual vague one liners. How can the similar amount out of SANFL coffers be "good for football" while you are at it.

Your contribution to this thread has been pretty poor IMO even though you think you have been really open. Vague hints, one liners, emoticons but never a full explanation of your position.

[cripple]

How much $ are footy putting into this again?

God you guys are like repetitive parrots that belong to Greg Howe

How much are cricket putting in?

This is where May-Z tells us about the "contribution of assets to the proposal" it's close to the most ridiculous spin of the whole NO vote purely designed to create a footy v cricket mentality that clearly has sucked in the gullible. You guys thought you were avoiding SACA spin yet you were sucked right into the NO vote spin without realising it.

How can taking $18m out of SACA coffers per year for the next 10 years at least be "good for cricket" as you claim. A claim you made with no explanation other than your usual vague one liners. How can the similar amount out of SANFL coffers be "good for football" while you are at it.

Your contribution to this thread has been pretty poor IMO even though you think you have been really open. Vague hints, one liners, emoticons but never a full explanation of your position.

I thought you would have figured out by now hondo that you can't explain the inexplicable . This is frustrating me no end over this side of the border, i can only imagine what it is doing to the yes voters in SA.

[Dutchy]

Ive outlined my 3 key points ages ago and havent waivered from that at all. So SACA dont put anything in but IMO lose so much more.

Ive voted against this proposal because IMO it will give what 95% of South Aussies want, a new seperate CBD stadium. Long term that is what the state needs also...

On a side note I havent gotten into the finance debate but the article in todays paper confirms no one knows or can answer the inevitable $ over run question -

Critically, SACA members will vote not knowing if the $535 million in state funds allocated will be enough and who will pay if not.

Director of major projects Rod Hook has indicated the final stadium cost won't be known for months. Economic modelling supporting the initiative also has been contested.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/adelaide- ... 6047260270

[mighty_tiger_79]

i dont get a vote

i would be voting no

make the AFL/SANFL build a new stadium and even put a roof on it the afl are supposed to be in charge of developing the game and the sanfl will get a nice little pay day when they either sell or lease off west lakes

could also have adelaide united play games there.

[Ecky]

How much $ are footy putting into this again?

God you guys are like repetitive parrots that belong to Greg Howe

I reckon everyone in this thread on both sides have become repetitive parrots after 41 pages.
It's at the stage where I reckon I can exactly predict everyone's responses now!

[Hondo]

Ive voted against this proposal because IMO it will give what 95% of South Aussies want, a new seperate CBD stadium. Long term that is what the state needs also...

Jebus, you're not voting on a new CBD stadium here What price do you want the SANFL and the SACA to pay for however many years until you get your new stadium?

95% of us would like a new Mercedes too. Long term (30 year-50 years) I agree the city needs a new stadium eventually. A new stadium AND a properly developed AO. We should be set up with the prime footy & cricket oval being the AO with the spillover going off to the second stadium, not the other way around.

[Hondo]

I reckon everyone in this thread on both sides have become repetitive parrots after 41 pages.
It's at the stage where I reckon I can exactly predict everyone's responses now!

Maybe ... probably

But the "footy is putting in nothing" argument is straight spin off the NO web-site and even Dutchy kind of acknowledged this in his response, to his credit.

Don't give me NO vote spin! He wants a new CBD stadium and that's why he's voting no, fine. At least it's his opinion and not Greg Howe cut and paste opinion.

I don't think Dutchy has been as clear as he thinks on his reasons for voting no. Until today I would have said the Shield Final was his main issue and, in fact, I am sure he said that a few pages ago. Anyway, it is what it is.

[heater31]

Heater, I assume you are campaigning against all other current or planned Government capital works?

Yes, I have serious concerns with all capital expenditure with Government Projects. Desal plant already a disaster cost wise and not something essential IMO, RAH cost spiralling out of control heck even the new Swimming pool doubled its initial costings

YOU HEATER (and others), are our states problem, SICK of it, take a second and read what you just wrote!!!!!
NO voters should cop the blame if this dies like so many other positive projects do in this state. What is wrong with our new swimming pool you id.........iot!!!!!, what is wrong with the tram line! etc etc etc. move with the times and accept progress and change otherwise we (SA) will die much quicker than we already are. OPEN your eyes.
Yes i've had a few beers but for F**kSake!!

Typical of today's Generation Y, I WANT, I WANT IT NOW!!! All well and good to want these things but you must be able to pay for them in the first place. We have already been committed to a a Desal plant that has been rushed, New Hospital that according to media reports is going to cost much more than anticipated, a new Superway which the design team can't keep in front of the construction team wasting more money.


Who pays for all this? Its me and you for the next 30 years in the mean time our government sells off assets left right and centre. For example Labor are prepared to sell off the Forestry Harvest rights for the next 100 years placing a massive cloud over The Green Triangle employment options yet it is people like you AFLFlyer can't see past the toll gate that there is more to South Australia than just Adelaide.

[AFLflyer]

Typical of today's Generation Y, I WANT, I WANT IT NOW!!! All well and good to want these things but you must be able to pay for them in the first place. We have already been committed to a a Desal plant that has been rushed, New Hospital that according to media reports is going to cost much more than anticipated, a new Superway which the design team can't keep in front of the construction team wasting more money.


Who pays for all this? Its me and you for the next 30 years in the mean time our government sells off assets left right and centre. For example Labor are prepared to sell off the Forestry Harvest rights for the next 100 years placing a massive cloud over The Green Triangle employment options yet it is people like you AFLFlyer can't see past the toll gate that there is more to South Australia than just Adelaide.[/quote]

We are going to pay taxes no matter what and our money goes towards such a broad range of things, this is such a small amount in comparison. Don't forget and most importantly Heater the spin off's from this project have HUGE potential. More jobs, more money, more enjoyment for ALL South Australians. That's the problem from some in your generation, Don't be such a pesemist and embrace change and think of the future of young South Australians. You need to spend money to get somehwere, dont be so tight, take risks and mover forward.
People like you make us the laughing stock we can be, but it doesn't have to be like that. People have to take responsibility

[heater31]

We are going to pay taxes no matter what and our money goes towards such a broad range of things, this is such a small amount in comparison. Don't forget and most importantly Heater the spin off's from this project have HUGE potential. More jobs, more money, more enjoyment for ALL South Australians. That's the problem from some in your generation, Don't be such a pesemist and embrace change and think of the future of young South Australians. You need to spend money to get somehwere, dont be so tight, take risks and mover forward.
People like you make us the laughing stock we can be, but it doesn't have to be like that. People have to take responsibility

Just Checked my Drivers licence and I'm Still in my mid 20's

The spin offs mean nothing as they are only on paper by some wack job who has little grip on reality. How can you say that the Port Adelaide Football Club will have bigger match attendances before even playing a game there? What about the South East timber workers are they going to move to the city to take up these jobs where they then have to compete with every other Average Joe?

Get some hard evidence that spending half a billion on a Sports Stadium is going to get bang for our bucks. Get both Port and Crows playing a few games and see how it goes by then all these other major projects will be completed and then we can focus on the next one.


I don't want to be paying exorbitant taxes all my life because some spanners thought it would be a good idea to spend truck loads of money all at once then for it to all turn sour by then the Government of the day will be turfed out and forgotten about whilst future generations are left to work their arses off to pay for it.

[Hondo]

Heater so you what do you think about Dutchy's plan?

In fact, all the finance related (budget overrun, etc) arguments are equally applicable to a new CBD stadium proposal

That's before you get into the argument about footy getting so much money gifted to it and cricket none ($800m gift approx?)

Dutchy, you might find some of these same arguments defeat your new stadium and it will be your turn to be frustrated with the minority

[heater31]

Heater so you what do you think about Dutchy's plan?

In fact, all the finance related (budget overrun, etc) arguments are equally applicable to a new CBD stadium proposal

That's before you get into the argument about footy getting so much money gifted to it and cricket none ($800m gift approx?)

Dutchy, you might find some of these same arguments defeat your new stadium and it will be your turn to be frustrated with the minority

Never said I was closed to either option but now is not the time to be spending cash willy nilly. Get the Superway/Hospital and whatever else on the go completed first then move on to the stadium. For now Get both clubs into Adelaide Oval for 2 or 3 games for a couple of years and get some actual data of the economic benefits then start this process again. Having said that I am a little concerned that were are setting ourselves up to be a laughing stock of the country again by only having 1 major stadium. What happens if some major event wants to come to Adelaide but needs an outdoor stadium but Football has it? Currently they book Adelaide Oval. In say 2018 where do they go? Melbourne and once again little old Adelaide misses out

However, if the time is right the Football landscape could be completely different, Port could be history or we have a third team and a second stadium could be necessary if Adelaide United get their brand up and running in the summer we would have to have a second stadium as once they outgrow their current home they have to move as they can't renovate/expand any further.

[spell_check]

Never said I was closed to either option but now is not the time to be spending cash willy nilly. Get the Superway/Hospital and whatever else on the go completed first then move on to the stadium. For now Get both clubs into Adelaide Oval for 2 or 3 games for a couple of years and get some actual data of the economic benefits then start this process again.

Not quite what I said, but it is very close. And I also checked my drivers license and came up with the same as you, heater.

An amusing theme of this topic is that most reasons on either side have merit, but only those who are against it are clutching straws?

[Hondo]

The AO simply is not ready or compliant (whatever term you want to use) for AFL games. I don't know what the capital spend would be to get it up to speed (for those 2-3 games) but it would go part way towards $450m. Whatever the cost would be those works may then have to be re-done when the whole stadium gets redeveloped. Reeks of a one-way freeway

There's no way of testing the water here with a token game here and there without potentially wasting even more money. It's all in or all out. The occasional game would also not a reliable guide as, if anything, it would inflate crowd estimates due to bigger crowds for the fewer games which would further fuel the fire for a full time move. I think the NO vote camp would be better off with the AFL not getting anywhere near the AO just in case it goes off in a big way.

[whufc]

The AO simply is not ready or compliant (whatever term you want to use) for AFL games. I don't know what the capital spend would be to get it up to speed (for those 2-3 games) but it would go part way towards $450m. Whatever the cost would be those works may then have to be re-done when the whole stadium gets redeveloped. Reeks of a one-way freeway

There's no way of testing the water here with a token game here and there without potentially wasting even more money. It's all in or all out. The occasional game would also not a reliable guide as, if anything, it would inflate crowd estimates due to bigger crowds for the fewer games which would further fuel the fire for a full time move. I think the NO vote camp would be better off with the AFL not getting anywhere near the AO just in case it goes off in a big way.

I find it a tad difficult to believe AO is not up to or cant temperarily be up to an AFL broadcast when AFL premiership games have been played at Manuka, Aurora Stadium and Darwins TIO Stadium.

[Hondo]

I heard a good take on this on the radio today. When you think back to the fuss that was made of the proposed lights at both Footy Park and then at the AO and then compare it to today where we take both for granted you wonder if this redevelopment will be the same. The tram line extension was similarly criticised along the lines of Heater's argument here.

I bet a lot of the no-voters will look back on this in 10 years' time and wonder why were they so resistant and why did it take to 2014 to get our prime located CBD stadium finally up to speed.

[whufc]

I heard a good take on this on the radio today. When you think back to the fuss that was made of the proposed lights at both Footy Park and then at the AO and then compare it to today where we take both for granted you wonder if this redevelopment will be the same. The tram line extension was similarly criticised along the lines of Heater's argument here.

I bet a lot of the no-voters will look back on this in 10 years' time and wonder why were they so resistant and why did it take to 2014 to get our prime located CBD stadium finally up to speed.

If they have absolutly zero interest in AFL i dont think they will.

[Hondo]

I find it a tad difficult to believe AO is not up to or cant temperarily be up to an AFL broadcast when AFL premiership games have been played at Manuka, Aurora Stadium and Darwins TIO Stadium.

Are there corporate box facilities in either the new Western stand or the Chappell stands (ie, for side on views) .... I actually don't know about the new Western stands.

Is there room for the side on coaches boxes to AFL standard?

Where in the Western stands do the TV networks have room to do what they need to do?

Are the changerooms up to speed?

It's one thing to play the occasional game in a non-footy state like Darwin and make do in front of 10,000 people it's another thing when you actually have a stadium up to AFL requirements up the road that can take 20,000 more people (when we know the AO struggles with 30,000 crowds as is). I think the AFL are prepared to be more lenient in the non footy states. Here, they have said the AO as it is now will never host an AFL game and I can understand why.

[whufc]

I find it a tad difficult to believe AO is not up to or cant temperarily be up to an AFL broadcast when AFL premiership games have been played at Manuka, Aurora Stadium and Darwins TIO Stadium.

Are there corporate box facilities in either the new Western stand or the Chappell stands (ie, for side on views) .... I actually don't know about the new Western stands.

Is there room for the side on coaches boxes to AFL standard?

Where in the Western stands do the TV networks have room to do what they need to do?

Are the changerooms up to speed?

It's one thing to play the occasional game in a non-footy state like Darwin and make do in front of 10,000 people it's another thing when you actually have a stadium up to AFL requirements up the road that can take 20,000 more people (when we know the AO struggles with 30,000 crowds as is).

If the clubs can do it in a non footy state i dont think the size of the crowd should have an impact on whether they could do it in a footy state with a larger crowd. Especially if good crowds increased the chances of a city based stadium.

I would be looking at game such as Port vs Fremantle, Port vs Gold Coast etc etc to test the waters.

[Hondo]

Whufc,

The AFL have been clear that they won't do it. Even if they thought about it the SANFL wouldn't agree to giving up catering revenue to the SACA even for one game. Why would they?

It's not going to happen.

As said, it's not a reliable guide anyway. No point picking the worst possible Port home game as a test. What's will it prove one way or the other if 20,000 people go to the AO for a Port Freo game? You'd need to get a Crows game there and see how it works but then the problem loops back to the fact that the AO can't take the crowd that a normal Crows game generates.

Remember, the financial savings of the AO proposal aren't driven by extra attendances mainly. It's the sharing of stadium costs by the two sports that is the major saving. If you maintain both stadiums then the savings evaporate so why play any games at AO and take money away from the SANFL?