'New' Auckland Stadium Discussion

Forums › Off topic › 'New' Auckland Stadium Discussion

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Networkn
32243 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357483 26-Mar-2025 16:08

cddt:

wellygary:

Buried in the report is this in relation to the costs they have "proposed"

Actually insane to even propose a plan with all those caveats. May as well wish for a genie to magic up a new stadium too, it's as realistic as that proposal.

I agree, if you want to get really upset, ask how much the nonsense in that report cost us.

Sharesies kids

Free kids accounts - trade shares and funds (NZ, US) with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357537 26-Mar-2025 16:32

SaltyNZ:

If some sort of privately funded organisation wants to build a new stadium, have at it, I guess. Just don't expect The Public to bail it out if/when it fails for some reason. (The Public will absolutely be asked to bail it out if it fails for some reason).

That is what is happening today. A trust, set up with Auckland Cricket and Auckland Rugby as the beneficiaries, makes the decisions and then periodically comes to the rate payers for a bail out. The most recent one (2019) was a $10 million donation and a $53 million dollar loan because they can't get a bank loan.

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357540 26-Mar-2025 16:37

Scott3:

And other than limits on number / time of events (I feel central government should pass legislation to lift this restriction)

Good luck with that.

To be fair to the residents they have to put up with the Eden Park constantly trying to move the goal posts on numbers and timing of events. It's a different situation to that of Western Springs where the residents objected to an existing use of the speedway.

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357541 26-Mar-2025 16:44

mattwnz:

New Zealand already has too many boutique stadiums that aren’t large enough to accommodate major events to allow them to be considered international class stadiums. The Wellington stadium was one of the first of these boutique stadiums to be built and was originally supposed to be 80,000 seats. But got downgraded to 35000 with a bit extra for temp seats. Now all new stadiums being built don’t support cricket and people seem to want it roofed. They tend to cost ratepayers a significant amount and the level of support for the main sport played in them, rugby, has dropped off alot. NZs largest stadium is currently Eden park and a significant amount of money was spent on it prior to a previous World Cup to allow it to be temporarily increased in capacity to 60,000 to allie it to host a RWC final. But this new planned stadium only has a capacity of 55k. Seems ridiculously small to be considered a national stadium in a large world class city.

Auckland is a small city internationally and huge stadia have very limited use. They become massive millstones and are very rarely filled. How often does Sky Stadium sellout? It seems that 30k may even have been too big.

Cricket doesn't want large stadiums, they want small venues that are cost effective, easy to fill and look good on TV. Hagley, Seddon and Bay Oval are the types of venues that cricket want.

Oval stadiums are pretty useless for watching winter sport and generally not wonderful for concerts.

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357542 26-Mar-2025 16:46

networkn:

cddt:

Actually insane to even propose a plan with all those caveats. May as well wish for a genie to magic up a new stadium too, it's as realistic as that proposal.

I agree, if you want to get really upset, ask how much the nonsense in that report cost us.

So the council should have just YOLO'd it with reckons and "common sense?"

networkn

Networkn
32243 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357555 26-Mar-2025 17:09

Handle9:

So the council should have just YOLO'd it with reckons and "common sense?"

Sigh. Can you just have a discussion like a normal person without the dripping sarcasm?

The report contains so many caveats and disclaimers so as to make the entire report on the costs of second stadium pointless and of little use to anyone.

No-one is suggesting the report shouldn't have a cost, but what have we gained in exchange for our money? Absolutely nothing actionable as it relates to a second stadium. I could have 'reckoned' a billion dollars by guestimating, doesn't mean it's going to get built for that.

Not to mention this is I think, the third such report and round of proposals related to this topic.

mattwnz

20106 posts

Uber Geek

#3357556 26-Mar-2025 17:17

I recall it was going to cost over a billion back before Eden park was last chosen to get the major revamp. IMO the let revamp should have lasted decades. A new one now I am guessing will be closer to 3 billion with how expensive things add in NZ

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357557 26-Mar-2025 17:17

networkn:

Handle9:

So the council should have just YOLO'd it with reckons and "common sense?"

Sigh. Can you just have a discussion like a normal person without the dripping sarcasm?

The report contains so many caveats and disclaimers so as to make the entire report on the costs of second stadium pointless and of little use to anyone.

No-one is suggesting the report shouldn't have a cost, but what have we gained in exchange for our money? Absolutely nothing actionable as it relates to a second stadium. I could have 'reckoned' a billion dollars by guestimating, doesn't mean it's going to get built for that.

Not to mention this is I think, the third such report and round of proposals related to this topic.

The purpose of a feasibility report is to show whether or not the proposal has considered all the relevant details. It's commenting on the proposal put forward by the development consortium. The feasibility report essentially says that the new stadium proposal is a pipe dream and not worth considering. That is entirely actionable.

The Eden Park proposal report also shows it's not financially viable and would require substantial public money on top of the ~$600 million Eden Park wants for development.

mattwnz

20106 posts

Uber Geek

#3357560 26-Mar-2025 17:31

Is the size of the stadium they want, to attract a future World Cup rugby hosting arrangement . Eden park rarely fills to capacity and the public seems to be losing interest in rugby which will be its main sporting use. Maybe levy’s should go on ticket prices to cover the cost. I think Wellington stadium has a levy on each ticket sold. But almost all the benefit is to Auckland

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357610 26-Mar-2025 20:48

mattwnz:

Is the size of the stadium they want, to attract a future World Cup rugby hosting arrangement . Eden park rarely fills to capacity and the public seems to be losing interest in rugby which will be its main sporting use. Maybe levy’s should go on ticket prices to cover the cost. I think Wellington stadium has a levy on each ticket sold. But almost all the benefit is to Auckland

Where did the world cup thing come from? There has been no discussion of that and the chances of New Zealand ever hosting the world cup again are minimal.

Eden Park charges for sports to use it. It's a rental agreement.

mattwnz

20106 posts

Uber Geek

#3357630 26-Mar-2025 23:05

New Zealand will always want to hold the rugby World Cup again. It is seen as the number one national sport and NZ is one of the top countries. If they don’t take into account the venues ability to host it , it could end up costing NZ a substantial amount of money in the future. That is exactly what happened with the last World Cup NZ held where it was decided to back Eden park instead of building a new Waterfront stadium for it. I recall tax payers spend about 250 million on the park for that and not sure what return on the investment was.

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3357632 26-Mar-2025 23:42

New Zealand can't afford to host the Rugby World Cup. France guaranteed £150 million to world rugby to host the last world cup. That was £30 million above the required guarantee. New Zealand can't underwrite a tournament like that.

New Zealand will never host the rugby world cup again under the current rules which require a single country to host the tournament. It's a falacy to suggest that the stadium in Auckland is being considered as being suitable for a rugby world cup.

This whole thing is part of Auckland councils long term stadium strategy which is looking at what is required for the region vs the current stock. Their basic conclusion is they need a 30,000-60,000 seat stadium for large events (Eden Park or replacement), a 10,000-25,000 seat stadium for club/franchise games (Blues/Warriors/Auckland FC, likely at Mt Smart) and a small stadium of 8,000-10,000 (likely Western Springs) with a strong cricket focus.

They have already rationalised speedway to and invested in Waikaraka Park. This will likely result in the council upgrading Mt Smart and building a new small stadium.

The Rugby World Cup has no part in this review. It is about Aucklands requirements.

mattwnz

20106 posts

Uber Geek

#3357633 27-Mar-2025 00:33

Handle9:

The Rugby World Cup has no part in this review. It is about Aucklands requirements.

Which is exactly why it should be 100% funded by Auckland and not get any central government funding, or any funding from taxpayers outside Auckland.
The rest of NZ have our own regional stadiums that we are already paying for, many of which are better and in better locations close to transport hubs than Eden park will ever be. The only thing Eden park had going for it was it's capacity. Eden park is essentially Auckland versions of Wellingtons old Athletic park. Athletic park at one stage could also hold nearly 60,000 people.

GV27

5883 posts

Uber Geek

#3357645 27-Mar-2025 07:29

mattwnz:

Which is exactly why it should be 100% funded by Auckland and not get any central government funding, or any funding from taxpayers outside Auckland.
The rest of NZ have our own regional stadiums that we are already paying for, many of which are better and in better locations close to transport hubs than Eden park will ever be. The only thing Eden park had going for it was it's capacity. Eden park is essentially Auckland versions of Wellingtons old Athletic park. Athletic park at one stage could also hold nearly 60,000 people.

Can we get a refund for Auckland taxpayers for all the things we have made contributions to in other parts of the country then?

The idea that Auckland should fund things for Auckland in isolation should cut both ways.

gzt

16994 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3357652 27-Mar-2025 08:07

Scott3:

At least one of those numbers may appear to be incorrect. Western Springs has hosted music events with crowds of 50,000+ Configured for sporting events the figure may be correct.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4