Eden Park
-
-
@KiwiMurph so who actually are the Eden Park Trust? Who do they act for? If they ever sell where do the proceeds go? That's a shitload of money to be giving an independent organisation if there are no guarantees or any stake in the asset. I would have thought it not unreasonable for the Council to demand a measure of control over EP in return
-
Hell yeah, that's a slippery slope.
-
@canefan said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@KiwiMurph so who actually are the Eden Park Trust? Who do they act for?
It used to be a joint representative of Auckland Rugby and Auckland Cricket. I think now the Govt has a significant stake in appointing trustees as they pumped 200M into the place.
For 2011 there were reservations about handing $$$ over to a private trust. I think it drove changes to the trust deed, too
-
-
@Duluth said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
Good, this means the last major traditional ground in NZ exists for a few more years.
Now make plans to knock down the North Stand and covert it into a rectangular ground
Doesn't solve the problems they have trying to make it pay
-
-
-
The council hasn't pushed back. Goff wanted a vanity project to go ahead. The council and the residents were both happy to have restrictions on Eden Park
With this loan the incentives might have changed. If the council want the loan paid back, they should want Eden Park to make some money
-
Eden Park.
The majority of the Rugby World Cup redevelopment budget was funded by a $190m Government grant. This contribution anticipated an approximately $50m contribution from the various Auckland Councils (the now defunct Auckland Regional Council and the region’s seven city and district councils). Ultimately the Councils refused to contribute other than $10m from the Auckland Regional Council. This left a $40m shortfall to fulfil a construction contract and ensure the 2011 Rugby World Cup could be delivered. In order to complete the redevelopment Auckland City Council agreed to guarantee a bank loan of $40m on commercial terms.
This $40m that the (4 separate former city) councils welshed on 8 years ago, keeps popping up. The combined Super CIty wants to continue welshing on it. There is so much horseshit in the media about the financial performance of Eden Park, and bailouts etc.
(welshing is such a ridiculous slur that it is surely not even offensive?)
From the report.
The most pressing issue regarding the future of Eden Park is the unresolved status of the $40,000,000 ASB funding loan, which expires on 30 September 2019.
An Eden Park positive propaganda (myth busting) fact sheet.
https://www.edenpark.co.nz/uploads/images/fact sheet_updated.pdf -
@Rapido It's Welching not Welshing. According to renowned historian A J P Taylor the first person to use the 1845 Gaming Act to try and avoid paying a debt was called Welch. Notwithstanding the above the Pons have a long history of believing all Welsh are thieving sheep shaggers
So yr EP attendances show more people went to see Ponsonby v Varsity than Akl v Waikato
-
-
@Nepia The loan is Eden Park's but if it is defaulted on, the Council gets to pay it.
And in the mean time Eden Park Trust has to pay or defer the interest probably at a rate a bank would charge a precarious trust.
Where as all NZ Local Government Authorities have an excellent credit rating via a pooled credit thingamajig and pay low interest.
Could be saving millions a year.
-
@Nepia The loan is Eden Park's but if it is defaulted on, the Council gets to pay it.
And in the mean time Eden Park Trust has to pay or defer the interest probably at a rate a bank would charge a precarious trust.
Where as all NZ Local Government Authorities have an excellent credit rating via a pooled credit thingamajig and pay low interest.
Could be saving millions a year.
Eden Park Trust is a registered charity with its financial statements available here: https://www.register.charities.govt.nz/Charity/CC32802
Going by recent statements, their bank loans are between 2.82% and 4.14% (total bank interest: 2018 - $1.463 million, 2017 - $1.758 million, 2016 - $2.285 million), and 2.43% for the Council loans, so while it would make a difference (around $500K), it would not be the difference between solvency or not. Probably helps that the bank is also a sponsor (ASB).
Having looked over the various financial statements, tickets + membership ($14+ million p.a.) more than pay for the costs of actually running the events (~$9+ million p.a., being direct costs, staff) and contributions to ACA and ARU ($2 million) - the principal issue is depreciation i.e. replacement costs over time, not interest or anything else. It's over $8 million a year, so unless they can find a way to pay for that, they are in dire straits, even if all loans were forgiven/paid by Council.
