I note with somewhat sadness that Elizabeth managed to put such a negative spin in the story in the ODT today.

How can two of the biggest other sporting codes in NZ showing interest (and not just lip service) in playing games in Dunedin be anything but a good thing? I note that they currently don’t play here now, nor have they said that they will play at the decrepit Carisbrook.

Full Story Here

It of course is only a start too. Yes Elizabeth build it and they will come, and yes it will cost us. It costs every other stadium to host these guys, why should Dunedin be a ‘special’ case and expect to get it free? They have laid out how much it will cost and what numbers are expected to break even, they have indicated that they wish to come to town, the rest is up to the company that will run the stadium.

And yes they bloody well will come. The Mad Butcher and Radio Sport will talk about Dunedin stadium all week, there will be people coming from all over the country. My mother who is a mad mad Warriors fan was so excited this morning she rang to see if the stadium was being built for sure. She can’t get to Auckland to see The Warriors, but she sure as heck will make her way down here for the game.

Funny though, like the poo on the beach (yes that again Elizabeth), the water treatment upgrade projects, and almost countless other concerns posed by those opposing the stadium, the question has been asked who and what will be in the stadium, and like we have been saying all along, look what could go in there if you ask and seek.

“The two teams were among a list of clubs and organisations to respond to a letter from the trust seeking expressions of interest for the stadium”

Oh and BTW seems that it wasn’t just the Phoenix and Warriors expressing interest.


Filed under Stadiums

9 responses to “Boy-yah!

  1. Elizabeth

    Good man, you bit back.

  2. Elizabeth

    If the letters (expressions of interest) are the same as in the white paper presented to Dunedin City Council on 9 February, well….easy to write, harder to follow up on if the venue hire charges are beyond reach (remembering, joy of joys, we’re looking at ratepayer subsidisation of the annual business of the stadium, on top of the severe problems of funding its build)…let’s hope CST has achieved more expressions of interest since early February, given all the who-ha of the great venue being plonked upon us.
    And let’s not forget, Mr Farry says they’re working around the clock on the events programme, have been for three years…
    The hype is extraordinary and profound. How clever to drop the two sports entities into this week’s PR. Sounds like the future is league, not rugby. Oh my god. CST have been backing the wrong horse all this time…fooled to thinking DCC should buy ORFU into the picture of supreme viability at Awatea St.
    But it’s easy isn’t it, gambling with other people’s money when you can’t get more than “$30” (like Guy Hedderwick said) from your private sector. Furiously hope that’s a myth, but he said it poor man – let’s regard it as an ‘historical’ amount, one too pitiful to acknowledge beside the promissories (signed contracts) slaved for in recent months. Was that operational revenue, or capital funding. I’m always confused by the fudging.

    Old Boys will have their stadium.

  3. David

    Three problems
    – they’re not our teams
    – they’re not even proper games – they’re pre-season games that are irrelevant.
    – the poor ratepayer gets hit yet again with the costs and risks of under-writing a third grade sporting event. Auckland just did that and lost a fortune.

  4. Richard

    I come back (again)!

    David, you overlook that if the stadium eventuates, the council will not be the operator, as I have indeed noted elsewhere.

    Nor should it be as the ARC fiasco with David Beckham at Mt. Smart proved.

    I go! (again)!

  5. David

    Richard, The stadium could run with very large losses, which in my opinion is very likely.

    Even if you take the highly optimistic predictions, the margin is so small that there is a high risk of making losses – quite possibly very large losses. (and that’s without including the missing $2.8m depreciation per year)

    If this happens, who pays for the losses?

    Do ratepayers fork out for this, or do other city companies cover it, and the city gets a smaller dividend ? (bottom line – ratepayers still fork out for it)

  6. Three positives

    – they’re not our teams
    The professional sports teams mentioned appreciate the money making possibilities of expanding their market base. Funny Palmy Nth isn’t the home of the Highlanders, someone tell the locals.

    Imagine the indignity and smugness of other teams wanting to come to the best indoor stadium in the Southern Hemisphere and playing games – how dare they.

    – they’re not even proper games – they’re pre-season games that are irrelevant.

    Tell that to all of the people who will go. What about the pre season tour by Everton, Manchester Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal to the Asian countries, the two pre-season baseball leagues attracting thousands of people.

    They are proper games and not irrelevant.

    – the poor ratepayer gets hit yet again with the costs and risks of under-writing a third grade sporting event. Auckland just did that and lost a fortune.

    Wrong. As outlined in the paper games by these teams elsewhere has been profitable. You are of course confusing the David Beckham LA Galaxy issue (why didn’t this surprise me?). The first visit by Beckham was an astounding success, just as it was all over the place. I sat with tens of thousands of fans in BC Place Stadium in Vancouver watching an irrelevant pre season game between the Vancouver Whitecaps and the LA Galaxy (So irrelevant). The problem was poor management on the ARC’s behalf, if anyone was delusional to think that a second visit by that team would work needs to be sacked – oh wait they were! The first game was a success but with the ageing and dubious quality of the LA Galaxy (excluding Beckham) there was no way they were going to attract a crowd, the Galaxy are awful. Now if he was to come back to town with AC Milan or whatever other team he is in, with genuine great footballers, that would be a success.

    It’s just so simple to be blasé with the reality of the situation. Moans and groans ad nauseam that other codes and teams won’t be interested, documented evidence to the contrary and what do we get, the above defeatist comments.

    This is also just the tip of the ice-berg. If it can be shown that not only do we have the best new indoor stadium in the Southern Hemisphere, but that events can be run there successfully, and that crowds will come, then of course it is a valid conclusion to assume that other (proper) regular season games will come. The Phoenix have always expressed an interest in a home game or two away from home, just at the Highlanders did the other week.

    It’s only a risk if the people running the place have a non intelligent sports marketing brian among them. Beckham once (with the dreadful Galaxy) was a great idea and a success for the city, Beckham twice so close with the even more dreadful Galaxy (subsequent retirements) was a mistake. However mistakes like these aren’t fatal, no one will die, and as evident in the Rogers Arena complex in Toronto, even the most dire situation can be turned around into a resounding success.

  7. David


    We are talking of pre-season games, including a soccer team that 90% of Dunedin couldn’t name a single player. No one I talked to could even tell you the name of the NZ team that plays in Australia – not one.

    I say there is a risk of ratepayers underwriting this. You say there isn’t.

    If there’s no risk, then why on earth do we have to underwrite it?

    Much of the reason for this stadium is about our own insecurity, our ego and our vanity. We are being laughed at from further north because Dunedin thinks this will make other teams suffer “indignity and smugness” because they can’t play here.

    With all due respect, that’s just laughable. Unless there are teams all over Australia suffering indignity and smugness because they can’t play at telstra dome. Oh those poor teams must be suffering such mental anguish.

    Take away our ego and vanity and what you have is a $200m concrete box that is empty 95% of the year.

    And if were are to get so many events other than rugby, why do CST project that LESS THAN 10% of income will come from ALL other events put together (and that’s before costs).

    All non-rugby events put together (before costs) don’t even come to 1/40th of the annual loan commitments. And annual rugby venue hire (before costs) totals just 1/20th.

  8. Elizabeth

    ### ODT Online Mon, 6 Apr 2009
    Opinion: Your say: Stadium blackmail
    By Montana kiwi fan

    Sports teams have been blackmailing cities into building them new stadiums for years, too often successfully.

    Read more

    The New York Times published the post ‘Op-Classic, 1996: Wild Pitch’ by Roger G. Noll on April 5, 2009.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s