by Footy Smart » Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:08 pm
by Psyber » Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:11 pm
Nah, they'll need bailing out whatever.Footy Smart wrote:If this doesnt go ahead it will damage Port Adelaides financial projection with grave result wouldnt it?
by Booney » Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:22 pm
Psyber wrote:Nah, they'll need bailing out whatever.Footy Smart wrote:If this doesnt go ahead it will damage Port Adelaides financial projection with grave result wouldnt it?
And the SANFL are better off using an oval they own than one they have to share revenue from, so they can afford the Power for a little longer...
by Psyber » Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:42 pm
I suspect the SANFL had the idea in mind that if the Adelaide Oval deal came off they could sell the property at West Lakes at a huge profit.Booney wrote: Interesting theory Psyber. Use an oval the SANFL own, something like say......Football Park, have Port play there and somehow, I really dont know how, come to some agreement that allows both the PAFC and SANFL to make money from the arangement? Of course, this would depend upon the SANFL not having to pay rent on the stadium. I know, Football Park...! Use that. That Sir must merely be a pipedream.....
by Royal City » Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:36 pm
Psyber wrote:I suspect the SANFL had the idea in mind that if the Adelaide Oval deal came off they could sell the property at West Lakes at a huge profit.Booney wrote: Interesting theory Psyber. Use an oval the SANFL own, something like say......Football Park, have Port play there and somehow, I really dont know how, come to some agreement that allows both the PAFC and SANFL to make money from the arangement? Of course, this would depend upon the SANFL not having to pay rent on the stadium. I know, Football Park...! Use that. That Sir must merely be a pipedream.....
But the logistics of brokering a deal to suit the SACA, and the the SANFL always were impossible , which is why the oval at West Lakes was built at the start.
The government is not going to put money in now the elections are over and there is no need to be populist to buy votes for a while - especially if they expect to lose the next one anyway.
It was never a "goer" without the ALP driving it. So, for now staying at West Lakes is the most affordable option for the SANFL
The PAFC? As I've said before, I support the Power against the Victorian teams, but giving the second licence to a one club team was never going to work.[Particularly giving it to one club very few supporters of other clubs were going to be even mildly sympathetic too.]
by Hondo » Fri Feb 18, 2011 12:38 pm
by Royal City » Fri Feb 18, 2011 2:36 pm
Hondo wrote:According to the 5AA boys the inside word was that the SMA would be announcing within the next fortnight that they have come to a heads of agreement with the SACA and the SANFL to proceed. If so, that's close to the green light as that is a key milestone.
We'll see.
I will be very surprised if the SACA and the SANFL let $535m of Govt money slip through their fingers.
by Booney » Fri Feb 18, 2011 2:39 pm
Royal City wrote:Hondo wrote:According to the 5AA boys the inside word was that the SMA would be announcing within the next fortnight that they have come to a heads of agreement with the SACA and the SANFL to proceed. If so, that's close to the green light as that is a key milestone.
We'll see.
I will be very surprised if the SACA and the SANFL let $535m of Govt money slip through their fingers.
Actually no thats not a green light. It still has to then be approved by the members of both organisations.
And with the ashes here now in the summer of 2013.
Not 2014 as original scheduled. Id love to see SACA explain to SACA Members how the developlement plans may not be completed by April 2014.
Which is 6 months after an ashes test will be held in Adelaide dceheduled for mid-Dec 2013.
by Royal City » Fri Feb 18, 2011 2:45 pm
Booney wrote:Royal City wrote:Hondo wrote:According to the 5AA boys the inside word was that the SMA would be announcing within the next fortnight that they have come to a heads of agreement with the SACA and the SANFL to proceed. If so, that's close to the green light as that is a key milestone.
We'll see.
I will be very surprised if the SACA and the SANFL let $535m of Govt money slip through their fingers.
Actually no thats not a green light. It still has to then be approved by the members of both organisations.
And with the ashes here now in the summer of 2013.
Not 2014 as original scheduled. Id love to see SACA explain to SACA Members how the developlement plans may not be completed by April 2014.
Which is 6 months after an ashes test will be held in Adelaide dceheduled for mid-Dec 2013.
I have a very good handle on the tight building works schedule that the Western Stand had worked within.I would think the further redevelopment would be a very rushed project.
Perhaps cricket at Footy Park for a couple of summers?
( BTW - I still dont believe it will go ahead )
by Hondo » Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:44 pm
Royal City wrote:Actually no thats not a green light. It still has to then be approved by the members of both organisations.
And with the ashes here now in the summer of 2013.
Not 2014 as original scheduled. Id love to see SACA explain to SACA Members how the developlement plans may not be completed by April 2014.
Which is 6 months after an ashes test will be held in Adelaide dceheduled for mid-Dec 2013.
by Hondo » Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:47 pm
by Royal City » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:01 pm
Hondo wrote:RUKC
On the Ashes date change have you got a link? The 2013 Ashes series in England is already selling tickets. Are you saying England will come out here straight afterwards for another Ashes series in 2013-14?
http://www.ashes2010cricket.co.uk/
by Hondo » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:03 pm
by Royal City » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:30 pm
Hondo wrote:Yep, fair enough I'll grant you that one
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 82,00.html
That might be the kicker the SMA needs to get on with it!
by Reddeer » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:33 pm
by smac » Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:00 pm
by Jim05 » Sat Feb 26, 2011 7:22 pm
by Psyber » Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 am
GOOD!Jim05 wrote:Oh well we will get what we deserve. We will NEVER see the wallabies or the socceroos in adelaide but thats ok its gives me a road trip to go see them.
Oh even the Asian cup isnt coming to Adelaide, the new AO is deemed not suitable by FIFA
by Psyber » Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:56 am
Hers the fly in that ointment:smac wrote:http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/footy-cricket-reach-agreement-on-oval/story-e6frea6u-1226012282132
The stadium and associated infrastructure is estimated to cost about $50 million more than the $535 million already allocated, with the Government hopeful private investment will cover the gap.
by Royal City » Mon Feb 28, 2011 2:02 pm
Psyber wrote:GOOD!Jim05 wrote:Oh well we will get what we deserve. We will NEVER see the wallabies or the socceroos in adelaide but thats ok its gives me a road trip to go see them.
Oh even the Asian cup isnt coming to Adelaide, the new AO is deemed not suitable by FIFA
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |