Great to hear from you Park Life ---- I seem to remember a very complimentary piece from you last year.
(By the way, why do you people all hide behind these funny names, is it some sort of secret seven or famous five type set up with secret handshakes etc)
Nairnville Park --- 3/4 size --- WCC two thirds NZCT 1/3 Approx
Te Whaea --- WCC -- 100%-- $1.5m (important point --- its there!)
Two at Wakefield Park --- WCC 2/3 ---- sponsorship 1/3
User Pays ---- at the moment Capital football picks up the payments and they or the clubs may continue to do that. Estimated payment over and above current set up will be around $2 -- $4 per player per game. (We asked an awful lot of stakeholders in both codes whether if given the option they'd prefer to pay $2-$4 per head and play or pay nothing and not play--- I'm sure you know the answer). No its not the extra private sector money or whatever it was you heard.
The chatter about schools is very straightforward --- John Dow and myself have had considerable discussion with both Wellington College and St Pats College. In both cases both parties (WCC and School) are looking at a joint deal, probably 50/50 but thats not set in stone. Obvious advantages are --- it halves the price for both parties instead of $1.5m each it's $750,000 each. So it makes it far more achievable for both parties in terms of getting over the line. Resource consents and other compliance matters are easier within school grounds. Because you can get so many hours from these (Nairnville and Te Whaea were doing up to 60 hours per week) each party can see themselves getting a very adequate go. The schools are happy for outsiders to access these as long as they come in under a Club, Assoc or Union banner as it were.They will both be full size with lights and for football, rugby and rugby league. From our point of view we should also be happy that the kids in the school are our kids (Wellington) anyway.
Fundraising for these --- interesting point Park Life --- I think we've been able to look at an opportunity of halving our costs and achieving 50% of two artificials that we had 0% of before.
Adding to our sportsfields portfolio which as many of your colleagues have pointed out is desperately needed.
I have also been involved in speaking with some potential funders who may well assist one or both parties get this over the line.
Both schools and WCC have expressed a commitment to continue the discussions/negotiations to get these underway as soon as possible.
If you call all that shameless self promotion then I suppose I'm guilty.
Best Wishes
John M
Good to hear from you too John, I seem to remember you knocked me out of the park (to use a metaphor from a stick and ball game I don't really like) with your reply. All very entertaining, although some were quite put out if I recall.
To answer your question, it is absolutely a secret seven/famous five type arrangement. Feverish and I have a secret handshake and we're in the process of debating whether or not to let Hard News use it. He probably is too fat as it's quite an acrobatic move.
But I digress.
Thanks for the clarity around who paid for what so far.
A few more q's if that's okay...
Are you saying there will definitely be two pitches going in at Wakefield? That's awesome if so and undeniable progress over and above existing plans, if you take my drift. Also great news about the two schools. Both in desperate need. Happy days.
If I can jump back to the user pays thing though - at the moment Te Whaea is $60/hour to hire. Are you saying the new turfs are going to be $60/hour plus $2-4 dollars per player? I think this is an important question. Not that I'm saying user pays is necessarily wrong, just wondering.
Think that is all.
By the way, I think you're in the business of shameless self-promotion. In fact I think we're helping.
PL.
