Diegos Son
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Heart_fan wrote:TimmyJ wrote:It's not really legacy if no one uses it. Correct. x3
|
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
Mister Football wrote:I honestly doubt SA made any sort of "profit". I feel the same way on this. They spent a fortune on infrastructure and other costs, that even if an operating profit was reached, the net short-medium term cost was a loss.
|
|
|
Diegos Son
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.9K,
Visits: 0
|
New_Dawn_Kiwi_Fan wrote:You can all go and get fucked. Yeah! hahahahahahahah
|
|
|
New_Dawn_Kiwi_Fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
You can all go and get fucked.
|
|
|
Mister Football
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
I honestly doubt SA made any sort of "profit".
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
TimmyJ wrote:It's not really legacy if no one uses it. Correct. Also, even if they are 'fully paid off', they cost a fortune to maintain, and with limited income, they are a cash drainer to their operators. The initial costs are just part of the equation.
|
|
|
TimmyJ
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.8K,
Visits: 0
|
It's not really legacy if no one uses it.
|
|
|
Diegos Son
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.9K,
Visits: 0
|
girtXc wrote:This is a ridiculous beat up. The stadiums are FULLY PAID FOR as a legacy of the WC. With SA having made a profit of at least 39 billion rand already it doesn't really matter if the stadiums gather dust for a little while Rugby comes over.Ongoing maintenance costs are about 100 million rand all up so they can sit there for 20 years and its still only 2 billion rand in maintenance All but 2 have tenants already Rugby and Cricket are dirty that football left them out.Western Province rugby are making demands for FULL control of Green Point:oops: They and the Sharks will move eventually,they are just doing exactly what the AFL did just before the bid book was sorted Moses Mahbida is virtually paying for itself already with its day to day earnings from tours,the Arch and the Arch Swing.
Its all politics. Russia is prepared to spend a far bigger proportion of their profit on stadiums-$10 billion infact
Bit airy fairy about there X, I get your point, but too much airy fairy stuff. If the stadiums become white elephants, then no-one wins. If they can spend a bit of miney to re-configure the stadiums, then so be it. This 'legacy' stuff is pompous and crap at times. I like the idea, but it can be idealistic at times.
|
|
|
icoulddoitbetter
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.9K,
Visits: 0
|
i do not give a shite about cricket! leave it to the indians
|
|
|
girtXc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.7K,
Visits: 0
|
This is a ridiculous beat up. The stadiums are FULLY PAID FOR as a legacy of the WC. With SA having made a profit of at least 39 billion rand already it doesn't really matter if the stadiums gather dust for a little while Rugby comes over.Ongoing maintenance costs are about 100 million rand all up so they can sit there for 20 years and its still only 2 billion rand in maintenance All but 2 have tenants already Rugby and Cricket are dirty that football left them out.Western Province rugby are making demands for FULL control of Green Point:oops: They and the Sharks will move eventually,they are just doing exactly what the AFL did just before the bid book was sorted Moses Mahbida is virtually paying for itself already with its day to day earnings from tours,the Arch and the Arch Swing.
Its all politics. Russia is prepared to spend a far bigger proportion of their profit on stadiums-$10 billion infact
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
nogglekaty wrote:South Africa underwent a massive building programme in an effort to make the country ready to host the month-long soccer extravaganza with the construction of five new stadiums, while a further five underwent varying degrees of renovation. Correct, but the viability of nearly all projects is in question. Thats why I laugh when I hear people complain that we have ovals in our bid. Its all about future viability, and selling the idea to the public. We do not want to get to a point after the WC that we have SA's current stresses.
|
|
|
nogglekaty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 0
|
South Africa underwent a massive building programme in an effort to make the country ready to host the month-long soccer extravaganza with the construction of five new stadiums, while a further five underwent varying degrees of renovation.
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
Mr wrote:socceroossupporter wrote:This is basically what would happen in WA, SA and Victoria if the 'friendly neighbourhood AFL haters™' were let anywhere near the 2022 bid negotiation table. Financial ruin. So Hindmarsh & Swan St are white elephants? One is already at capacity on big matches, the other will be within months. And Western Force need a new home in WA, as will Glory. Not to mention the Wallabies & Socceroos matches that WA & SA are missing out on each year. The commonsense moveable seating approach does not seem to be heeded by the friendly neighbourhood AFL lovers™'like yourself. No, those stadiums are not white elephants, but anything much larger will be. I think thats the point he was making really. Going for the grand projects, on the off chance that the game will be huge in a decade or so, is a big gamble.
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
md_ wrote:socceroossupporter wrote:This is basically what would happen in WA, SA and Victoria if the 'friendly neighbourhood AFL haters™' were let anywhere near the 2022 bid negotiation table. Financial ruin. Adelaide is the only substantive issue. Victoria will have the MCG and nowhere else. Geelong ain't likely to happen unless there is an A-league side on the way. Perth needs a decent rectangular stadium to provide a proper venue for the Glory, Force, likely NRL side and Socceroos. The A-league is a boon for rectangular stadiums, because in conjunction with the Rugby codes, provides year round stadium use. Correct, but somehow we need to get stadiums like EAS out of the hands of the NRL clubs, with the Knights in that case, to really get the HAL clubs, which is NJ in the said example, to be financially stronger. We can not be reliant on other codes dictating stadium access and costs.
|
|
|
md_
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 997,
Visits: 0
|
socceroossupporter wrote:This is basically what would happen in WA, SA and Victoria if the 'friendly neighbourhood AFL haters™' were let anywhere near the 2022 bid negotiation table. Financial ruin. Adelaide is the only substantive issue. Victoria will have the MCG and nowhere else. Geelong ain't likely to happen unless there is an A-league side on the way. Perth needs a decent rectangular stadium to provide a proper venue for the Glory, Force, likely NRL side and Socceroos. The A-league is a boon for rectangular stadiums, because in conjunction with the Rugby codes, provides year round stadium use.
|
|
|
Mr
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6K,
Visits: 0
|
socceroossupporter wrote:This is basically what would happen in WA, SA and Victoria if the 'friendly neighbourhood AFL haters™' were let anywhere near the 2022 bid negotiation table. Financial ruin. So Hindmarsh & Swan St are white elephants? One is already at capacity on big matches, the other will be within months. And Western Force need a new home in WA, as will Glory. Not to mention the Wallabies & Socceroos matches that WA & SA are missing out on each year. The commonsense moveable seating approach does not seem to be heeded by the friendly neighbourhood AFL lovers™'like yourself.
|
|
|
skeptic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Heart_fan wrote:Cricket? Damn they are really looking at anything now. Sad to see. That it is. Difficult to avoid a situation where much of the expense won't be an ornament to extravagance. SA premier league averaged only 7k last season, with only 3 of 16 clubs getting above the average and the top team 18k. Without other tenants such as cricket to help recoup costs, it's Kinda like GCU being the sole tenant of Skilled Park, only on a larger scale and in a country that can least afford it.
|
|
|
socceroossupporter
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
This is basically what would happen in WA, SA and Victoria if the 'friendly neighbourhood AFL haters™' were let anywhere near the 2022 bid negotiation table. Financial ruin.
|
|
|
Heart_fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8K,
Visits: 0
|
Cricket? Damn they are really looking at anything now. Sad to see.
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:World Cup stadiums suffer cricket blow 18/08/2010, 13:45 South Africa's hopes of making the World Cup football stadiums financially viable have been dealt a blow after the cricket board told parliament that most of the grounds are too small to host matches. Cricket South Africa (CSA) chief executive Gerald Majola told the portfolio committee on sport that his organisation had hoped to utilise some of the stadiums to spread their game to areas of the country that did not usually enjoy top-flight cricket. "Historically, our game has not been played in some of areas where some of stadiums were built," Majola told reporters on Wednesday, referring specifically to the arenas in Polokwane, Rustenburg and Nelspruit. "We saw an opportunity, but unfortunately we were not part of the designs of the stadiums," he added. South Africa underwent a massive building programme in an effort to make the country ready to host the month-long soccer extravaganza, with the construction of five new stadiums, while a further five underwent varying degrees of renovation. However, Majola said that a lack of consultation with CSA meant that only the Moses Mabhida Stadium in Durban is currently capable of hosting cricket. "We are compelled by the size of fields. When these fields were built, we were not part of that," he explained. South Africa is set to play a Twenty20 international against India at the Durban venue next January. CSA had to ask the International Cricket Council (ICC) for special dispensation to hold the match, as the ground is currently 22 metres too short square of the wicket. Majola added that if plans to incorporate an athletics track at the stadium go ahead, then the ground will conform to ICC size regulations. http://www.supersport.com/football/south-africa/news/100818/World_Cup_stadiums_suffer_cricket_blow
|
|
|