Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If we ditched the $5,800,000 hawks deal it wouldn't even matter if footy in the south broke even, since it costs $500,000 rather than $5,800,000.

Its not worth paying $5,300,000 so a percentage of 40,000 potential football fans from the North West can be two hours closer to a semi-regular football match in Launceston, at the expense of the other 470,000 people.

Ditch the Hawks, embrace North Melbourne, maybe pump a couple of mil into the Southern facilities, keep V8 supercars, and then take the majority of the Hawks money thats left and spend it somewhere useful. Seriously EVERYONE would benefit then, not just York Park contractors and Launceston hoteliers.

LOL TT-Line...Its all just channeling central government funds, I don't know why they expect anyone to believe otherwise. Lets not go down that route, remember the ridiculous state of affairs here, e.g. Government power regulatory body sets prices, then Government company Hydro sells power, to Government company Aurora. Then Aurora go cap in hand to the Government complaining the price from hydro set by the regulator was too high and they need a $200,000,000 top up, government cries 'we can do nothing!' and across goes the cash; all the while Aurora's wage growth is out of control and we have a couple of million dollars per year of CEOs wages for what was once one company... It is all just smoke and mirrors, shuffling public funds so cronies get their kickbacks while the common folk pay for the game to continue.

there goes all your previous stats out the window.

millions wasn't that long ago spent on Bellrieve to host cricket.

I originally was commenting on the mentality of it being better in Hobart,by a Hobart person, like the Hobart based Premier....you've just gone and strengthened my point.

Edited by jangles
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not at all.

5.3mil is the difference in cost between footy in the south and footy in the north.

When I say pump a couple million into southern facilities I mean over the same period that 18 million would go to the hawks...clearly a couple of million over 3 years is a lot less than nearly 18 million over the same time period.

Population stats are the same. 200k people in greater Hobart, 100k in launceston, a little over 40k on the NW

coast, out of a population on 510k.

There is no compelling argument to have football in launceston at 10x the cost of football in Hobart and you know it. It's gross misuse of state funds.

Not at all.

5.3mil is the difference in cost between footy in the south and footy in the north.

When I say pump a couple million into southern facilities I mean over the same period that 18 million would go to the hawks...clearly a couple of million over 3 years is a lot less than nearly 18 million over the same time period.

Population stats are the same. 200k people in greater Hobart, 100k in launceston, a little over 40k on the NW

coast, out of a population on 510k.

There is no compelling argument to have football in launceston at 10x the cost of football in Hobart and you know it. It's gross misuse of state funds.

It just sounds like you want the football in Hobart and not Launnie, wouldnt it be great if they spent 100 million on Baskerville and had the V8's there too!!!

As said before, AFL and V8's has coincided in the state for years now. TTline 'sponsored' the football in Hobart, They would get way more benefits if they sponsored the V8's, now the state doesn't have money for V8's, yet has money for AFL in Hobart....

AFL in Launnie really has nothing to do with it, the money spent there is for 'sponsorship' it might not return the benefits the government want us to believe, but thats what it is.

Edited by jangles

What could you do to baskerville to make it awesome enough for V8s?

Pit straight would need to be like doubled. Maybe make whole new section that joins on the current track? It would be nice if it was glassy smooooooth

What could you do to baskerville to make it awesome enough for V8s?

Pit straight would need to be like doubled. Maybe make whole new section that joins on the current track? It would be nice if it was glassy smooooooth

Thats what i was getting at, A LOT

What could you do to baskerville to make it awesome enough for V8s?

Pit straight would need to be like doubled. Maybe make whole new section that joins on the current track? It would be nice if it was glassy smooooooth

Thats what i was getting at, A LOT

Basky was kind of supposed to get a grant for 5mil , it was to lengthen the track (so there was a short and a long track) move the pits to the main straight , re lay all the old early 80's bitumen and bring the toilets up to scratch :) , but it'll never happen pinch.gif

It just sounds like you want the football in Hobart and not Launnie, wouldnt it be great if they spent 100 million on Baskerville and had the V8's there too!!!

Missed point much? I couldn't give a flying f**k about AFL. So I'd like to see them save 5 mil a year and just have one visiting footy sideshow. Pure and simple. Wouldn't matter if North Melbourne played at York park, I don't care, if they'll do it for $500k, theres no point paying Hawthorn $5million!

The only reasons I've advocated Hobart is the deal is underway already and it is where the vast majority of the state population resides (but like I say, who cares where the game is as long as its maximum benefit for dollars).

Very simple.Ditch one team, save 5 million dollars per year for 3 years. More than enough in the kitty then for motorsport to get a look in, and a lot of FAR more important things.

Nobody mentioned baskerville, the only facilities I was referring to were football ones.

As said before, AFL and V8's has coincided in the state for years now. TTline 'sponsored' the football in Hobart, They would get way more benefits if they sponsored the V8's, now the state doesn't have money for V8's, yet has money for AFL in Hobart....

Yep, refer to previous response, ditch the $5+ million Hawks contract and have a little bit of footy (instead of lots), and a little bit of motorsport (instead of none), plus a LOT left over for things that are actually important and will affect people other than rabid sports fans.

AFL in Launnie really has nothing to do with it, the money spent there is for 'sponsorship' it might not return the benefits the government want us to believe, but thats what it is.

And? If they can cancel a V8SC contract they can cancel a football one. Ring legal, tear up contract, done.

Edited by floody
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • The rain is the best time to push to the edge of the grip limit. Water lubrication reduces the consumption of rubber without reducing the fun. I take pleasure in driving around the outside of numpties in Audis, WRXs, BRZs, etc, because they get all worried in the wet. They warm up faster than the engine oil does.
    • When they're dead cold, and in the wet, they're not very fun. RE003 are alright, they do harden very quickly and turn into literally $50 Pace tyres.
    • Yeah, I thought that Reedy's video was quite good because he compared old and new (as in, well used and quite new) AD09s, with what is generally considered to be the fast Yokohama in this category (ie, sporty road/track tyres) and a tyre that people might be able to use to extend the comparo out into the space of more expensive European tyres, being the Cup 2. No-one would ever agree that the Cup 2 is a poor tyre - many would suggest that it is close to the very top of the category. And, for them all to come out so close to each other, and for the cheaper tyre in the test to do so well against the others, in some cases being even faster, shows that (good, non-linglong) tyres are reaching a plateau in terms of how good they can get, and they're all sitting on that same plateau. Anyway, on the AD08R, AD09, RS4 that I've had on the car in recent years, I've never had a problem in the cold and wet. SA gets down to 0-10°C in winter. Not so often, but it was only 4°C when I got in the car this morning. Once the tyres are warm (ie, after about 2km), you can start to lay into them. I've never aquaplaned or suffered serious off-corner understeer or anything like that in the wet, that I would not have expected to happen with a more normal tyre. I had some RE003s, and they were shit in the dry, shit in the wet, shit everywhere. I would rate the RS4 and AD0x as being more trustworthy in the wet, once the rubber is warm. Bridgestone should be ashamed of the RE003.
    • This is why I gave the disclaimer about how I drive in the wet which I feel is pretty important. I have heard people think RS4's are horrible in the rain, but I have this feeling they must be driving (or attempting to drive) anywhere close to the grip limit. I legitimately drive at the speed limit/below speed the limit 100% of the time in the rain. More than happy to just commute along at 50kmh behind a train of cars in 5th gear etc. I do agree with you with regards to the temp and the 'quality' of the tyre Dose. Most UHP tyres aren't even up to temperature on the road anyway, even when going mad initial D canyon carving. It would be interesting to see a not-up-to-temp UHP tyre compared against a mere... normal...HP tyre at these temperatures. I don't think you're (or me in this case) is actually picking up grip with an RS4/AD09 on the road relative to something like a RE003 because the RS4/AD09 is not up to temp and the RE003 is closer to it's optimal operating window.
    • Either the bearing has been installed backwards OR the gearbox input shaft bearing is loosey goosey.   When in doubt, just put in a Samsonas in.
×
×
  • Create New...