Stadium of Canterbury
-
It all seems a bit pointless to me really. I'm very pessimistic about future of pro rugby in NZ anyway.
ABs will be in Washington DC during the NPC.
Dont even 'get' anymore what we're trying to earn this foreign revenue to protect or maintain.
A 10,000 capacity is probably too big for Chch.
Probably wrong thread. NZRU have wasted 2 winters of pandemic. Slaves to test rugby. The value of which diminishes year by year. Even Albany got a Boks test. Even Nelson got a test. Decline and fall.
-
@rapido said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Even Albany got a Boks test. Even Nelson got a test. Decline and fall.
Don't understand your point here.
@dogmeat said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@rapido said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Even Albany got a Boks test. Even Nelson got a test. Decline and fall.
Don't understand your point here.
i think the point was NH stadium got a Boks (big) test with a capacity of 25k
-
Yes, partly.
Even Albany with 25k and 1 grandstand can get a blue riband test.
But also, where I digressed off topic - NZRU have a business model reliant on a single team playing 14 to 16 tests a year to pay the bills. Yet they haven't carried the public (or the next generation) with them. Boks v All Blacks in the 3rd biggest stadium in the city ... could you imagine that 20 or 30 years ago.
It's the trend I'm trying to highlight.
How does it relate to new Chch stadium? That even in reduced version it is way too big for Canterbury rugby, about right for All Black rugby (sadly) - but for long? if we don't address the trend and re-engage the public in sub-All Black rugby.
-
Yes, partly.
Even Albany with 25k and 1 grandstand can get a blue riband test.
But also, where I digressed off topic - NZRU have a business model reliant on a single team playing 14 to 16 tests a year to pay the bills. Yet they haven't carried the public (or the next generation) with them. Boks v All Blacks in the 3rd biggest stadium in the city ... could you imagine that 20 or 30 years ago.
It's the trend I'm trying to highlight.
How does it relate to new Chch stadium? That even in reduced version it is way too big for Canterbury rugby, about right for All Black rugby (sadly) - but for long? if we don't address the trend and re-engage the public in sub-All Black rugby.
@rapido said in Stadium of Canterbury:
How does it relate to new Chch stadium? That even in reduced version it is too big if we don't address the trend and re-engage the public in sub-All Black rugby.
It was interesting to see part of the WEL Network stand empty for the All Blacks v Fiji game in Hamilton recently. While there was some social media chat about perhaps it was closed due to earthquake concerns, I'm sure I saw a promo about 'last tickets still available' just a few days before the game.
-
Yes, partly.
Even Albany with 25k and 1 grandstand can get a blue riband test.
But also, where I digressed off topic - NZRU have a business model reliant on a single team playing 14 to 16 tests a year to pay the bills. Yet they haven't carried the public (or the next generation) with them. Boks v All Blacks in the 3rd biggest stadium in the city ... could you imagine that 20 or 30 years ago.
It's the trend I'm trying to highlight.
How does it relate to new Chch stadium? That even in reduced version it is way too big for Canterbury rugby, about right for All Black rugby (sadly) - but for long? if we don't address the trend and re-engage the public in sub-All Black rugby.
-
@rapido said in Stadium of Canterbury:
How does it relate to new Chch stadium? That even in reduced version it is too big if we don't address the trend and re-engage the public in sub-All Black rugby.
It was interesting to see part of the WEL Network stand empty for the All Blacks v Fiji game in Hamilton recently. While there was some social media chat about perhaps it was closed due to earthquake concerns, I'm sure I saw a promo about 'last tickets still available' just a few days before the game.
@donsteppa said in Stadium of Canterbury:
It was interesting to see part of the WEL Network stand empty for the All Blacks v Fiji game in Hamilton recently. While there was some social media chat about perhaps it was closed due to earthquake concerns
I have since been told it definitely wasn't allowed to be opened. In the last couple of years the entire WEL Network stand is closed for NPC, and everyone is seated in the Brian Perry Stand. That will be down to the cost.
-
@donsteppa said in Stadium of Canterbury:
It was interesting to see part of the WEL Network stand empty for the All Blacks v Fiji game in Hamilton recently. While there was some social media chat about perhaps it was closed due to earthquake concerns
I have since been told it definitely wasn't allowed to be opened. In the last couple of years the entire WEL Network stand is closed for NPC, and everyone is seated in the Brian Perry Stand. That will be down to the cost.
@bovidae said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@donsteppa said in Stadium of Canterbury:
It was interesting to see part of the WEL Network stand empty for the All Blacks v Fiji game in Hamilton recently. While there was some social media chat about perhaps it was closed due to earthquake concerns
I have since been told it definitely wasn't allowed to be opened. In the last couple of years the entire WEL Network stand is closed for NPC, and everyone is seated in the Brian Perry Stand. That will be down to the cost.
Aha, hopefully there are earthquake strengthening plans being developed.
Interesting that there were still tickets available so close to game day with reduced capacity. To be fair, I'm one of those who looked at the varying ticket prices for a family of four in Hamilton in the middle of winter and decided against it...
-
this is a rant worthy of the Fern.
when you start calling people gutless in a published article, you're probably not advancing strong rational arguments.
-
this is a rant worthy of the Fern.
when you start calling people gutless in a published article, you're probably not advancing strong rational arguments.
-
this is a rant worthy of the Fern.
when you start calling people gutless in a published article, you're probably not advancing strong rational arguments.
@nzzp said in Stadium of Canterbury:
this is a rant worthy of the Fern.
when you start calling people gutless in a published article, you're probably not advancing strong rational arguments.
I would be interested in seeing how Dunedin is laughing all the way to the bank - is there any facts around whether this actually makes money? I would imagine no way to covering the cost of it, outside of indirect money into the local economy.
-
@nzzp said in Stadium of Canterbury:
this is a rant worthy of the Fern.
when you start calling people gutless in a published article, you're probably not advancing strong rational arguments.
I would be interested in seeing how Dunedin is laughing all the way to the bank - is there any facts around whether this actually makes money? I would imagine no way to covering the cost of it, outside of indirect money into the local economy.
@machpants isn't that the case with pretty much all stadia? none make money in their own right, but the suppliers (food, cleaners etc) do and the wider community (hotels, bars etc) does
-
@machpants isn't that the case with pretty much all stadia? none make money in their own right, but the suppliers (food, cleaners etc) do and the wider community (hotels, bars etc) does
@kiwiwomble said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@machpants isn't that the case with pretty much all stadia? none make money in their own right, but the suppliers (food, cleaners etc) do and the wider community (hotels, bars etc) does
pretty much spot on. Stadia are not a sensible investment from a direct $$$ point of view. But then, neither is a community swimming pool or library - you have to figure out the intangible contribution as well, and that's where people's perspective skews wildly.
-
@kiwiwomble said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@machpants isn't that the case with pretty much all stadia? none make money in their own right, but the suppliers (food, cleaners etc) do and the wider community (hotels, bars etc) does
pretty much spot on. Stadia are not a sensible investment from a direct $$$ point of view. But then, neither is a community swimming pool or library - you have to figure out the intangible contribution as well, and that's where people's perspective skews wildly.
@nzzp i guess there is a simple test, i dont think there are many (any?) companies that just own and run stadia, they all generally seem to be owned either by the main sports team that play there and so their finances are bundled up in lots of other things or by councils/government in which case they are "for the greater good"
...if they made money, someone would be out there perfecting running them and making money doing it
-
@nzzp said in Stadium of Canterbury:
this is a rant worthy of the Fern.
when you start calling people gutless in a published article, you're probably not advancing strong rational arguments.
I would be interested in seeing how Dunedin is laughing all the way to the bank - is there any facts around whether this actually makes money? I would imagine no way to covering the cost of it, outside of indirect money into the local economy.
@machpants I think he means that Chch will now lose out to Dunedin when it comes to AB tests, which is likely, but what he missed was that the entire rationale for the MUA concept was on the back of a massive local uproar that FBS got a bunch of Ed Sheeran gigs and Chch missed out, and the MUA is now smaller than FBS. I saw some dopey bitch was wanking on about how the concert capacities will still be the same despite the reduction in seats but I fail to see how that can be the case when you start from a 2,500 seat disadvantage and the pitch sizes are both 100m x 75m.
-
@machpants I think he means that Chch will now lose out to Dunedin when it comes to AB tests, which is likely, but what he missed was that the entire rationale for the MUA concept was on the back of a massive local uproar that FBS got a bunch of Ed Sheeran gigs and Chch missed out, and the MUA is now smaller than FBS. I saw some dopey bitch was wanking on about how the concert capacities will still be the same despite the reduction in seats but I fail to see how that can be the case when you start from a 2,500 seat disadvantage and the pitch sizes are both 100m x 75m.
@shark said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@machpants I think he means that Chch will now lose out to Dunedin when it comes to AB tests, which is likely, but what he missed was that the entire rationale for the MUA concept was on the back of a massive local uproar that FBS got a bunch of Ed Sheeran gigs and Chch missed out, and the MUA is now smaller than FBS. I saw some dopey bitch was wanking on about how the concert capacities will still be the same despite the reduction in seats but I fail to see how that can be the case when you start from a 2,500 seat disadvantage and the pitch sizes are both 100m x 75m.
Depends on the design. If Chch is an almost 3/4 stadium - e.g. like a smaller roofed version of New Lansdowne Road. Then almost all the 25k permanent seats are in play for concerts. E.g. if anything like the sketches.
Where as Dunedin removes about approximately 3k of its (temporary) seats for concerts.
-
on a related but completely opposite note, the same dreamers who are always pushing this stuff are trying to leverage our possibility of hosting Olympic football in 2032 to once again try for a 20,000 seat stadium
In a city of 150,000
without a major sports team to play in it
I am sure the 800 strong crowd at a Northern Pride game will loooove all the additional space
I am becoming more and more convinced that the people who work in public infrastructure are mentally deficient
-
on a related but completely opposite note, the same dreamers who are always pushing this stuff are trying to leverage our possibility of hosting Olympic football in 2032 to once again try for a 20,000 seat stadium
In a city of 150,000
without a major sports team to play in it
I am sure the 800 strong crowd at a Northern Pride game will loooove all the additional space
I am becoming more and more convinced that the people who work in public infrastructure are mentally deficient
@mariner4life said in Stadium of Canterbury:
I am becoming more and more convinced that the people who work in public infrastructure are mentally deficient
isn't that @booboo ? I know he does booboo but even so you're being a bit harsh.
