|
numklpkgulftumch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Sounds like he's been wedged, but doesn't care. Announcement just to get/keep votes before the election, and doesn't have to do anything until after he's in. Probably give his main rival a hospital pass as the "Minister for the Olympics"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
numklpkgulftumch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]People involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option. to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane. Ok buddy. Spending a combined $3 billion on a couple of el cheapo refurbs to maybe host some future IAAF makes “complete sense” while building a new brand new 50 year stadium to cater for Olympics, cricket, AFL and atheltics is “utterly insane”? You’re utterly insane. Brisbane is a growing city, and will continue to grow and grow. At some point in the near future, Gabba will be too old and too small, and we are going to need that 50k+ stadium built anyway. The long term economics of building a new stadium makes complete sense whilst keeping the two tired old relics on life support to showcase our status as a new world city to the world is utterly insane. You're an anti-vaxxer :) You're also right, but not about the Gabba. Lang Park needs the upgrade. The Gabba's size is more than enough for Brisbane's needs now and in the future. It's also functionally newer than Lang Park and used far less. Lang Park hosts multiple clubs throughout the year (Broncos/Dolphins/Roar/Reds), yearly internationals with Socceroos/Matildas/Kangaroos/Wallabies, festivals like Magic Round, State of Origin, big concerts and other unique events. It honestly should've been upgraded to 65/70K years ago. It also means that the QLD Govt can make a real play for the NRL GF and other events that the current size of Lang Park denies them. By george! You want to spend $1.5 billion downgrading the QSAC, $1.5 billion samegrading the Gabba, and another ~$2 billion upgrading lang park, and you're trying to argue this makes complete sense? The hilarious thing is you've spent close to $5-6 billion once you factor in public transport upgrades, and you've actually acheived a net reduction in seats, once QSAC is demolished to 14k. Wouldn't it make more sense to just build a new stadium, one which will be eventually needed anyway, and will last at least 50 years, and will provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift? Even the pro environment /green argument fails as Gabba and QSAC now redundant can be converted into green space or sustainable housing precincts. Your argument is bizarre and sucks on every level; financially, environmentally, practically, economically. Just build the new stadium ffs! They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals. Just going to touch on two points: provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift Is providing an alternative not just providing another white elephant? They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals.
The AFL Grand Final is never leaving Melbourne again unless forced to by a pandemic, etc as it was for 2020/2021. NRL, maybe. But that won't be in an upgraded cricket/AFL stadium, that will just be in Suncorp. This obsession with trying to have a Melbourne-class (not going to say world-class because of the sport) AFL stadium astounds me... Sure, it might work for the Olympics, but do you really think the Brisbane Lions are going to get above 40k regularly to a standard season game? Upgrading/building a new stadium for the Olympics to accomodate that is just having seats there that won't be used. BBL hovers around 25k, and Lions only get crowds like they got for the first game when they're premiership contenders. No one should be building things for AFL, full stop. No it’s not another white elephant because you’re effectively doubling Brisbane’s capacity to host major concerts. Currently Suncorps capacity to host them is capped due to concerns about impacts on local residents around Milton and Paddington. As for the NRL/AFL argument, the only event it regularly sells out Suncorp is state of origin. Maybe once or twice year. But that isn’t a reason to reduce its capacity, just because 99% of time it is a “white elephant”. The same applies for the new Brisbane stadium, 99% of the time it will be useless , but occasionally , maybe once or twice a year, its insurance policy will be activated and it will sell out. Your argument is moot anyway, simply because the financials of upgrading , downgrading and side grading existing stadiums and building new transport links where it isn’t needed makes no sense. The newer, bigger, better stadium at Victoria park is ultimately cheaper and far better investment
It's also not about total capacity these days It's the revenue that can be generated. Old stadiums are being replaced by ones with more and better corporate facilities that bring in much more $ per head Once you've sold all the corporate boxes you're missing out, regardless of whether some of the top tiers have empty seats For Example, The new Spurs Stadium has been specifically designed to get people in the ground earlier and have people staying longer as well. This certainly applies to Music promoters when they come to choose which 3 cities their artist will pick to play in 
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]People involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option. to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane. Ok buddy. Spending a combined $3 billion on a couple of el cheapo refurbs to maybe host some future IAAF makes “complete sense” while building a new brand new 50 year stadium to cater for Olympics, cricket, AFL and atheltics is “utterly insane”? You’re utterly insane. Brisbane is a growing city, and will continue to grow and grow. At some point in the near future, Gabba will be too old and too small, and we are going to need that 50k+ stadium built anyway. The long term economics of building a new stadium makes complete sense whilst keeping the two tired old relics on life support to showcase our status as a new world city to the world is utterly insane. You're an anti-vaxxer :) You're also right, but not about the Gabba. Lang Park needs the upgrade. The Gabba's size is more than enough for Brisbane's needs now and in the future. It's also functionally newer than Lang Park and used far less. Lang Park hosts multiple clubs throughout the year (Broncos/Dolphins/Roar/Reds), yearly internationals with Socceroos/Matildas/Kangaroos/Wallabies, festivals like Magic Round, State of Origin, big concerts and other unique events. It honestly should've been upgraded to 65/70K years ago. It also means that the QLD Govt can make a real play for the NRL GF and other events that the current size of Lang Park denies them. By george! You want to spend $1.5 billion downgrading the QSAC, $1.5 billion samegrading the Gabba, and another ~$2 billion upgrading lang park, and you're trying to argue this makes complete sense? The hilarious thing is you've spent close to $5-6 billion once you factor in public transport upgrades, and you've actually acheived a net reduction in seats, once QSAC is demolished to 14k. Wouldn't it make more sense to just build a new stadium, one which will be eventually needed anyway, and will last at least 50 years, and will provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift? Even the pro environment /green argument fails as Gabba and QSAC now redundant can be converted into green space or sustainable housing precincts. Your argument is bizarre and sucks on every level; financially, environmentally, practically, economically. Just build the new stadium ffs! They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals. Just going to touch on two points: provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift Is providing an alternative not just providing another white elephant? They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals.
The AFL Grand Final is never leaving Melbourne again unless forced to by a pandemic, etc as it was for 2020/2021. NRL, maybe. But that won't be in an upgraded cricket/AFL stadium, that will just be in Suncorp. This obsession with trying to have a Melbourne-class (not going to say world-class because of the sport) AFL stadium astounds me... Sure, it might work for the Olympics, but do you really think the Brisbane Lions are going to get above 40k regularly to a standard season game? Upgrading/building a new stadium for the Olympics to accomodate that is just having seats there that won't be used. BBL hovers around 25k, and Lions only get crowds like they got for the first game when they're premiership contenders. No one should be building things for AFL, full stop. No it’s not another white elephant because you’re effectively doubling Brisbane’s capacity to host major concerts. Currently Suncorps capacity to host them is capped due to concerns about impacts on local residents around Milton and Paddington. Why does it need to be doubled though? Very rarely are there two major concerts at the same time, and people can't perform in two places at once.
As for the NRL/AFL argument, the only event it regularly sells out Suncorp is state of origin. Maybe once or twice year. But that isn’t a reason to reduce its capacity, just because 99% of time it is a “white elephant”. The same applies for the new Brisbane stadium, 99% of the time it will be useless , but occasionally , maybe once or twice a year, its insurance policy will be activated and it will sell out. Yeah that's fair enough. I mean personally... I don't think Suncorp needs anything done to it. I just think $900 million (assuming nothing gets spent on Suncorp, which we know isn't going to happen) being spent on upgrading/facelifting/etc the Gabba should suffice for everything it needs to be. Again, this is working off the figures used to upgrade the MCG for 2006 Comm Games (and accounting for inflation)
Your argument is moot anyway, simply because the financials of upgrading , downgrading and side grading existing stadiums and building new transport links where it isn’t needed makes no sense. The newer, bigger, better stadium at Victoria park is ultimately cheaper and far better investment .
Transport links is a good point. As I've said earlier, not from Brisbane, so I can't really comment on that. But again, stadiums can be made bigger and better without needing to be newer.
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x[quote]People involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option. to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane. Ok buddy. Spending a combined $3 billion on a couple of el cheapo refurbs to maybe host some future IAAF makes “complete sense” while building a new brand new 50 year stadium to cater for Olympics, cricket, AFL and atheltics is “utterly insane”? You’re utterly insane. Brisbane is a growing city, and will continue to grow and grow. At some point in the near future, Gabba will be too old and too small, and we are going to need that 50k+ stadium built anyway. The long term economics of building a new stadium makes complete sense whilst keeping the two tired old relics on life support to showcase our status as a new world city to the world is utterly insane. You're an anti-vaxxer :) You're also right, but not about the Gabba. Lang Park needs the upgrade. The Gabba's size is more than enough for Brisbane's needs now and in the future. It's also functionally newer than Lang Park and used far less. Lang Park hosts multiple clubs throughout the year (Broncos/Dolphins/Roar/Reds), yearly internationals with Socceroos/Matildas/Kangaroos/Wallabies, festivals like Magic Round, State of Origin, big concerts and other unique events. It honestly should've been upgraded to 65/70K years ago. It also means that the QLD Govt can make a real play for the NRL GF and other events that the current size of Lang Park denies them. By george! You want to spend $1.5 billion downgrading the QSAC, $1.5 billion samegrading the Gabba, and another ~$2 billion upgrading lang park, and you're trying to argue this makes complete sense? The hilarious thing is you've spent close to $5-6 billion once you factor in public transport upgrades, and you've actually acheived a net reduction in seats, once QSAC is demolished to 14k. Wouldn't it make more sense to just build a new stadium, one which will be eventually needed anyway, and will last at least 50 years, and will provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift? Even the pro environment /green argument fails as Gabba and QSAC now redundant can be converted into green space or sustainable housing precincts. Your argument is bizarre and sucks on every level; financially, environmentally, practically, economically. Just build the new stadium ffs! They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals. Just going to touch on two points: provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift Is providing an alternative not just providing another white elephant? They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals.
The AFL Grand Final is never leaving Melbourne again unless forced to by a pandemic, etc as it was for 2020/2021. NRL, maybe. But that won't be in an upgraded cricket/AFL stadium, that will just be in Suncorp. This obsession with trying to have a Melbourne-class (not going to say world-class because of the sport) AFL stadium astounds me... Sure, it might work for the Olympics, but do you really think the Brisbane Lions are going to get above 40k regularly to a standard season game? Upgrading/building a new stadium for the Olympics to accomodate that is just having seats there that won't be used. BBL hovers around 25k, and Lions only get crowds like they got for the first game when they're premiership contenders. No one should be building things for AFL, full stop. No it’s not another white elephant because you’re effectively doubling Brisbane’s capacity to host major concerts. Currently Suncorps capacity to host them is capped due to concerns about impacts on local residents around Milton and Paddington. As for the NRL/AFL argument, the only event it regularly sells out Suncorp is state of origin. Maybe once or twice year. But that isn’t a reason to reduce its capacity, just because 99% of time it is a “white elephant”. The same applies for the new Brisbane stadium, 99% of the time it will be useless , but occasionally , maybe once or twice a year, its insurance policy will be activated and it will sell out. Your argument is moot anyway, simply because the financials of upgrading , downgrading and side grading existing stadiums and building new transport links where it isn’t needed makes no sense. The newer, bigger, better stadium at Victoria park is ultimately cheaper and far better investment
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x[quote]People involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option. to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane. Ok buddy. Spending a combined $3 billion on a couple of el cheapo refurbs to maybe host some future IAAF makes “complete sense” while building a new brand new 50 year stadium to cater for Olympics, cricket, AFL and atheltics is “utterly insane”? You’re utterly insane. Brisbane is a growing city, and will continue to grow and grow. At some point in the near future, Gabba will be too old and too small, and we are going to need that 50k+ stadium built anyway. The long term economics of building a new stadium makes complete sense whilst keeping the two tired old relics on life support to showcase our status as a new world city to the world is utterly insane. You're an anti-vaxxer :) You're also right, but not about the Gabba. Lang Park needs the upgrade. The Gabba's size is more than enough for Brisbane's needs now and in the future. It's also functionally newer than Lang Park and used far less. Lang Park hosts multiple clubs throughout the year (Broncos/Dolphins/Roar/Reds), yearly internationals with Socceroos/Matildas/Kangaroos/Wallabies, festivals like Magic Round, State of Origin, big concerts and other unique events. It honestly should've been upgraded to 65/70K years ago. It also means that the QLD Govt can make a real play for the NRL GF and other events that the current size of Lang Park denies them. By george! You want to spend $1.5 billion downgrading the QSAC, $1.5 billion samegrading the Gabba, and another ~$2 billion upgrading lang park, and you're trying to argue this makes complete sense? The hilarious thing is you've spent close to $5-6 billion once you factor in public transport upgrades, and you've actually acheived a net reduction in seats, once QSAC is demolished to 14k. Wouldn't it make more sense to just build a new stadium, one which will be eventually needed anyway, and will last at least 50 years, and will provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift? Even the pro environment /green argument fails as Gabba and QSAC now redundant can be converted into green space or sustainable housing precincts. Your argument is bizarre and sucks on every level; financially, environmentally, practically, economically. Just build the new stadium ffs! They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals. Just going to touch on two points: provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift Is providing an alternative not just providing another white elephant? They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals.
The AFL Grand Final is never leaving Melbourne again unless forced to by a pandemic, etc as it was for 2020/2021. NRL, maybe. But that won't be in an upgraded cricket/AFL stadium, that will just be in Suncorp. This obsession with trying to have a Melbourne-class (not going to say world-class because of the sport) AFL stadium astounds me... Sure, it might work for the Olympics, but do you really think the Brisbane Lions are going to get above 40k regularly to a standard season game? Upgrading/building a new stadium for the Olympics to accomodate that is just having seats there that won't be used. BBL hovers around 25k, and Lions only get crowds like they got for the first game when they're premiership contenders. No one should be building things for AFL, full stop.
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x[quote]People involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option. to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane. Ok buddy. Spending a combined $3 billion on a couple of el cheapo refurbs to maybe host some future IAAF makes “complete sense” while building a new brand new 50 year stadium to cater for Olympics, cricket, AFL and atheltics is “utterly insane”? You’re utterly insane. Brisbane is a growing city, and will continue to grow and grow. At some point in the near future, Gabba will be too old and too small, and we are going to need that 50k+ stadium built anyway. The long term economics of building a new stadium makes complete sense whilst keeping the two tired old relics on life support to showcase our status as a new world city to the world is utterly insane. You're an anti-vaxxer :) You're also right, but not about the Gabba. Lang Park needs the upgrade. The Gabba's size is more than enough for Brisbane's needs now and in the future. It's also functionally newer than Lang Park and used far less. Lang Park hosts multiple clubs throughout the year (Broncos/Dolphins/Roar/Reds), yearly internationals with Socceroos/Matildas/Kangaroos/Wallabies, festivals like Magic Round, State of Origin, big concerts and other unique events. It honestly should've been upgraded to 65/70K years ago. It also means that the QLD Govt can make a real play for the NRL GF and other events that the current size of Lang Park denies them. By george! You want to spend $1.5 billion downgrading the QSAC, $1.5 billion samegrading the Gabba, and another ~$2 billion upgrading lang park, and you're trying to argue this makes complete sense? The hilarious thing is you've spent close to $5-6 billion once you factor in public transport upgrades, and you've actually acheived a net reduction in seats, once QSAC is demolished to 14k. Wouldn't it make more sense to just build a new stadium, one which will be eventually needed anyway, and will last at least 50 years, and will provide a viable alternative to Suncorp to host major performing artists like Taylor Swift? Even the pro environment /green argument fails as Gabba and QSAC now redundant can be converted into green space or sustainable housing precincts. Your argument is bizarre and sucks on every level; financially, environmentally, practically, economically. Just build the new stadium ffs! They could even boost the capacity to 60-70k, then you would have a genuine competitor to Sydney to host NRL/AFL finals.
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
Yes, football stadiums. What have been floated though are big round stadiums, not suitable for football. Nothing to see folks.
|
|
|
|
|
karta
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 567,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xPeople involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option. to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane. Ok buddy. Spending a combined $3 billion on a couple of el cheapo refurbs to maybe host some future IAAF makes “complete sense” while building a new brand new 50 year stadium to cater for Olympics, cricket, AFL and atheltics is “utterly insane”? You’re utterly insane. Brisbane is a growing city, and will continue to grow and grow. At some point in the near future, Gabba will be too old and too small, and we are going to need that 50k+ stadium built anyway. The long term economics of building a new stadium makes complete sense whilst keeping the two tired old relics on life support to showcase our status as a new world city to the world is utterly insane. You're an anti-vaxxer :) You're also right, but not about the Gabba. Lang Park needs the upgrade. The Gabba's size is more than enough for Brisbane's needs now and in the future. It's also functionally newer than Lang Park and used far less. Lang Park hosts multiple clubs throughout the year (Broncos/Dolphins/Roar/Reds), yearly internationals with Socceroos/Matildas/Kangaroos/Wallabies, festivals like Magic Round, State of Origin, big concerts and other unique events. It honestly should've been upgraded to 65/70K years ago. It also means that the QLD Govt can make a real play for the NRL GF and other events that the current size of Lang Park denies them. +xThis Brisbane Stadium chat doesn't involve any rectangular stadiums, it doesn't matter to football. Just call them football stadiums. The people who say the four syllable 'rectangular' instead of the more traditional 'football' are the same people upset about this decision. The flow on effect of this decision is that Lang Park will reclaim the title as the best football stadium in the country and likely force NSW's hand into re-configuring Stadium Australia into a football ground. If BNE and SYD both have large, modern football stadiums then good luck to MEL events when competing for touring clubs/nations... More high quality football grounds in this country is not a bad thing for a football fan.
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+xThis Brisbane Stadium chat doesn't involve any rectangular stadiums, it doesn't matter to football. Well… it kinda does involve rectangular stadiums QSAC, whilst an athletics ground, is a rectangular ground within that. It was the Matilda’s base for the World Cup. Plus the headline grabber from the media, is that Suncorp is getting a minor facelift/upgrades instead of a new (primarily) AFL stadium for the Olympics
|
|
|
|
|
Footyball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
This Brisbane Stadium chat doesn't involve any rectangular stadiums, it doesn't matter to football.
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xPeople involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option. to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane. Ok buddy. Spending a combined $3 billion on a couple of el cheapo refurbs to maybe host some future IAAF makes “complete sense” while building a new brand new 50 year stadium to cater for Olympics, cricket, AFL and atheltics is “utterly insane”? You’re utterly insane. Brisbane is a growing city, and will continue to grow and grow. At some point in the near future, Gabba will be too old and too small, and we are going to need that 50k+ stadium built anyway. The long term economics of building a new stadium makes complete sense whilst keeping the two tired old relics on life support to showcase our status as a new world city to the world is utterly insane. There is a 50k+ stadium. Suncorp. How often does the Gabba sell out?
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+xPeople involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option. to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane. Ok buddy. Spending a combined $3 billion on a couple of el cheapo refurbs to maybe host some future IAAF makes “complete sense” while building a new brand new 50 year stadium to cater for Olympics, cricket, AFL and atheltics is “utterly insane”? You’re utterly insane. Brisbane is a growing city, and will continue to grow and grow. At some point in the near future, Gabba will be too old and too small, and we are going to need that 50k+ stadium built anyway. The long term economics of building a new stadium makes complete sense whilst keeping the two tired old relics on life support to showcase our status as a new world city to the world is utterly insane.
|
|
|
|
|
karta
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 567,
Visits: 0
|
People involved in actually delivering the games have said from the start that the Gabba is a bad option.
The AFL-media led whinging is ridiculous and shows how out-of-touch some people are. The Gabba hosted their GF but now getting half a billion to refurbish it is a disaster...
Vic Park is much needed greenspace and should never have been an option.
The outcome to use/upgrade Lang Park and to rebuild our _athletics_ stadium and have a real legacy to host future IAAF events makes complete sense. Spending billions on a new stadium that would host one test a year, some T20's and a dozen unpopular AFL games was utterly insane.
If the AFL is really upset they can move out to Ipswich where the QLD government just built them a $70M stadium. I'm sure the Gabba's staff would prefer to see the back of them.
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. The report said that the Gabba will be at the end of its useful life in 2030 so it won't be touch ups that will be required. Touch ups is probably a facetious word by me. But... useful life is all up to how it's looked after. MCG has been around for 170 years, and it's most recent redevelopment in 2002-2006 for the Commonwealth Games cost $450m, all while being able to still use at 70,000 capacity during the 4 years. Yes, I know inflation means that figure is more like $750m in today's money. But 'useful life' isn't all about knockdown rebuilds / relocation. (See Roosty's post below that summarises what's in motion for the Gabba with this QSAC decision) It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
Flytox
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 413,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. The report said that the Gabba will be at the end of its useful life in 2030 so it won't be touch ups that will be required.
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
Why build giant new facilities for sports which never have crowds except for the olympics when they exist a 1 hour flight away. That’s whey they gave it to Brisbane. Most of the infrastructure is ready to go. No need to build an Olympic village or any expensive white elephants. Gabba needed an upgrade anyway and the Brisbane Live venue had been on the cards for years before any Olympics talk. They gave it to Brisbane because they were the only ones silly enough to volunteer to have a giant millstone hung around their neck. Every other city said 'fuck that'. In any case I'm not talking specifically about Brisbane but seeing we are, does Brisbane have a whitewater kayaking course, for example, or will that need to be built at a cost of millions? Because there's a perfectly good Olympic standard one in Penrith an hour away. No no, they're going to build one at a cost of millions. Waste of money and within 2 weeks of the closing ceremony a white elephant. That's my point. It's a badly made one. They awarded the games to Brisbane 12 years before the games. It's not that we were IOCs only option, rather the business case stacked up, we were trusted and preferred. They didn't really look at anyone else. If not Brisbane, of course, of course, the 2032 games weren't going to be cancelled because every other city said "fuck that". As per my previous comment, the idea of giving it to Brisbane is most of the venues here are Olympics ready. The key word being 'most'. Some new builds will cost millions, but millions will also be earned in tourism, economic activity, in addition to all the transport infrastructure, legacy benefits, etc. At the very least, QLD will have a white water rafting facility, just like the 25 year old one in Penrith.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
Why build giant new facilities for sports which never have crowds except for the olympics when they exist a 1 hour flight away. That’s whey they gave it to Brisbane. Most of the infrastructure is ready to go. No need to build an Olympic village or any expensive white elephants. Gabba needed an upgrade anyway and the Brisbane Live venue had been on the cards for years before any Olympics talk. They gave it to Brisbane because they were the only ones silly enough to volunteer to have a giant millstone hung around their neck. Every other city said 'fuck that'. In any case I'm not talking specifically about Brisbane but seeing we are, does Brisbane have a whitewater kayaking course, for example, or will that need to be built at a cost of millions? Because there's a perfectly good Olympic standard one in Penrith an hour away. No no, they're going to build one at a cost of millions. Waste of money and within 2 weeks of the closing ceremony a white elephant. That's my point. Finding 5.5 – The Redland Whitewater Centre proposal presents a compelling case. The Review Panel saw a range of advantages to building the facility including strong legacy outcomes There is a sound Financial model for the facility The facility provides a regional attraction which could have broader benefits to the Redlands The centre would provide a convenient training facility for State Emergency Service, Queensland Surf Lifesaving and other First responder agencies  Yes yes I read that too. You can retrospectively justify anything. I'm betting London to a brick that whilst they can use it it will be well in excess of anything they'll ever need. In any case pick any other sport which is niche and the facilities exist elsewhere so you don't have to spend millions building a white elephant. Maybe Bridget 'Shotgun' Mackenzie or Daryl Maguire can be given a seat on the Brisbane organising committee. They have form getting brand new giant oversized facilities for sports that are niche and undeserving.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
numklpkgulftumch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
Why build giant new facilities for sports which never have crowds except for the olympics when they exist a 1 hour flight away. That’s whey they gave it to Brisbane. Most of the infrastructure is ready to go. No need to build an Olympic village or any expensive white elephants. Gabba needed an upgrade anyway and the Brisbane Live venue had been on the cards for years before any Olympics talk. They gave it to Brisbane because they were the only ones silly enough to volunteer to have a giant millstone hung around their neck. Every other city said 'fuck that'. In any case I'm not talking specifically about Brisbane but seeing we are, does Brisbane have a whitewater kayaking course, for example, or will that need to be built at a cost of millions? Because there's a perfectly good Olympic standard one in Penrith an hour away. No no, they're going to build one at a cost of millions. Waste of money and within 2 weeks of the closing ceremony a white elephant. That's my point. Finding 5.5 – The Redland Whitewater Centre proposal presents a compelling case. The Review Panel saw a range of advantages to building the facility including strong legacy outcomes There is a sound Financial model for the facility The facility provides a regional attraction which could have broader benefits to the Redlands The centre would provide a convenient training facility for State Emergency Service, Queensland Surf Lifesaving and other First responder agencies
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
Why build giant new facilities for sports which never have crowds except for the olympics when they exist a 1 hour flight away. That’s whey they gave it to Brisbane. Most of the infrastructure is ready to go. No need to build an Olympic village or any expensive white elephants. Gabba needed an upgrade anyway and the Brisbane Live venue had been on the cards for years before any Olympics talk. They gave it to Brisbane because they were the only ones silly enough to volunteer to have a giant millstone hung around their neck. Every other city said 'fuck that'. In any case I'm not talking specifically about Brisbane but seeing we are, does Brisbane have a whitewater kayaking course, for example, or will that need to be built at a cost of millions? Because there's a perfectly good Olympic standard one in Penrith an hour away. No no, they're going to build one at a cost of millions. Waste of money and within 2 weeks of the closing ceremony a white elephant. That's my point.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
Why build giant new facilities for sports which never have crowds except for the olympics when they exist a 1 hour flight away. That’s whey they gave it to Brisbane. Most of the infrastructure is ready to go. No need to build an Olympic village or any expensive white elephants. Gabba needed an upgrade anyway and the Brisbane Live venue had been on the cards for years before any Olympics talk. Ironically that is what QLD Labor is now doing, spending $1.5 billion to build a white elephant at QSAC. Smart politics by Labor, if they cancel the games they will have to explain to taxpayers why they are costing them $500 million in compensation , whereas now they can argue they are saving taxpayer billions. Funny how politics spoils everything.
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]Truly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
Well, as I said in the above post, why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Um. It shouldn’t. It just can. Kill two birds with one stone kinda thing
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
QSAC should be knocked down and redeveloped into something actually useful. Was shit even back when they had the commonwealth games there. (Thankfully they looked to have done their dash too.) Can see the olympics in the future being given to cities that have previously hosted them (obviously not Athens or Rio) or whole countries. Why build giant new facilities for sports which never have crowds except for the olympics when they exist a 1 hour flight away.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
Well, as I said in the above post, why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Ok, since then, I didn't realise Cricket is actually an Olympic sport as of 2028, so that can be a factor. But this pandering of stadiums for AFL is just ridiculous. Look at all the hoopering and a-hollering that happened in Sydney with stadiums over the past 25 years, because AFL stuck their fingers in the pie.
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics... It’s not a real refurbishment, they aren’t building any new stands or increasing the capacity. Most likely it relates to disability access, corporate facilities, dressing rooms upgrades etc. Really exciting stuff.
It makes no sense. Why refurbish the Gabba and then spend another $1.5 billion on horrible temporary stadium with a lower capacity, horrible PT access and no pubs? Why not just do it all at the Gabba?
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. And that goes back to my original point. Why should the Olympic Games futureproof international cricket and AFL? Personally, you're all making valid points from a QLD taxpayer point of view (long term use within the wider state) - I'm not one so I can't really comment on that. We're in a football forum, so that's why I'm bringing up this perspective. What's been lost in the media is that QLD Gov is still putting forward about half a billion to refurbishing the Gabba before the Olympics...
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash. Well in a few months time the LNP can have a crack. Let's see what they do.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all. Not at all. Brisbane and SEQ already has a bunch of facilities and stadia that are Olympics ready. Cycling, tennis. basketball etc. It just needs an indoor venue to activate Roma Station and a new oval 50-60k stadium to futureproof Brisbane for international cricket and AFL. Bris needs these things anyway, the Olympics is a perfect excuse to get them built whilst using federal funds. If it costs $3.5 billion, while that is a lot of money, it will only get more expensive as time goes by. Labor’s plan however is a car crash.
|
|
|
|
|
bohemia
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Brisbane is making the Athens Olympics look organised
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xTruly crazy decision by the QLD government. So the Gabba isn’t big or new enough to host the athletics or opening ceremony, so they solve the problem by moving it an older stadium with a lower capacity of 40k, then diverting the opening ceremony to Suncorp. Absolute pure clusterfuckery of the highest magnitude. Then again, it is Labor , so no surprise. I dunno, smart of them to spruce up a stadium that already has an athletics track, than to build something completely new. This way they can touch up the Gabba as they need to over the years. Remember, that was also expanded on just after Lang Park (unless we got fed backwards news in NSW 20 years ago). To me, personally, it doesn't make sense to build a new stadium that, after the Olympics, the major sports that will use it have no relation to the Olympic Games whatsoever. Remember Rio did similar, despite all the other white elephants they built. Lol the athletics track will need to replaced anyway. So spend $1.5 billion on a temporary stadium in order to save $1 million on installing an athletics track at the Gabba? Then spending another $1 billion on the Gabba to bring it up to code. Then spending another $10 billion plus in 15-20 years anyway because the Gabba is no longer fit for purpose.
You would have to be a pretty rusted on Labor voter to think that is good economics.
Labour or LNP here Rusty and you'd struggle. This is a case of trying to polish a turd no matter which way you look at it. In any case when Labour get booted this election coming up we'll see if the LNP up there can roll that turd in glitter after all.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|