[DEF] AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | 52,000

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in areas other than the CBD and North Adelaide. Includes Port Adelaide and Glenelg.
Message
Author
User avatar
Omicron
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2336
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:46 pm

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#526 Post by Omicron » Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:59 pm

Matt wrote:The whole 'stadium debate' is a load of bollocks and I'm over it.
The SANFL aren't going to budge on their position and risk losing control of their major cash-cow, the AFC are already investing in new facilities there (that are under construction), the AFL have insisted that football is staying at AAMI, and the State Government are refusing to even (publicly) investigate the possibility of a new stadium, despite the overwhelming public interest.

If they want to throw more money at Jurassic Park - go right ahead - but I've ditched my Crows membership and will use the money saved on a couple of Melbourne trips instead where I can actually enjoy the experience rather than dread it.

The Melbourne football public enjoy:
- great public transport
- great atmosphere
- great facilities (MCG, Telstra Dome)
- the opportunity to have a meal or drinks before and after the game with endless choices of venue
- the sense of 'event' and the excitement of being in a city awash with supporters on match day

The Adelaide football public has NONE of these.

The Crows consistently sell out matches - AAMI holds just over 50,000, yet crowd figures are usually less than 40,000 - so who and where are the other 10-15k who don't rock up, despite having paid for their tickets?

I'd bet that a fair proportion would be season-ticket holders like myself, that often cannot be bothered with the ordeals associated with that arsehole of a venue.
Melbourne football clubs are also heavily subsidised by the AFL and the Victorian Government (far more so than either of the South Australian clubs), as well as being associated with a dreadful basket-case of a state league that is a limp-wristed wet tissue compared to the financial powerhouse that is the SANFL. It's a delightful paradox, but I can assure you that if football in South Australia was in a financial crisis, there'd be a greater chance of a brand-new city stadium going ahead.

pushbutton
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1421
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:01 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 18 times

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#527 Post by pushbutton » Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:15 pm

I absolutely do not think it is the role of any government to be funding sporting venues. Local councils should provide smaller leisure centres for local residents yes, but state governments certainly should not be putting taxpayers money into major stadiums.

Mike Rann is quite right in saying that government money is for higher priorities like schools, hospitals, police etc.

User avatar
rogue
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 602
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:45 am
Location: Over here
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 3 times

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#528 Post by rogue » Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:57 pm

pushbutton wrote:I absolutely do not think it is the role of any government to be funding sporting venues. Local councils should provide smaller leisure centres for local residents yes, but state governments certainly should not be putting taxpayers money into major stadiums.

Mike Rann is quite right in saying that government money is for higher priorities like schools, hospitals, police etc.
So what about the $100m that has been promised to the SANFL, albeit postponed?

peas_and_corn
Legendary Member!
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 9:32 pm

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#529 Post by peas_and_corn » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:56 am

rogue wrote:
pushbutton wrote:I absolutely do not think it is the role of any government to be funding sporting venues. Local councils should provide smaller leisure centres for local residents yes, but state governments certainly should not be putting taxpayers money into major stadiums.

Mike Rann is quite right in saying that government money is for higher priorities like schools, hospitals, police etc.
So what about the $100m that has been promised to the SANFL, albeit postponed?
I agree with Pushbutton on this one- and I think that the SANFL shouldn't get the money. I remember the last time the SANFL wanted money to upgrade the stadium- they were turned down and they found the money by getting sponsorship. I do not oppose money for sporting infrastructure- only I support it when ordinary people will be using it, not professional athletes in a professional league.

raulduke
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 174
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 10:22 am

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#530 Post by raulduke » Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:30 pm

i agree, governments should not be funding stadiums with all of the money these clubs rake in with the endless advertising and sponsorship

i say demolish all stadiums and build massive glass towers instead :D

Brando
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 3:11 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 51 times

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#531 Post by Brando » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:18 pm

Omicron wrote:
Matt wrote:The whole 'stadium debate' is a load of bollocks and I'm over it.
The SANFL aren't going to budge on their position and risk losing control of their major cash-cow, the AFC are already investing in new facilities there (that are under construction), the AFL have insisted that football is staying at AAMI, and the State Government are refusing to even (publicly) investigate the possibility of a new stadium, despite the overwhelming public interest.

If they want to throw more money at Jurassic Park - go right ahead - but I've ditched my Crows membership and will use the money saved on a couple of Melbourne trips instead where I can actually enjoy the experience rather than dread it.

The Melbourne football public enjoy:
- great public transport
- great atmosphere
- great facilities (MCG, Telstra Dome)
- the opportunity to have a meal or drinks before and after the game with endless choices of venue
- the sense of 'event' and the excitement of being in a city awash with supporters on match day

The Adelaide football public has NONE of these.

The Crows consistently sell out matches - AAMI holds just over 50,000, yet crowd figures are usually less than 40,000 - so who and where are the other 10-15k who don't rock up, despite having paid for their tickets?

I'd bet that a fair proportion would be season-ticket holders like myself, that often cannot be bothered with the ordeals associated with that arsehole of a venue.
Melbourne football clubs are also heavily subsidised by the AFL and the Victorian Government (far more so than either of the South Australian clubs), as well as being associated with a dreadful basket-case of a state league that is a limp-wristed wet tissue compared to the financial powerhouse that is the SANFL. It's a delightful paradox, but I can assure you that if football in South Australia was in a financial crisis, there'd be a greater chance of a brand-new city stadium going ahead.
EXCUSE ME...! As a member of the Essendon FC, i can say with vigorous certainty that we do not receive any increased revenue from the AFL for being based in Victoria. Don't be confused with the likes of Melbourne Demons and Bulldogs, whom have required a hand out.

I can assure you Omi, when it comes to the Bombers, your messing with Omega here.

As for the greedy SANFL, all i can say is the backlash within the 'football congregation' is rather prolific.

mattblack
Legendary Member!
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:20 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 5 times

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#532 Post by mattblack » Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:49 am

A simple way to get all the money that SA needs to pump directly into sporting facilities. Increase poker machine taxes by about 1 - 1.5%. Make sure all this money is specifically allocated to stadiums, state swiming centres, velodromes .... etc. The population can see where these mega bucks are going and the only people you can posssibly offend are the machine licence holders. EASY PEAZY :D

User avatar
Omicron
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2336
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:46 pm

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#533 Post by Omicron » Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:26 am

Brando wrote:
Omicron wrote:
Matt wrote:The whole 'stadium debate' is a load of bollocks and I'm over it.
The SANFL aren't going to budge on their position and risk losing control of their major cash-cow, the AFC are already investing in new facilities there (that are under construction), the AFL have insisted that football is staying at AAMI, and the State Government are refusing to even (publicly) investigate the possibility of a new stadium, despite the overwhelming public interest.

If they want to throw more money at Jurassic Park - go right ahead - but I've ditched my Crows membership and will use the money saved on a couple of Melbourne trips instead where I can actually enjoy the experience rather than dread it.

The Melbourne football public enjoy:
- great public transport
- great atmosphere
- great facilities (MCG, Telstra Dome)
- the opportunity to have a meal or drinks before and after the game with endless choices of venue
- the sense of 'event' and the excitement of being in a city awash with supporters on match day

The Adelaide football public has NONE of these.

The Crows consistently sell out matches - AAMI holds just over 50,000, yet crowd figures are usually less than 40,000 - so who and where are the other 10-15k who don't rock up, despite having paid for their tickets?

I'd bet that a fair proportion would be season-ticket holders like myself, that often cannot be bothered with the ordeals associated with that arsehole of a venue.
Melbourne football clubs are also heavily subsidised by the AFL and the Victorian Government (far more so than either of the South Australian clubs), as well as being associated with a dreadful basket-case of a state league that is a limp-wristed wet tissue compared to the financial powerhouse that is the SANFL. It's a delightful paradox, but I can assure you that if football in South Australia was in a financial crisis, there'd be a greater chance of a brand-new city stadium going ahead.
EXCUSE ME...! As a member of the Essendon FC, i can say with vigorous certainty that we do not receive any increased revenue from the AFL for being based in Victoria. Don't be confused with the likes of Melbourne Demons and Bulldogs, whom have required a hand out.

I can assure you Omi, when it comes to the Bombers, your messing with Omega here.

As for the greedy SANFL, all i can say is the backlash within the 'football congregation' is rather prolific.
My judgemental eye apologises for this transgression, and casts its stern glance over the likes of Richmond, the Western Bulldogs, the Kangaroos, Melbourne, Carlton, etc.

In the context of the SANFL receiving government funding, I don't see any reason why anger should be directed at them. It's not their fault if the State Government agrees to hand them money, and one would be hard-pressed to find an organisation that would turn down such a substantial injection of funds. Neither is the support of a football league with state government funds without precedent, for that matter. The distribution of taxpayer dollars is entirely the responsibility of the Government - reviewing the thousands upon thousands of requests it receives each year and allocating funds as it sees fit.

ozisnowman
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 12:34 pm
Been thanked: 10 times

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (60,000+) | West Lakes

#534 Post by ozisnowman » Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:07 am

After watching the Brisbane International tennis in their new state of the art facility it is amazing that Brisbane
can update the Gabba. build the new Suncorp and now this new tennis centre and what do we have here in Adelaide
nothing a mishmash of decaying sporting facilities.

We need to really step back and look at the Melbourne approach of building a high quality sporting precinct
close to the CBD, close to transport, shops, hotels and the like. The sporting precinct should be a staged
development but should aim to bring sports together to the benefit of the spectators and state.

Whats needed

1 General purpose oval ground for Cricket and Australian Rules Football. Proposed Location (Adelaide Oval)
2 Indoor arena for Tennis, Basketball, Volleyball and the like could also act as a new CBD entertainment centre. Proposed Location site of current Memorial Drive Tennis Centre/Next Generation.
3 General purpose rectangular ground including Athletics track. Football (aka Soccer), Rugby, Athletics, Hockey etc. Over the railway lines North Terrace.
4 State swimming, diving centre for swimming, diving, waterpolo etc. Next to rectangular stadium, on the proposed Marj Site.

This would do away with a multitude of current poor quality and decentralised stadiums. AAMI, Hindmarsh Stadium, Entertainment Centre, Powerhouse and proposed State Swim Centre at Marion. Only things to remain current Adelaide Aquatic Centre (upgraded for rec use)
and the Cycling Velodrome/Pines Hockey stadium etc.

Yes it would cost a bit but it would bring money into the state and it would stop good money being spent after bad on upgrading poorly located and poorly design current stadium.
4

User avatar
Pikey
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 2219
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Sitting Down
Has thanked: 123 times
Been thanked: 338 times

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (52,000) | West Lakes

#535 Post by Pikey » Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:36 am

The SANFL have come out several times and indicated the development will not increase capacity, it will stay around the 50,000 mark, hence the thread title change
Walking on over....

| Sensational-Adelaide.com Moderator |

ghs
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1551
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:09 am
Location: Brighton
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 60 times

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (52,000) | West Lakes

#536 Post by ghs » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:14 pm

Pikey wrote:The SANFL have come out several times and indicated the development will not increase capacity, it will stay around the 50,000 mark, hence the thread title change
I haven't seen anything saying that the capacity will not be increased.

User avatar
adam73837
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 416
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:43 pm
Location: The wilderness being sustained by nutrients in the air and powering my laptop with positive energy

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (52,000) | West Lakes

#537 Post by adam73837 » Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:42 am

Pikey wrote:The SANFL have come out several times and indicated the development will not increase capacity, it will stay around the 50,000 mark, hence the thread title change
Which leads me to wonder why they are creating all these fancy renders of essentially a rebuild of most of the stadium which involves the construction of an Eastern Grandstand:
AAMI_Vision_1.jpg
AAMI_Vision_1.jpg (65.13 KiB) Viewed 2606 times
AAMI_Vision_4.jpg
AAMI_Vision_4.jpg (68.39 KiB) Viewed 2607 times
I take back many of the things I said before 2010; particularly my anti-Rann rants. While I still maintain some of said opinions, I feel I could have been less arrogant. I also apologise to people I offended; while knowing I can't fully take much back. :)

crawf
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5415
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:49 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 320 times

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (52,000) | West Lakes

#538 Post by crawf » Fri Jan 16, 2009 12:17 pm

Can you please edit your signature and make it smaller

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (52,000) | West Lakes

#539 Post by Cruise » Fri Jan 16, 2009 5:46 pm

adam73837 wrote:
Pikey wrote:The SANFL have come out several times and indicated the development will not increase capacity, it will stay around the 50,000 mark, hence the thread title change
Which leads me to wonder why they are creating all these fancy renders of essentially a rebuild of most of the stadium which involves the construction of an Eastern Grandstand:

You can't cram as many people in steeply angled stands. It's kind of a trade off between better viewing or higher capacity.

User avatar
adam73837
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 416
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:43 pm
Location: The wilderness being sustained by nutrients in the air and powering my laptop with positive energy

[DEF] Re: #ONH: AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | (52,000) | West Lakes

#540 Post by adam73837 » Thu Jan 22, 2009 11:52 pm

On the so-called [i]Get the Facts[/i] site, ([i]facts[/i] sounds a little fictional considering what they're stating there...) Leigh Whicker wrote:Importantly, the League reinforces its support – along with our two AFL clubs – for a two-stadium policy in Adelaide.

Every capital city in Australia has at least two stadia – Perth (Subiaco and WACA), Melbourne (MCG and Telstra Dome), Sydney (SCG and ANZ Stadium) and Brisbane (Suncorp and the Gabba). Why should Adelaide be different?
Well then, Whicker, obviously you have truble counting, because if AAMI and Hindmarsh are knocked down and a new Multi-Purpose Stadium is built on the railyards site, we'll have the Multi-Purpose Stadium and Adelaide Oval! There, you see now, 1... 2!
Cruise wrote:The reason the SANFL is being stubborn is because every dime they collect in revenue goes to them.

But seeing as you find that hard to understand i think you are being the stubborn one, not the SANFL.
Don't call ME the stubborn one; if every cent that they earn at AAMI goes to them, what difference will it make if their stadium is in the city, other than the fact that they will most definitely get a larger income in the city? See, maybe it IS the SANFL being stubborn when nearly everyone else is screaming out for an Inner-City Stadium with more atmosphere than at West Lakes.
Okay, there's the fact that Adelaide United will play there in the off-season, but how does that affect them if they aren't using it at that time? Maybe they get upset because the scent of the support of an International Sport will be going throughout their stadium come the pre-season. :cry: :wink: :roll:
I take back many of the things I said before 2010; particularly my anti-Rann rants. While I still maintain some of said opinions, I feel I could have been less arrogant. I also apologise to people I offended; while knowing I can't fully take much back. :)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests