New City Arena

[A-Town]

I can almost guarantee that when Labor get back into power, they'll build it or something like it.

Being against it now has little to do with it being a good or bad project

Sent from my SM-A505YN using Tapatalk

Perhaps they will.
But, the issue for many people isn't that something is to be built there, the issue is priorities, as discussed throughout this thread.
That's the first issue, and imo the most important. Sporting venue that nobody has asked for at 3/4 of a billion, or fixing the health care system....
The second issue, which ties into the first one, is that there is a proposal from during the Labor government years, to redevelop Memorial Drive properly. The Liberal state government has ignored that, spent tens of millions on a mediocre minor upgrade instead, and plans to spend 3/4 of a billion on a new venue across the river.

Hopefully work doesn't get underway before the next state election, because if Labor win and they cancel the project it may cost tax payers millions in clauses to end the contracts.

Yeah it's a stupid argument though.

We could spend our entire state budget on health and it wouldn't be enough because there would be new ways to spend it and more multi millionaire specialists

Governments can walk and chew gum.

Couldn't care less about this project, but the what about health argument is tiresome.

Perhaps we should spend the money on a royal commission into our health system?

Sent from my SM-A505YN using Tapatalk

If it were up to some nuffies in Adelaide, the entire government's budget would be spent on health. People act as if the $660m that this Arena would cost was redistributed into health, it would magically fix the entire health system. It's not that simple. We might have one or two new health facilities with the same poor efficiencies that have plagued health departments around SA and indeed the country for years.

A Royal Commission is a good idea.

[A-Town]

All in all, something must be built to replace the entertainment centre.

Why?

It was in the tiser or another article the other day I read this:

Cameron Hoy, Ticketek Managing Director of Australia has said that without the new arena, major acts will bypass the state altogether because the Adelaide Entertainment Centre is not a viable option.

“The proposed new Adelaide Riverbank Arena is essential unless Adelaide is happy to no longer be part of the contemporary live entertainment touring scene.”

Now of course this is just an opinion (like most of revs whining), but it's true. The current entertainment centre just doesn't have enough seats for it to be profitable by major musical artists and events. Apparently its quite costly to keep running, and that's why it's going to be sold by the government if it gets relected. So atm is either new riverbank arena, or a redevelopment of the entertainment centre. I hope that answers you question Nathan.

Cameron Hoy is right, we will continue to miss out on big acts while we have a sub-standard facility with a small capacity in comparison to other major cities. I recently went to Perth's new arena and was blown away. It's a first class outstanding facility, and it really makes our entertainment centre look tired and second rate.

[ml69]

Perhaps they will.
But, the issue for many people isn't that something is to be built there, the issue is priorities, as discussed throughout this thread.
That's the first issue, and imo the most important. Sporting venue that nobody has asked for at 3/4 of a billion, or fixing the health care system....
The second issue, which ties into the first one, is that there is a proposal from during the Labor government years, to redevelop Memorial Drive properly. The Liberal state government has ignored that, spent tens of millions on a mediocre minor upgrade instead, and plans to spend 3/4 of a billion on a new venue across the river.

Hopefully work doesn't get underway before the next state election, because if Labor win and they cancel the project it may cost tax payers millions in clauses to end the contracts.

Yeah it's a stupid argument though.

We could spend our entire state budget on health and it wouldn't be enough because there would be new ways to spend it and more multi millionaire specialists

Governments can walk and chew gum.

Couldn't care less about this project, but the what about health argument is tiresome.

Perhaps we should spend the money on a royal commission into our health system?

Sent from my SM-A505YN using Tapatalk

If it were up to some nuffies in Adelaide, the entire government's budget would be spent on health. People act as if the $660m that this Arena would cost was redistributed into health, it would magically fix the entire health system. It's not that simple. We might have one or two new health facilities with the same poor efficiencies that have plagued health departments around SA and indeed the country for years.

A Royal Commission is a good idea.

I recently worked in the finance department at SA Health. It was established through benchmarking that CALHN (Central Adelaide Local Health Network - looks after RAH and QEH) was one of the most expensive per patient and inefficient area health services in all of Australia. SALHN and NALHN were much better.
Much of this was to do with poor management practices and systematic rorting by highly-paid specialists. That’s why Korda Mentha were sent in (who themselves are charging an arm and a leg, and not much had been achieved when I left the department).

[SRW]

And anyway besides, let's stop mischaracterising this as a mere repurposing of so-called 'derelict' land. What's proposed is to build right up to the banks of the river and to forsake 10% of the city's green space. Much will be lost on the right of this vista.
IMG_1919.jpg

The Arena would make quite a nice addition to that backdrop, similar to how the redeveloped Adelaide Oval compliments the River Torrens.

Try to remove yourself from two-dimensional thinking. This space isn't static; it's a recovering environment. And that 'backdrop', by all indications, will be razed in order to build the misplaced arena.

[A-Town]

And anyway besides, let's stop mischaracterising this as a mere repurposing of so-called 'derelict' land. What's proposed is to build right up to the banks of the river and to forsake 10% of the city's green space. Much will be lost on the right of this vista.
IMG_1919.jpg

The Arena would make quite a nice addition to that backdrop, similar to how the redeveloped Adelaide Oval compliments the River Torrens.

Try to remove yourself from two-dimensional thinking. This space isn't static; it's a recovering environment. And that 'backdrop', by all indications, will be razed in order to build the misplaced arena.

There's only so much room for the environment to 'recover' when the surrounding land is largely a dusty car park, roads and rowing sheds.

The backdrop of a new arena behind trees and the Torrens will look spectacular. Some trees will be razed of course, and they absolutely should greenify the surrounding areas of the arena when it's built.

[SRW]

The Arena would make quite a nice addition to that backdrop, similar to how the redeveloped Adelaide Oval compliments the River Torrens.

Try to remove yourself from two-dimensional thinking. This space isn't static; it's a recovering environment. And that 'backdrop', by all indications, will be razed in order to build the misplaced arena.

There's only so much room for the environment to 'recover' when the surrounding land is largely a dusty car park, roads and rowing sheds.

This is both a) untrue, and b) a weak argument to permanently alienate the area. I'd suggest those who don't regularly use the area would benefit from actually visiting it.

[A-Town]

Try to remove yourself from two-dimensional thinking. This space isn't static; it's a recovering environment. And that 'backdrop', by all indications, will be razed in order to build the misplaced arena.

There's only so much room for the environment to 'recover' when the surrounding land is largely a dusty car park, roads and rowing sheds.

This is both a) untrue, and b) a weak argument to permanently alienate the area. I'd suggest those who don't regularly use the area would benefit from actually visiting it.

More people than ever would frequent and enjoy the surrounding park lands when the arena gets built.

Build the arena, greenify and beatify the surrounding land, and watch it turn into something spectacular and be a wonderful tourist attraction and drawcard for the State. There's a good reason why so few people visit the area as it is right now.

[JCK98]

The second issue, which ties into the first one, is that there is a proposal from during the Labor government years, to redevelop Memorial Drive properly. The Liberal state government has ignored that, spent tens of millions on a mediocre minor upgrade instead, and plans to spend 3/4 of a billion on a new venue across the river.

I don't think that can be compared to this because that $200m proposal would hold 6,000 people, so in no way replace the Entertainment Centre for the events that skip Adelaide because of it, hell at the time the 36ers we're getting more than that in Findon with next to no public transport links on a regular basis.

[Brucetiki]

If there are a substantial number of shows where the difference between 11,300 seats and 15,000 seats is enough to make them non-viable then let's make the AEC bigger. Bet it could be done for a lot less than 677 million dollars.

The AEC can fit in around 7,000-9,000 people for an end stage concert - depending on the stage configuration. Concert stages are tending to get bigger and bigger (well, were pre-COVID), which can impact what a show can hold.

Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne have capacities around the 15,000 mark, while Sydney has 20,000. The new arena brings us into line with Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne, which will attract more concerts and events to Adelaide.

[rev]

If there are a substantial number of shows where the difference between 11,300 seats and 15,000 seats is enough to make them non-viable then let's make the AEC bigger. Bet it could be done for a lot less than 677 million dollars.

The AEC can fit in around 7,000-9,000 people for an end stage concert - depending on the stage configuration. Concert stages are tending to get bigger and bigger (well, were pre-COVID), which can impact what a show can hold.

Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne have capacities around the 15,000 mark, while Sydney has 20,000. The new arena brings us into line with Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne, which will attract more concerts and events to Adelaide.

No it won't. What will attract more concerts is people buying tickets promptly not at the last minute if at all.
Its been said by multiple people here with industry connections.

One of the major issues is disposable income. Its a rare commodity in SA. It's a reflection of the economic and socio-economic situation in SA.

New flash venues won't change anything except the states debt levels.

[Patrick_27]

If there are a substantial number of shows where the difference between 11,300 seats and 15,000 seats is enough to make them non-viable then let's make the AEC bigger. Bet it could be done for a lot less than 677 million dollars.

The AEC can fit in around 7,000-9,000 people for an end stage concert - depending on the stage configuration. Concert stages are tending to get bigger and bigger (well, were pre-COVID), which can impact what a show can hold.

Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne have capacities around the 15,000 mark, while Sydney has 20,000. The new arena brings us into line with Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne, which will attract more concerts and events to Adelaide.

No it won't. What will attract more concerts is people buying tickets promptly not at the last minute if at all.
Its been said by multiple people here with industry connections.

One of the major issues is disposable income. Its a rare commodity in SA. It's a reflection of the economic and socio-economic situation in SA.

New flash venues won't change anything except the states debt levels.

This! ^ And furthermore, Brisbane doesn’t have a facility that holds 15,000 people… Their own Entertainment Centre is not only a complete dump, but it holds a mere 2,000 more than the AEC (11,300 vs. 13,300, which remembering that Brisbane has a population three times the size of Adelaide’s) and the BEC is also older than our AEC.

[A-Town]

The AEC can fit in around 7,000-9,000 people for an end stage concert - depending on the stage configuration. Concert stages are tending to get bigger and bigger (well, were pre-COVID), which can impact what a show can hold.

Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne have capacities around the 15,000 mark, while Sydney has 20,000. The new arena brings us into line with Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne, which will attract more concerts and events to Adelaide.

No it won't. What will attract more concerts is people buying tickets promptly not at the last minute if at all.
Its been said by multiple people here with industry connections.

One of the major issues is disposable income. Its a rare commodity in SA. It's a reflection of the economic and socio-economic situation in SA.

New flash venues won't change anything except the states debt levels.

This! ^ And furthermore, Brisbane doesn’t have a facility that holds 15,000 people… Their own Entertainment Centre is not only a complete dump, but it holds a mere 2,000 more than the AEC (11,300 vs. 13,300, which remembering that Brisbane has a population three times the size of Adelaide’s) and the BEC is also older than our AEC.

And what's Brisbane doing about it? They're building a brand new 15,000 seat venue (which was planned before the Olympics, might I add). We will have the worst entertainment centre / arena facilities in the country by a long way once that's built.

[A-Town]

If there are a substantial number of shows where the difference between 11,300 seats and 15,000 seats is enough to make them non-viable then let's make the AEC bigger. Bet it could be done for a lot less than 677 million dollars.

The AEC can fit in around 7,000-9,000 people for an end stage concert - depending on the stage configuration. Concert stages are tending to get bigger and bigger (well, were pre-COVID), which can impact what a show can hold.

Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne have capacities around the 15,000 mark, while Sydney has 20,000. The new arena brings us into line with Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne, which will attract more concerts and events to Adelaide.

No it won't. What will attract more concerts is people buying tickets promptly not at the last minute if at all.
Its been said by multiple people here with industry connections.

One of the major issues is disposable income. Its a rare commodity in SA. It's a reflection of the economic and socio-economic situation in SA.

New flash venues won't change anything except the states debt levels.

The AEC is a sub-standard venue, especially for concerts. A brand new world class facility that people actually want to visit that has a bigger capacity and excellent acoustics will hardly put a dent in Adelaide's chances of hosting more concerts.

[VinyTapestry849]

The AEC can fit in around 7,000-9,000 people for an end stage concert - depending on the stage configuration. Concert stages are tending to get bigger and bigger (well, were pre-COVID), which can impact what a show can hold.

Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne have capacities around the 15,000 mark, while Sydney has 20,000. The new arena brings us into line with Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne, which will attract more concerts and events to Adelaide.

No it won't. What will attract more concerts is people buying tickets promptly not at the last minute if at all.
Its been said by multiple people here with industry connections.

One of the major issues is disposable income. Its a rare commodity in SA. It's a reflection of the economic and socio-economic situation in SA.

New flash venues won't change anything except the states debt levels.

The AEC is a sub-standard venue, especially for concerts. A brand new world class facility that people actually want to visit that has a bigger capacity and excellent acoustics will hardly put a dent in Adelaide's chances of hosting more concerts.

A-Town, don't bother. Those whingers are opposed to even a moderate development undertaken in the metro area, there's no point arguing. The Arena will go ahead as planned because the marshall government will get in easily. Very exciting!

[gnrc_louis]

This forum opposed to development? what an absurd statement. People here like to actually debate the merits of something, rather than mindlessly support any proposal. Questioning something doesn’t make you automatically opposed to development, it just means you can think critically.