Not stupid. Could build the Marine Education Centre on the Island as well. No NIMBYs to object.
Someone told me it's not particularly well built so every chance.
I've heard this too.
Backed up to some degree by the corrugated iron debacle - they took a cheaper option that came with a requirement to wash and maintain it, and then they didn't do that, so required replacing far quicker than provisioned for.
Someone told me it's not particularly well built so every chance.
I've heard this too.
Backed up to some degree by the corrugated iron debacle - they took a cheaper option that came with a requirement to wash and maintain it, and then they didn't do that, so required replacing far quicker than provisioned for.
I work for the company that engineered it. I think its pretty solid, but I'm no engineer.
Unless we (in conjunction with Rugby say) really did build our own ground, without the council's money.
Based on Crowd Trends, a 12,000 seat stadium will be seen as too extravagant for Rugby. They may be looking at using Martin Lucky Park to host Hurricanes games in a couple of years
Have you read the Seattle article Junior posted that kicked off this round of discussion?
The whole point of that article is that the the downward spiral in crowds was in a large part due to an inappropriate existing dual purpose stadium with no atmosphere. People didn't go BECAUSE of the vast cacophonous stadium where they were a long way from the pitch.
So they built a new ground, specifically designed for rectangle field sports, and they now bost the noisest NFL crowd in North America and boasted the highest home average crowd in the MLS.
So all along my point has been that the poor AND DECLINING crowds are a result of the round dual purpose atmosphere diluting cake tin stadium. And that therefore, with Rugby DESPERATE to arrest their alarming falling crowds they may very well be interested in cofunding a purpose built rectangular stadium.
It might take a bit of pitching to break their inertia, including cosy existing arrangements and relationships... but recent coverage has shown that it is not only us who are paying attention to Dale's graphs. Wellington Rugby are very concerned and conducting an internal review.
So I think the poor crowds at Wellington Rugby are exactly why they might want to invest in a solution.
Yes but that is in Seattle, America and it is about the NFL which is the richest sporting competition in the world. That just doesn't apply for Wellington.
Even at the Kingdome Seattle averaged seemed to average well over 50,000. Stadium size and shape are important factors but they aren't the only ones.
Are you unable to read the article and extract the concepts and the drivers and lessons without every single variable having to be identical? Sigh - okay - no point even having a conversation then is there?
Ahhhh... New Zealand. So few paying customers, so much passion.
No reason Welnix should not talk to Wellington Rugby, loosely. No harm done in exploring potential concepts.
Welnix owns a chunk of the Hurricanes you would think in order to explore synergies.
Unless we (in conjunction with Rugby say) really did build our own ground, without the council's money.
Based on Crowd Trends, a 12,000 seat stadium will be seen as too extravagant for Rugby. They may be looking at using Martin Lucky Park to host Hurricanes games in a couple of years
Have you read the Seattle article Junior posted that kicked off this round of discussion?
The whole point of that article is that the the downward spiral in crowds was in a large part due to an inappropriate existing dual purpose stadium with no atmosphere. People didn't go BECAUSE of the vast cacophonous stadium where they were a long way from the pitch.
So they built a new ground, specifically designed for rectangle field sports, and they now bost the noisest NFL crowd in North America and boasted the highest home average crowd in the MLS.
So all along my point has been that the poor AND DECLINING crowds are a result of the round dual purpose atmosphere diluting cake tin stadium. And that therefore, with Rugby DESPERATE to arrest their alarming falling crowds they may very well be interested in cofunding a purpose built rectangular stadium.
It might take a bit of pitching to break their inertia, including cosy existing arrangements and relationships... but recent coverage has shown that it is not only us who are paying attention to Dale's graphs. Wellington Rugby are very concerned and conducting an internal review.
So I think the poor crowds at Wellington Rugby are exactly why they might want to invest in a solution.
Yes but that is in Seattle, America and it is about the NFL which is the richest sporting competition in the world. That just doesn't apply for Wellington.
Even at the Kingdome Seattle averaged seemed to average well over 50,000. Stadium size and shape are important factors but they aren't the only ones.
Are you unable to read the article and extract the concepts and the drivers and lessons without every single variable having to be identical? Sigh - okay - no point even having a conversation then is there?
You said that
"the poor AND DECLINING crowds are a result of the round dual purpose atmosphere diluting cake tin stadium." I disagreed with that statement. Aren't I allowed to do that? Or do you not like discussions where someone disagrees with you? Makes it difficult to have a conversation then doesn't it? We would be damn stupid if we just built a new stadium and didn't look at the huge differences between the two cities or search for what other evidence there is available.
I conceded that stadium size and shape are important factors. I just don't think they are the only ones. In fact the very article you quoted mentions several other factors for Seattle's poor crowds! It sounds like you just took the points out of the article you wanted to. You have ignored pertinent facts like the roof on the Kingdome leaked and tiles collapsed before a game (not mentioned in the article). Nowhere in the Guardian article does it even say that a lack of crowd noise was why the Kingdome had to be replaced.
The Mariners received higher crowds in their last couple of years at the Kingdome then they do at Safeco Field today. Admittedly this is because they did better in their last couple of seasons in the Kingdome. This is my point though on field performance is more important than atmosphere. Isn't it more logical to spend 500k on a marquee every season so we can have a winning then shell out 20 mill for a stadium and pay 500k upkeep every season?
I can post evidence to say I disagree with that like how the Westpac Stadium used to get fantastic crowds when Super Rugby was a more attractive competition for fans.
I can post an article about how some NRL teams have seen increased crowds moving away from boutique grounds to centralised stadiums. If you disagreed with that then wouldn't you be doing the same thing you accused me of?
15k is good enough for an All Blacks test match in Christchurch, why wouldn't it be enough here? And if we lose the Sevens, is it really that much of a big deal? Nobody bothers to show up anymore, it might actually do more good for the city than harm if we lost it.
I do concede that cricket will suffer. If only we had one of the best cricket grounds in the world just a 10 minute drive away...
Not stupid. Could build the Marine Education Centre on the Island as well. No NIMBYs to object.
Suits me fine but then we've just bought one of these
15k is good enough for an All Blacks test match in Christchurch, why wouldn't it be enough here? And if we lose the Sevens, is it really that much of a big deal? Nobody bothers to show up anymore, it might actually do more good for the city than harm if we lost it.
I do concede that cricket will suffer. If only we had one of the best cricket grounds in the world just a 10 minute drive away...
Christchurch is not getting the decent rugby tests and that wont change until they build their new facility. Wait until the British and Irish Lions come in 2017. The best that Chch will get is a tour match not a test match. The three tests will be in Dunedin, Wellington and Auckland. The three with the biggest capacities. Economic fact of life for the rugby people when they know that with the British tour groups that come means they could sell out any venue in NZ twice over.
You said that
"the poor AND DECLINING crowds are a result of the round dual purpose atmosphere diluting cake tin stadium." I disagreed with that statement. Aren't I allowed to do that? Or do you not like discussions where someone disagrees with you? Makes it difficult to have a conversation then doesn't it? We would be damn stupid if we just built a new stadium and didn't look at the huge differences between the two cities or search for what other evidence there is available.
I conceded that stadium size and shape are important factors. I just don't think they are the only ones. In fact the very article you quoted mentions several other factors for Seattle's poor crowds! It sounds like you just took the points out of the article you wanted to. You have ignored pertinent facts like the roof on the Kingdome leaked and tiles collapsed before a game (not mentioned in the article). Nowhere in the Guardian article does it even say that a lack of crowd noise was why the Kingdome had to be replaced.
The Mariners received higher crowds in their last couple of years at the Kingdome then they do at Safeco Field today. Admittedly this is because they did better in their last couple of seasons in the Kingdome. This is my point though on field performance is more important than atmosphere. Isn't it more logical to spend 500k on a marquee every season so we can have a winning then shell out 20 mill for a stadium and pay 500k upkeep every season?
I can post evidence to say I disagree with that like how the Westpac Stadium used to get fantastic crowds when Super Rugby was a more attractive competition for fans.
I can post an article about how some NRL teams have seen increased crowds moving away from boutique grounds to centralised stadiums. If you disagreed with that then wouldn't you be doing the same thing you accused me of?
You are absolutely allowed to disagree. It was not clear that you were disagreeing with that particular statement, or why, until now. Thanks for clarifying.
Please note I did day what you said I said, but you have interpreted that as me saying it is the ONLY reason, which I did NOT say.
I agree with you that it is __A__ factor, but NOT the ONLY factor. I agree 100% that there are a range of factors. I never said there wasn't.
15k is good enough for an All Blacks test match in Christchurch, why wouldn't it be enough here? And if we lose the Sevens, is it really that much of a big deal? Nobody bothers to show up anymore, it might actually do more good for the city than harm if we lost it.
I do concede that cricket will suffer. If only we had one of the best cricket grounds in the world just a 10 minute drive away...
Christchurch is not getting the decent rugby tests and that wont change until they build their new facility. Wait until the British and Irish Lions come in 2017. The best that Chch will get is a tour match not a test match. The three tests will be in Dunedin, Wellington and Auckland. The three with the biggest capacities. Economic fact of life for the rugby people when they know that with the British tour groups that come means they could sell out any venue in NZ twice over.
I think you might be onto something there. Cricket got their wetdream of building an oval in Hagley Park for the ICC World Cup 2015, despite the fact the founding fathers set aside the Hagley Park as grounds for public use, not for a privatised sport. Could be that the ChCh stadium will be pushed through (despite public opposition to date due to other public priorities) in time for the Lions Tour if one follows your good logic.
Looks like Brisbane fans have some of the same issues with Suncorp as we have with the RoF:
They've been talking about Perry Park for years. Perfect location.
There's also Ballymore which is slightly less perfect but still viable - would need an upgrade too... I also remember there was some talk a few years back about developing something at Richlands, which is a prick of a location unless you're coming from Ipswich (which I would suggest relatively few Roar fans do).
I hope they do something positive... they're probably more likely than us.
Yes please, let's convert Hutt Rec.
...or under the Korokoro hill where Car Giant and the station overflow parking are.
I still think the better solution is to move the logs north of the ferry terminal (previously proposed) and build over there, across from Westpac... or my alternative plan where a train goes through Westpac and destroys foundations forcing it to be demolished.
Could we commit a small act of terror and flatten the NZRB office and build our new ground there?
Could we commit a small act of terror and flatten the NZRB office and build our new ground there?
Yes please, let's convert Hutt Rec.
For the Phoenix , yeah great.
But its a valuable cricket facility, athletics facility and general open space, which would be lost.
We need a new bit of ground near a train station.
I think it will be a struggle to find a greenfields site because vacant land near a train station is likely to be too expensive and you'd get a greater return with something else on it (as an investor). It would need to be an existing park.
Yes please, let's convert Hutt Rec.
For the Phoenix , yeah great.
But its a valuable cricket facility, athletics facility and general open space, which would be lost.
We need a new bit of ground near a train station.
It is a 5 min walk from Woburn and as for the Cricket/Athletics, can you please explain the new artificial training facility that has removed at least one cricket playing area?
I think it will be a struggle to find a greenfields site because vacant land near a train station is likely to be too expensive and you'd get a greater return with something else on it (as an investor). It would need to be an existing park.
I don't think the idea is neccessarily VACANT land near a train station. It is land with buildings on it, which are not being used / are not currently leased, that could be bought, demolished and a new stadium built there asd a greefields development...
I think it will be a struggle to find a greenfields site because vacant land near a train station is likely to be too expensive and you'd get a greater return with something else on it (as an investor). It would need to be an existing park.
I don't think the idea is neccessarily VACANT land near a train station. It is land with buildings on it, which are not being used / are not currently leased, that could be bought, demolished and a new stadium built there asd a greefields development...
Yes please, let's convert Hutt Rec.
For the Phoenix , yeah great.
But its a valuable cricket facility, athletics facility and general open space, which would be lost.
We need a new bit of ground near a train station.
Why can't the cricket and atheltics just move to Petone Rec, a general open space that the NIMBY's fought so hard to preserve even though it barely gets used?
Yes please, let's convert Hutt Rec.
For the Phoenix , yeah great.
But its a valuable cricket facility, athletics facility and general open space, which would be lost.
We need a new bit of ground near a train station.
Why can't the cricket and atheltics just move to Petone Rec, a general open space that the NIMBY's fought so hard to preserve even though it barely gets used?
Because of the children.
Yesss!!!!!!! Come on the Villa!
The problem is the ideal place is still Petone Rec (short of utilising port land which will never get support from councils vs Westpac) but because of the (not even) half-arsed way that was last handled those bridges are burnt.
I was in the tron the other day and people were complaining about Wellington getting cricket world cup games because no one shows up and it's embarassing.
Then I read in the dom post today that Wellington had the highest attendace as a percentage of the population across all games.
This goes to show that even when Wellington's croud attedence are actually amongst the top in the country the venue is not the correct size for the population in most sports, it actually is a bad look for the city and even the country.
Yes please, let's convert Hutt Rec.
For the Phoenix , yeah great.
But its a valuable cricket facility, athletics facility and general open space, which would be lost.
We need a new bit of ground near a train station.
Why can't the cricket and atheltics just move to Petone Rec, a general open space that the NIMBY's fought so hard to preserve even though it barely gets used?
Yeah. But that's up to westpac and I don't think they give a shark
Yesss!!!!!!! Come on the Villa!
We have the wind, the rain, the fog, the cold and the phoenix.
I don't think people realise how costly it would be to replace all the seats
better and more important things for the money to be spent on. Replacing seats that we already have is a waste.
Yes please, let's convert Hutt Rec.
For the Phoenix , yeah great.
But its a valuable cricket facility, athletics facility and general open space, which would be lost.
We need a new bit of ground near a train station.
Why can't the cricket and atheltics just move to Petone Rec, a general open space that the NIMBY's fought so hard to preserve even though it barely gets used?
Because of the children.
Because reasons.
Yes please, let's convert Hutt Rec.
For the Phoenix , yeah great.
But its a valuable cricket facility, athletics facility and general open space, which would be lost.
We need a new bit of ground near a train station.
It is a 5 min walk from Woburn and as for the Cricket/Athletics, can you please explain the new artificial training facility that has removed at least one cricket playing area?
They are moving the cricket blocks around
...or under the Korokoro hill where Car Giant and the station overflow parking are.
I still think the better solution is to move the logs north of the ferry terminal (previously proposed) and build over there, across from Westpac... or my alternative plan where a train goes through Westpac and destroys foundations forcing it to be demolished.
I'm with you, move the fudgeing logs. That being the first thing tourists on the cruise ships see is a disgrace. Much better to see a beautiful boutique Phoenix stadium.
better and more important things for the money to be spent on. Replacing seats that we already have is a waste.
The lack of funding is a joke.
...or under the Korokoro hill where Car Giant and the station overflow parking are.
I still think the better solution is to move the logs north of the ferry terminal (previously proposed) and build over there, across from Westpac... or my alternative plan where a train goes through Westpac and destroys foundations forcing it to be demolished.
I'm with you, move the fudgeing logs. That being the first thing tourists on the cruise ships see is a disgrace. Much better to see a beautiful boutique Phoenix stadium.
I'd prefer the train crash scenario. The more reclaimed land between the stadium and the harbour, the better!
better and more important things for the money to be spent on. Replacing seats that we already have is a waste.
I wonder if they are asking for too much money for what they are delivering.
Peoples habits have changed.
What was designed in the mid/late nineties to serve a milennium market is no longer fit for purpose fifteen years later. Now the council is left with what is effectively a yellow elephant, which they can't afford to rectify - and by "they", I mean ratepayers won't wear it.
Of course we would - but we need to remember we're not the majority. The majority are the people who rarely, if ever, go to the stadium and feel they've spent the best part of twenty years paying for it in their rates and no politician is a good enough salesperson to sell the concept (well, cost) of a new one - in conjunction with the required upgrade of the basin.
Solution?
Well, yeah... that's kinda the issue. Bluddy residents.
