News & Discussion: General CBD Development

[jimmy_2486]

Well if they were smart they would try and sell off AAMI and invest the money in upgrading the AO with more stands etc.

It would be in their best interests.

But then again I don't think they are that smart, hence why they hang on to that eyesore at west lakes.

But the reason why the SANFL built Football Park is precisely because they wanted their own stadium, nothing to do with the SACA. Its like the MCG - the moronic MCC (cricket) own the stadium, but 80% of income for the MCG comes from football. This was similar to when there was no Football Park and big football games were played at the Oval.
So it would be 'over their dead bodies' that the SANFL would pump money into SACA's Adelaide Oval, and quite rightly so

By the way, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the stadium of Football Park, but just its location and no rail link is the problem

Yeah but by pumping money into AO means they will have a cut of the ownership of it depending on how much they invested.

If I had 100 million to give to SACA to improve AO, then id want a share in the ownership. Im not gonna give them the 100 million for nothing????

With the MCG, if 80% of the income comes from football then wouldnt the AFL get that cut....not the MCC?? Im sure the AFL would be wasting their time and effort if they didnt??

[Dave_The_Planner]

Quite simply, it would be a terrible business decision to close down AAMI. It is the SANFL's primary asset and as such controls football in this state. Local and AFL.

It would be like selling your house at West Lakes to rent a house closer to the city. Economically it just doesn't make sense.

Why on earth would they even consider selling it and moving all games to a venue they do not own and, more importantly, can never own? They would lose control and be held to ransom by SACA and ACC! This is exactly why the AFL grand final is not played anywhere else except the MCG.

The same goes for constructing a rail line to AAMI. It is ridiculous to construct infrastructure to a venue that only gets used once a week for half the year. Sure, if the SANFL want to pay for a rail line that would be great, but this should not be the state Government's responsibility.

[Paulns]

Solution - Sell AAMI stadium and build a new one close to the city and excisting rail.....

By the way, I too don't support the idea of the SANFL once again sharing the SACA, Adelaide Oval. They should have there own Stadium, just in a more appropriate location.

In the mean time I wouldnt care if other AFL clubs played at the A.O. even though the chances of this happening are slim...

[Dave_The_Planner]

Solution - Sell AAMI stadium and build a new one close to the city and excisting rail.....

Except that if the SANFL sold AAMI they would not have enough money to construct a stadium. Estimates have been cast around $400 million for the site, minus the demolition costs of the stadium. So that would rely on the state Government giving them land and the SANFL borrowing hundreds of millions for a new stadium.

Probably the only way this "Stadium in the City" idea will come to fruition is if they adopt the BOOT system with a private investor. That way, the SANFL still retains control and will have an asset at some point in the future.

[jimmy_2486]

Quite simply, it would be a terrible business decision to close down AAMI. It is the SANFL's primary asset and as such controls football in this state. Local and AFL.

It would be like selling your house at West Lakes to rent a house closer to the city. Economically it just doesn't make sense.

I think what u said doesnt really make sense.

If SANFL invests the money from selling AAMI into ownership of the asset of AO, then the AO would be owned by 2 cooperate bodies...SACA and the SANFL.

Depending on who has the greater share in the asset is who gets the greater say.

Its just upto SACA to sell part of AO to the SANFL and in return this will give AO the funds it needs to upgrade it. The money the SANFL will buy it with is the sellings of AAMI. However this will be determined by how much of the AO, SACA is willing to sell.

[Dave_The_Planner]

Quite simply, it would be a terrible business decision to close down AAMI. It is the SANFL's primary asset and as such controls football in this state. Local and AFL.

It would be like selling your house at West Lakes to rent a house closer to the city. Economically it just doesn't make sense.

I think what u said doesnt really make sense.

If SANFL invests the money from selling AAMI into ownership of the asset of AO, then the AO would be owned by 2 cooperate bodies...SACA and the SANFL.

Depending on who has the greater share in the asset is who gets the greater say.

Its just upto SACA to sell part of AO to the SANFL and in return this will give AO the funds it needs to upgrade it. The money the SANFL will buy it with is the sellings of AAMI. However this will be determined by how much of the AO, SACA is willing to sell.

It makes perfect sense. I think you've completely missed the point.

Adelaide Oval is not owned by SACA. ACC owns Adelaide Oval and the surrounding parklands. You cannot simply sell land that has been dedicated as reserve and besides this would be a very unpopular decision. The SANFL moved from Adelaide Oval for good reason and I doubt anyone on the SANFL board of directors would be silly enough to entertain the idea for a second.

The SANFL would have to sell AAMI at less than its capital value because it would no longer be a stadium site.

Even if the SANFL decided to build a new stadium (somewhere), it would involve many hundreds of millions of debt. And for what? Another stadium similar in size but just closer to the city.

[jimmy_2486]

So how would this differ from Waverly Park with a 72,000 capacity being sold, and Telstra Dome being built in the city with 53,500 capacity, and very expensive features?

Maybe Melbourne should had just kept Waverly and never built Tesltra dome cos that must had also been a waste of money?

[jimmy_2486]

It makes perfect sense. I think you've completely missed the point.

Adelaide Oval is not owned by SACA. ACC owns Adelaide Oval and the surrounding parklands. You cannot simply sell land that has been dedicated as reserve and besides this would be a very unpopular decision. The SANFL moved from Adelaide Oval for good reason and I doubt anyone on the SANFL board of directors would be silly enough to entertain the idea for a second.

The SANFL would have to sell AAMI at less than its capital value because it would no longer be a stadium site.

So if SACA DOESN'T own AO, but ACC does instead cos you say you cannot sell land that has been dedicated as reserve.
Then technically SANFL doesn't OWN AAMI stadium cos wouldn't that area also be classed as reserve, so the Charles Sturt Council would own AAMI?? So from what you have said, how could SANFL sell AAMI if it doesn't own it?

?????...........

[rogue]

It makes perfect sense. I think you've completely missed the point.

Adelaide Oval is not owned by SACA. ACC owns Adelaide Oval and the surrounding parklands. You cannot simply sell land that has been dedicated as reserve and besides this would be a very unpopular decision. The SANFL moved from Adelaide Oval for good reason and I doubt anyone on the SANFL board of directors would be silly enough to entertain the idea for a second.

The SANFL would have to sell AAMI at less than its capital value because it would no longer be a stadium site.

So if SACA DOESN'T own AO, but ACC does instead cos you say you cannot sell land that has been dedicated as reserve.
Then technically SANFL doesn't OWN AAMI stadium cos wouldn't that area also be classed as reserve, so the Charles Sturt Council would own AAMI?? So from what you have said, how could SANFL sell AAMI if it doesn't own it?

?????...........

jimmy_2486, SACA does not own Adelaide Oval. It is leased from the ACC. The SANFL own AAMI Stadium and Max Basheer Reserve outright after purchasing the land about 30 years ago.

Dave_The_Planner, would the land not be worth more as a potential residential development rather than a stadium?

[Paulns]

Except that if the SANFL sold AAMI they would not have enough money to construct a stadium. Estimates have been cast around $400 million for the site, minus the demolition costs of the stadium. So that would rely on the state Government giving them land and the SANFL borrowing hundreds of millions for a new stadium.

Absolutely correct....
The SANFL will surely have to seek funding from both the State and Federal governemnt and I believe if needed to seek financial funding from interested big business..

I believe the long term benefits will far out weigh the negatives for Adelaide and South Australia in seeking other international events such as hosting the World cup soccer games, Australian Rugby internationals, maybe even the Commonwealth Games etc.....


The benefits to the SANFL would be inceased usage of their stadium, (ie-concerts, rugby,soccer,etc), increased crowds to footy games as the location is much more geographically central to Adelaide, which all means in the long term increased revenue to the SANFL which can be used for obviously the growth of the game and the sustainable future of the league....

Also the city already has the luxury of various forms of public transport infrustructure avaliable at no extra cost to both the SANFL and the goverment.
We have to think big, bold and long term if this cities ever going to really move forward....

[jimmy_2486]

It makes perfect sense. I think you've completely missed the point.

Adelaide Oval is not owned by SACA. ACC owns Adelaide Oval and the surrounding parklands. You cannot simply sell land that has been dedicated as reserve and besides this would be a very unpopular decision. The SANFL moved from Adelaide Oval for good reason and I doubt anyone on the SANFL board of directors would be silly enough to entertain the idea for a second.

The SANFL would have to sell AAMI at less than its capital value because it would no longer be a stadium site.

So if SACA DOESN'T own AO, but ACC does instead cos you say you cannot sell land that has been dedicated as reserve.
Then technically SANFL doesn't OWN AAMI stadium cos wouldn't that area also be classed as reserve, so the Charles Sturt Council would own AAMI?? So from what you have said, how could SANFL sell AAMI if it doesn't own it?

?????...........

jimmy_2486, SACA does not own Adelaide Oval. It is leased from the ACC. The SANFL own AAMI Stadium and Max Basheer Reserve outright after purchasing the land about 30 years ago.

Dave_The_Planner, would the land not be worth more as a potential residential development rather than a stadium?

Ok I get ya now. But I was under the impression that SANFL was also leasing max basheer reserve as Dave_The_planner stated that reserves cannot be sold, if you look above?

ANYWAYSSS........

I agree with Paulns that its in the best interests of the SANFL to move into the city. I mean the city can handle 9-5 commuters pretty good, and the situation is improving with light rail, so a footy game or any big event would be no worries.

[Dave_The_Planner]

Dave_The_Planner, would the land not be worth more as a potential residential development rather than a stadium?

Absolutely. Which is why if the land were sold, consideration would need to be given to the cost of demolition, likely to be 10's of millions.

Ok I get ya now. But I was under the impression that SANFL was also leasing max basheer reserve as Dave_The_planner stated that reserves cannot be sold, if you look above?,

Actually, reserves can be sold but the process normally requires the land be resumed to freehold title first. As I mentioned earlier, this would be time consuming and would not be a very popular decision.

ANYWAYSSS........

I agree with Paulns that its in the best interests of the SANFL to move into the city. I mean the city can handle 9-5 commuters pretty good, and the situation is improving with light rail, so a footy game or any big event would be no worries.

I agree that it would be great for the SANFL to move into the city, or at least to a more central location. If a new site is chosen, it must be next to, or on top of a railway line for efficient egress. Otherwise, it may as well stay where it is.

[Dave_The_Planner]

So how would this differ from Waverly Park with a 72,000 capacity being sold, and Telstra Dome being built in the city with 53,500 capacity, and very expensive features?

Maybe Melbourne should had just kept Waverly and never built Tesltra dome cos that must had also been a waste of money?

The difference is that the SANFL is still heavily investing in AAMI. The SANFL has made it very clear they are staying at West Lakes for the time being.

[Norman]

If they build a rail link to AAMI, I will be content with their current location.

[Paulns]

If they build a rail link to AAMI, I will be content with their current location.

A rail link to Footy Park would just be a white elephant, hence the reason why I believe government wouldn't support it. Theres to many other rail issues that need addressing before this would ever be considered. (ie - electrofing the network, upgrading suburban stations, extending the city tram line, etc, etc....)

In the mean time, until the SANFL and the AFL ever have the balls to axe AAMI, we'll just have to put up with there patch up of a joke bus service......

Already we've seen the federal government reject some funding for the SANFL's 70 million dollar upgrade. Maybe some people out there are finally starting to realise that any money spent on AAMI stadium is just a waste and not in the long term interests of this state and Adelaide?????

Its time for the SANFL to wake up and realise this. Its not 1977 anymore? Its 2007!!!!!!

Footy park may have been fine then but since Adelaides grown and just continues to sprawl by the day. Its not fair to expect people from the hills, and far southern and northern suburbs to travel past the city and wind there way into West lakes then spend how ever long trying to find a park. Its an absolute joke...... Then say after a crows game, try get outta the dump of a place along with the other 45,000 or so people???? This is stupid and it happens every weekend during the season. The footy public can only take so much of this..

I say just bulldoze the dump at what ever cost and do us all a favour and build new near the city to benefit us all from where ever, not just the western suburbs........