Adelaide Oval upgrade gets green light

[Mopar Dog]

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.

I hope it is succesful. You really need to stop attacking people personally for not having the same opinions as you IMHO.

I said your justification for it being successful was completely unfounded ie . increased interest via 5AA and internet sites. Thats all.

I really dont think the more realistic people of sa need to be labelled as having NFI.

[Hondo]

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

I am saying from where I sit it would cost close to doube what the redevelopment would cost

If the Libs are already up to $900m why do you think that's where it will ultimately end up? Unlikely. They probably used the same people to do their estimates as the ones that came up with $450m for the AO (before the $85m SACA reimbursement).

[Mopar Dog]

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

I am saying from where I sit it would cost close to doube what the redevelopment would cost

If the Libs are already up to $900m why do you think that's where it will ultimately end up? Unlikely. They probably used the same people to do their estimates as the ones that came up with $450m for the AO (before the $85m SACA reimbursement).

And I am saying your claims are yet again biased and completely unfounded.

Im not saying it would cost the same. But it would in no way cost $1.5 billion.

If you any evidence to support your claim you are more than welcome to present it.

If you are going to add $600 mill in add ons to a new stadium. YOu know what you need to do with the A/oval deveopement to be consistent.

MOre unfounded justification claims IMHO.

Ive also noticed your not arguing against the add ons now. More now trying to justify the add ons with "there would be add ons at a new stadium as well you know".

Which is irrelevant to the argument. THis investment of $600-$800 mill is a waste of money and will give us very little return if any.

[Hondo]

Im not saying it would cost the same. But it would in no way cost $1.5 billion.

If you any evidence to support your claim you are more than welcome to present it.

You just gave us a figure of $900m based on estimates done by Martin Hamilton Smith a couple of years ago. I am using that.

$1.5b? I said that was the experts' upper limit real estimate but you don't know any better than I do if it would cost that.

If we accept $900m as a now outdated baseline estimate then you could be pretty confident it would end up > $1b.

No, you aren't saying it would cost the same but you gave me a hypothetical of what would I think if they did cost the same. That's why we are now on this track.

I think we agree it would cost more than the redevelopment would. The rest is just chest beating isn't it?

[Hondo]

Ive also noticed your not arguing against the add ons now like 3 pages ago. if you brought a lawnmower scenarios.

More now trying to justify the add ons with "there would be add ons at a new stadium as well you know".

I was never arguing against add ons. I was arguing against summing up a lot of add ons to come up with some big number to then use as a scare tactic which is the common and easiest way to throw stones at a project like this.

Moreso I am arguing if you want to cost in add ons to one scenario then you better do it for the other. Which you don't seem to be. Otherwise you are twisting numbers to suit your argument aren't you?

[gossipgirl]

seriously some people just can not add

its not rocket science, look around how much new stadiums with roofs are costing at the moment. its not that hard to realise 1.5 billion is a fairly realistic cost.

[Gingernuts]

This thread makes me laugh heartily.

As a wise man once said - "Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

Now, I'm off to discuss the quote for my new rear decking. They've forgotten to quote for the 40 years worth of beer I will drink on it, the 40 years worth of snags I will cook on the BBQ on it, the driveway my mates will park their cars in when they come around to sit on it, the side gate they'll have to walk through to get to it, the house that it will be attached to, and the bitumen for the street leading to it. Might have to go to The Advertiser about this, they've obviously got NFI what they're doing.

[gossipgirl]

This thread makes me laugh heartily.

As a wise man once said - "Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

Now, I'm off to discuss the quote for my new rear decking. They've forgotten to quote for the 40 years worth of beer I will drink on it, the 40 years worth of snags I will cook on the BBQ on it, the driveway my mates will park their cars in when they come around to sit on it, the side gate they'll have to walk through to get to it, the house that it will be attached to, and the bitumen for the street leading to it. Might have to go to The Advertiser about this, they've obviously got NFI what they're doing.

brilliant

[Mopar Dog]

Im not saying it would cost the same. But it would in no way cost $1.5 billion.

If you any evidence to support your claim you are more than welcome to present it.

You just gave us a figure of $900m based on estimates done by Martin Hamilton Smith a couple of years ago. I am using that.

$1.5b? I said that was the experts' upper limit real estimate but you don't know any better than I do if it would cost that.

If we accept $900m as a now outdated baseline estimate then you could be pretty confident it would end up > $1b.

No, you aren't saying it would cost the same but you gave me a hypothetical of what would I think if they did cost the same. That's why we are now on this track.

I think we agree it would cost more than the redevelopment would. The rest is just chest beating isn't it?

Lets try again.

Hondo "hypothetically" they cost the same.

WOuld you be against Adelaide OVal ?????

Yes or no ????

I have never said a new stadium would cost $900 mill. I stated it was quoted at $900 mill and those figures were crossed check which is what it states in the report.

WHich is two years old granted but it was all i could find on google.

Ill 100% refute a new stadium would cost 200% more than the developement. Which was smac's original claim. You are both more than welcome to prove me wrong.

And Ill stand by my claim it will not cost $600 mill to re-develope adelaide oval.

Expected AFL crowds of 25000 maybe max 30000 at Adelaide Oval doesnt really justify this investment . Doesnt stop me doubting its success tbh.

For the record I never brought up the second stadium. SMAC did. I believe it was his way to yet again try and justiy this massive expense.

The positive is Hondo. Well only have 2 1/2 years of speuclating with each other on its succes left I guess.

[Hondo]

Lets try again.

Hondo "hypothetically" they cost the same.

WOuld you be against Adelaide OVal ?????

Yes or no ????

Why are you asking us a hypothetical when you agree the premise is wrong. It's like asking saying if a Ferrari and a Corolla cost the same which one would I choose? They don't cost the same.

[Rik E Boy]

This thread makes me laugh heartily.

As a wise man once said - "Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

When did I tell you that mate, first year or second year?

regards,

REB

[Rik E Boy]

Lets try again.

Hondo "hypothetically" they cost the same.

WOuld you be against Adelaide OVal ?????

Yes or no ????

Why are you asking us a hypothetical when you agree the premise is wrong. It's like asking saying if a Ferrari and a Corolla cost the same which one would I choose? They don't cost the same.

They do at Elizabeth.

regards,

REB

[Mopar Dog]

This thread makes me laugh heartily.

As a wise man once said - "Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

Now, I'm off to discuss the quote for my new rear decking. They've forgotten to quote for the 40 years worth of beer I will drink on it, the 40 years worth of snags I will cook on the BBQ on it, the driveway my mates will park their cars in when they come around to sit on it, the side gate they'll have to walk through to get to it, the house that it will be attached to, and the bitumen for the street leading to it. Might have to go to The Advertiser about this, they've obviously got NFI what they're doing.

More personal abuse cos we all dont have rose coloured glasses. Unfair IMHO.

Obviously if something is privately funded on a deveopement. The real cost is nothing .

[Mopar Dog]

Lets try again.

Hondo "hypothetically" they cost the same.

WOuld you be against Adelaide OVal ?????

Yes or no ????

Why are you asking us a hypothetical when you agree the premise is wrong. It's like asking saying if a Ferrari and a Corolla cost the same which one would I choose? They don't cost the same.

Because as mentioned previously .
I dont think you would change your stance no matter what the final figures are.

More than welcome to prove me wrong.

[Trader]

Lets try again.

Hondo "hypothetically" they cost the same.

WOuld you be against Adelaide OVal ?????

Yes or no ????

Why are you asking us a hypothetical when you agree the premise is wrong. It's like asking saying if a Ferrari and a Corolla cost the same which one would I choose? They don't cost the same.

They do at Elizabeth.

regards,

REB

[Gingernuts]

This thread makes me laugh heartily.

As a wise man once said - "Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

When did I tell you that mate, first year or second year?

regards,

REB

When you were beating me with your experience.

[Mopar Dog]

Lets try again.

Hondo "hypothetically" they cost the same.

WOuld you be against Adelaide OVal ?????

Yes or no ????

Why are you asking us a hypothetical when you agree the premise is wrong. It's like asking saying if a Ferrari and a Corolla cost the same which one would I choose? They don't cost the same.

Silly analogy.

We are talking about a brand new ferrari for $500K or remaking an older classic ferrari model for $400K.

THey are both going to end up being CBD stadiums .

One is simply a cheaper option.

[Rik E Boy]

This thread makes me laugh heartily.

As a wise man once said - "Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

When did I tell you that mate, first year or second year?

regards,

REB

When you were beating me with your experience.

Now now, no need to argue.

regards,

REB

[The Sleeping Giant]

Some names have changed, but the argument remains the same.

[smac]

Lets try again.

Hondo "hypothetically" they cost the same.

WOuld you be against Adelaide OVal ?????

Yes or no ????

No, because the benefits lie in the future of both sports in this state, not in the venue itself.

People speak of second stadiums and how important that is. Docklands is yet to yield a profit in it's lifetime - in a city populated by 4 x the people and 5 x the teams to support it. How in hell could either sport focus on developing themselves to their potential?

And you mentioned in an earlier post that SACA would be 'fine' with or without the development. Again, incorrect - I have stated (once or twice, maybe 45 times) that they are fine without it.

They would be so far in front of 'fine' with the development that to say 'fine' is doing the redevelopment a gross injustice.

I would bet my left one that a new stadium would cost at least $1bn. Remember, they need to buy land and get it ready for use before they can even dig a hole. I brought up second stadium to point out the folly in it as a concept. Not many seem to have an issue with that point.

Lastly, being called an idiot is only personal abuse when it isn't an obvious conclusion.