Adelaide Oval upgrade gets green light

[AFLflyer]

100% agree TSG, exactly my stance.
IMHO mopar it's you with your nose out of joint. Not once i have said what you claim i have. (except for the NFI bit) whoops
anyway, i don't know it will be a success, i hope it will!
I'm keen to watch my footy and CRICKET in the new oval, and enjoy the new precint. Aint nothing wrong with that...

[whufc]

Will we be the only state in the country to not have two major sporting venues!

[Q.]

Yeah, but at least the one we do have will be ******* awesome

[whufc]

and they call this progress.

[Hondo]

Will we be the only state in the country to not have two major sporting venues!

The fact that Rugby requires specialised, smaller stadiums helps out a couple of those states don't you reckon?

The fact that AFL games are played at the Gabba and the SCG defeats this argument. In fact, we currently are one of ONLY two states that don't play football and cricket at their primary, CBD based cricket ground. ie, every other state bar us and WA use their CBD cricket stadium 12 months of the year.

I think this was one of those mischevous no vote shadow arguments. It sounds really important the way you've said it here, then you dig deeper into it and find that it means very little.

[smac]

Are some upset at the cost of this upgrade or the lack of a second stadium? That confuses me. Unless these folk are simply looking for anything they can to actively dissent.

Are they aware that a second stadium would do the following two things(among others)?

1. Cost at least twice as much as the AO project (plus the bridge to wherever that one is built would be massive - we include that cost, don't we?)
2. Have both footy and cricket in this state continue to fund the operations of a stadium individually, depriving both sports of one of the key benefits of the AO project
3. Leave SACA with their debt and unable to fund any future development at the oval for many years
4. Leave SACA & SANFL with an inability to fund grassroots sport as it will be

[Mopar Dog]

Are some upset at the cost of this upgrade or the lack of a second stadium? That confuses me. Unless these folk are simply looking for anything they can to actively dissent.

Are they aware that a second stadium would do the following two things(among others)?

1. Cost at least twice as much as the AO project (plus the bridge to wherever that one is built would be massive - we include that cost, don't we?)pbe

any proof of that when final costings aren't even completed yet for Adelaide oval ????
And a new stadium was quoted at $800 mill wasn't it.

I think it more these false justifications and assurities everythings going to be fine that has me concerned.

Smac your now trying to make out saca would have financial constraints without this deal.
I thought you were one who said the opposite a few months ago.

[smac]

No, I was the one who said they would not be knackered without this deal. I stand by that.

So you don't believe the quoted figure for a redeveloped AO - one that has had 18 months work put into it - but you do believe the one quoted for a new stadium that has had no work put into it? And you say you are in business of some sort? I hope I don't have an investment in that business.

[Mopar Dog]

No, I was the one who said they would not be knackered without this deal. I stand by that.

So you don't believe the quoted figure for a redeveloped AO - one that has had 18 months work put into it - but you do believe the one quoted for a new stadium that has had no work put into it? And you say you are in business of some sort? I hope I don't have an investment in that business.

i'm not saying that at all. I honestly asked how much was the quote for the new stadium ???? I heard $800 mill. Which is not even close to double.

How much have you heard it would cost. ?? Genuine question.

So saca is going to be financially strong either way. But you asked the question about sacas ability to fund future projects?

Yet again it's these unfounded justifcations is what's making me uneasy.

If people just said like tsg I like it and I hope it works . Fair enough, you'll get no argument from me.

[Hondo]

The Liberals said $800m but it was no more than an estimate and I recall that they admitted it was much a guesstimate as an estimate. It also excluded a car park from memory. They were also going to move or realign the entire train station (and put some tracks underground I think) so god knows what that would have cost. The short of it is that the $800m would have had a lot of the same add ons you are using to pump $535m up to $800m. So $800m being a guess in the first place, then with add ons, a train station redevelopment and probably still the $400m or so on the precinct work then we have another huge infrastructure project on our hands.

You can't take the baseline AO construction cost estimate of $535m and then add lots of things on to then compare it to the Liberals baseline construction cost estimate for a new stadium WITHOUT add-ons.

[Mopar Dog]

The Liberals said $800m but it was no more than an estimate and I recall that they admitted it was much a guesstimate as an estimate. It also excluded a car park from memory. They were also going to move or realign the entire train station (and put some tracks underground I think) so god knows what that would have cost. The short of it is that the $800m would have had a lot of the same add ons you are using to pump $535m up to $800m. So $800m being a guess in the first place, then with add ons, a train station redevelopment and probably still the $400m or so on the precinct work then we have another huge infrastructure project on our hands.

You can't take the baseline AO construction cost estimate of $535m and then add lots of things on to then compare it to the Liberals baseline construction cost estimate for a new stadium WITHOUT add-ons.

So it wouldnt be even close to 200% more than Adelaide Oval is what your saying. Even with a speculative $400 million worth of add ons for a new railway station.

Can I ask a question Hondo/Smac . If they said the adelaide oval developement cost 1 billion and so would a new stadium . Would you honestly change your support for the developement. ???

[JK]

Are some upset at the cost of this upgrade or the lack of a second stadium? That confuses me. Unless these folk are simply looking for anything they can to actively dissent.

Are they aware that a second stadium would do the following two things(among others)?

1. Cost at least twice as much as the AO project (plus the bridge to wherever that one is built would be massive - we include that cost, don't we?)
2. Have both footy and cricket in this state continue to fund the operations of a stadium individually, depriving both sports of one of the key benefits of the AO project
3. Leave SACA with their debt and unable to fund any future development at the oval for many years
4. Leave SACA & SANFL with an inability to fund grassroots sport as it will be

Im no expert, but I'd imagine it would also replicate the same financial strain that currently exists for both codes (perhaps moreso footy) if each was attached to a separate venue .. With both requiring a higher attendance for profitability than would be the case at a shared venue.

For the record, I'm ambivalent about the whole 1 or 2 stadium thing and which stadiums they are ... If I wanna go to the footy or cricket then I'll happily pay and go regardless of where it is.

[Mopar Dog]

"when this developement doesnt work"

just another idiotic comment from Mr Negative Naysayer.
what makes you so sure? Already we are getting a taste of what it will be like, when two bottom 8 sides were scheduled to play with no development. This has created a lot of interest.
NFI mopar!

And this is what your basing the success of the developement on.
The vibe of the one of game this year.


I wouldnt be throwing out to many NFI calls if I was you AFl flyer.

Just cos you are extremely desperate to see this work.
No need to accuse others who disagree with your desperation of having NFI IMHO.

well, unless you can see into the future, what else is there to base my argument on? unless you have something worthwhile to say, don't bother.

100% agree TSG, exactly my stance.
IMHO mopar it's you with your nose out of joint. Not once i have said what you claim i have. (except for the NFI bit) whoops
anyway, i don't know it will be a success, i hope it will!
I'm keen to watch my footy and CRICKET in the new oval, and enjoy the new precint. Aint nothing wrong with that...

You actually confirmed it AFL Flyer. well, unless you can see into the future, what else is there to base my argument on?

But good to see I have changed your opinion from "negative nay sayers have NFI".

To now "you hope it is a success".

[Hondo]

So it wouldnt be even close to 200% more than Adelaide Oval is what your saying. Even with a speculative $400 million worth of add ons for a new railway station.

At the time of the debate some reputable construction companies and experts came out and pegged the real cost of a new CBD Stadium with a roof in the range of $1.2m to $1.5m. Railway station realignment on top of that. Footbridge? Don't know. Probably on top too.

[Hondo]

Can I ask a question Hondo/Smac . If they said the adelaide oval developement cost 1 billion and so would a new stadium . Would you honestly change your support for the developement. ???

They wouldn't ever cost the same. Simple maths of the cost of constructing an entirely new stadium (time and materials) v replacing stands at an existing stadium tell you that. How can they be the same. Steel costs what it costs and if you need twice as much it will cost you twice as much.

I am trying to say to you the apples and apples comparison (assuming the Libs' guesstimate was right although that was questioned) is $535m v $800m. You would have to assume the add-ons are the same. I think the proposed new WA stadium without a roof is around $800m estimated cost. So maybe Isobel got her roof thrown in? There's already the same questioning going on over there about the proposed cost and people are suggesting it will more likely go north of $1b.

My guess is a new Adelaide stadium would end up around $1b before any of your addons. A lot will be the same under either option. We are also then left with footy and cricket having to maintain one stadium each when they only use it for half the year so the current financial constraints on the SACA and the SANFL are not solved. What's your solution to that?

[Mopar Dog]

So it wouldnt be even close to 200% more than Adelaide Oval is what your saying. Even with a speculative $400 million worth of add ons for a new railway station.

At the time of the debate some reputable construction companies and experts came out and pegged the real cost of a new CBD Stadium with a roof in the range of $1.2m to $1.5m. Railway station realignment on top of that. Footbridge? Don't know. Probably on top too.

I found this on google. And the libs document says $900 mill.

http://www.martinhamilton-smith.com.au/ ... ort-(final).pdf

It looks to me as if these figures had been verified before published and the roof would cost an extra $50 mill not $300 mill.

[Hondo]

Well, there you go .. $900m

With some slippage by the time official quotes come in you are at $1b already.

The add your add ons and it starts to add up

I couldn't get the link to work BTW and I never said a roof was $300m.

Look, here you are swallowing everything the Libs said on a new stadium (because that's what you want) but on the other hand throwing stones at the redevelopment option (because that's what you don't want). If you are going to question one set of costs then question the other.

[AFLflyer]

"when this developement doesnt work"

just another idiotic comment from Mr Negative Naysayer.
what makes you so sure? Already we are getting a taste of what it will be like, when two bottom 8 sides were scheduled to play with no development. This has created a lot of interest.
NFI mopar!

And this is what your basing the success of the developement on.
The vibe of the one of game this year.


I wouldnt be throwing out to many NFI calls if I was you AFl flyer.

Just cos you are extremely desperate to see this work.
No need to accuse others who disagree with your desperation of having NFI IMHO.

well, unless you can see into the future, what else is there to base my argument on? unless you have something worthwhile to say, don't bother.

100% agree TSG, exactly my stance.
IMHO mopar it's you with your nose out of joint. Not once i have said what you claim i have. (except for the NFI bit) whoops
anyway, i don't know it will be a success, i hope it will!
I'm keen to watch my footy and CRICKET in the new oval, and enjoy the new precint. Aint nothing wrong with that...

You actually confirmed it AFL Flyer. well, unless you can see into the future, what else is there to base my argument on?

But good to see I have changed your opinion from "negative nay sayers have NFI".

To now "you hope it is a success".

I hope it is a sucess! That's me being positive and you looking for the negatives! I'm keen for this to happen and i think a positive sign will be if this Port Adelaide clash gets a 25K+ crowd (that is my opinion, no more complicated than that). I will be going and people like you will stay at home, hoping everyone else is having a terrible time. I have never changed my opinion. Bring it on.

[Mopar Dog]

Can I ask a question Hondo/Smac . If they said the adelaide oval developement cost 1 billion and so would a new stadium . Would you honestly change your support for the developement. ???

They wouldn't ever cost the same. Simple maths of the cost of constructing an entirely new stadium (time and materials) v replacing stands at an existing stadium tell you that. How can they be the same. Steel costs what it costs and if you need twice as much it will cost you twice as much.

I am trying to say to you the apples and apples comparison (assuming the Libs' guesstimate was right although that was questioned) is $535m v $800m. You would have to assume the add-ons are the same. I think the proposed new WA stadium without a roof is around $800m estimated cost. So maybe Isobel got her roof thrown in? There's already the same questioning going on over there about the proposed cost and people are suggesting it will more likely go north of $1b.

My guess is a new Adelaide stadium would end up around $1b before any of your addons. A lot will be the same under either option. We are also then left with footy and cricket having to maintain one stadium each when they only use it for half the year so the current financial constraints on the SACA and the SANFL are not solved. What's your solution to that?

So yet again a new roofed stadium wouldnt cost 200% more than adelaide oval.

Solution. SACA doesnt need one. They are fine with or without the developement which has been stated 100 times from memory.

SANFL if Im to understand your hypothetical question. They would now have a new roofed multi purpose stadium which could attract quality international sporting events when the stadium is not in use in the summer.

Looks likes both would be Ok to me, but that just my opinion.

[gossipgirl]

so a new stadium would be at least 1.5 billion. would be interesting to know the estimated ongoing costs of a new stadium with a roof compared to upgrade of adelaide oval.