Brisbane 2032 Venues/Stadiums Thread

[FYI]

3 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Anyway - I hope the IOC's strict July-August hosting window is worth overlooking these world class former Olympic Parks for Australia's third Olympics:

You blindly hand the 2032 Olympics to a city literally half the size of Sydney and Melbourne with half the infrastructure... and you get what you’re given. 

 

3 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

I've said it before, if the IOC truly cared about sustainability of cities and "using whats already there" - they'd negotiate flexibility in those dates. 

If you took a pragmatic assessment of the capabilities of Australia's cities to host a cheap and sustainable Olympics, it would have been a two horse race between Sydney and Melbourne. No ifs or buts. 

It really does boggle the mind when looking at those Olympic parks in Melbourne & Sydney, that one of them should really be the Australian host in 2032. Not some Atlanta/Phoenix/Minneapolis Australian equivalent that can hardly pass the mustard.

[Australian Kiwi]

2 hours ago, FYI said:

 

 

It really does boggle the mind when looking at those Olympic parks in Melbourne & Sydney, that one of them should really be the Australian host in 2032. Not some Atlanta/Phoenix/Minneapolis Australian equivalent that can hardly pass the mustard.

Thats the irony though - Melbourne and Sydney both have urban area populations of over 5 million (they're both comparable in size to Atlanta, Dallas or Philly). Brisbane is about 2.5 million, similar to Tampa.

But yeah, its frustrating that we have two of the most "Olympic ready" cities in the world (up there with LA and London) and neither of them were in the running because its too cold to host in July August. Sydney would need September, Melbourne would need October. 

I get that television etc is the reason - but ultimately they're the ones who have continuously stepped back from routinely staging in Sept/Oct (Tokyo, Mexico City, Seoul, Sydney) and the consequence is that it rules out some of their most viable cities. 

Frankly having a second Melbourne or Sydney Games in 2032 is the IOC's loss. Hope they enjoy travelling to a tiny stadium, in Carrara and their venues spread over hundreds of kilometres of SEQ.

[Rob2012]

[FYI]

8 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Thats the irony though - Melbourne and Sydney both have urban area populations of over 5 million (they're both comparable in size to Atlanta, Dallas or Philly). Brisbane is about 2.5 million, similar to Tampa.

Can you just imagine the uproar on these boards (at least once-upon-a-time there would've been, especially from the international audience) if Tampa, or other similarly-sized U.S. metro areas (like Orlando, Kansas City, St. Louis [not in the 21st Century anyway], Austin, San Antonio, Charlotte, Pittsburgh [which ironically, looks a lot like Brisbane, with a big river running through it], Sacramento, San Diego or Portland, OR) were the 2028 host instead of Los Angeles? But since none of them had a JC in their court, none of them are hosting! 

8 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

But yeah, its frustrating that we have two of the most "Olympic ready" cities in the world (up there with LA and London) and neither of them were in the running because its too cold to host in July August. Sydney would need September, Melbourne would need October. 

I get that television etc is the reason - but ultimately they're the ones who have continuously stepped back from routinely staging in Sept/Oct (Tokyo, Mexico City, Seoul, Sydney) and the consequence is that it rules out some of their most viable cities. 

Frankly having a second Melbourne or Sydney Games in 2032 is the IOC's loss. Hope they enjoy travelling to a tiny stadium, in Carrara and their venues spread over hundreds of kilometres of SEQ.

Yeah, that's the biggest argument against, the broadcast revenues. But I really would like to know how much of a "clash" there was between the Nov/Dec 2022 World Cup VS the 'regular' U.S. season in the NFL (& other sports).

I know Sydney 2000 is basically why the IOC implemented the time-frame rule TBW, cause of lower ratings for NBC for those Games. But that was already quite a while back, & with so many more viewing options now available since then, a work-around could probably be introduced, at the very least just to try it & see it goes. 

[Australian Kiwi]

3 hours ago, FYI said:

Can you just imagine the uproar on these boards (at least once-upon-a-time there would've been, especially from the international audience) if Tampa, or other similarly-sized U.S. metro areas (like Orlando, Kansas City, St. Louis [not in the 21st Century anyway], Austin, San Antonio, Charlotte, Pittsburgh [which ironically, looks a lot like Brisbane, with a big river running through it], Sacramento, San Diego or Portland, OR) were the 2028 host instead of Los Angeles? But since none of them had a JC in their court, none of them are hosting! 

Yeah, that's the biggest argument against, the broadcast revenues. But I really would like to know how much of a "clash" there was between the Nov/Dec 2022 World Cup VS the 'regular' U.S. season in the NFL (& other sports).

I know Sydney 2000 is basically why the IOC implemented the time-frame rule TBW, cause of lower ratings for NBC for those Games. But that was already quite a while back, & with so many more viewing options now available since then, a work-around could probably be introduced, at the very least just to try it & see it goes. 

Precisely. Its a really odd basis for the decision into the 21st century. 
I'm no broadcasting expert - but the world is very different to 2000, we now have streaming platforms, the internet, etc and different ways to engage in the Olympics. Furthermore there are new markets that will likely challenge the power NBC has over the event (eg. China, India). 

[Gonzo]

2000 Stadium Australia

2004 Athens Olympic Stadium

2008 Birds Nest

2012 London Stadium

2016 Maracana/Olympic Stadium

2021 Tokyo Olympic Stadium

2024 Stade de France

2028 LA Coliseum/SoFi Stadium

2032 QSAC/QEII Toilet

The IOC won't allow it to happen

[Sir Rols]

5 hours ago, Rob2012 said:

I wasn’t going to go there, Rob, but I know I’m not the only one who’s pondered how this would be reconciled within a certain party’s worldview- in three posts or less

[Gonzo]

This is media talk today that they might go back to the "original" option of a new 50,000 stadium at Albion which after the games would be converted to an AFL/Cricket ground and the Gabba would then be demolished and sold off for housing

[Australian Kiwi]

What if they found a new home for QSAC/QE2?

Build a 50,000 seater somewhere else on SEQ which is 70% temporary 30% permanent. Goal is that QE2 site can be demolished cleared and redeveloped for a few billion. 

Just a matter of where. 

[Sir Rols]

I don’t know Brisbane that well, but looking at the map, Albion Park looks like it would be a good spot for just that. Looks like a nice big area already with a cricket oval and a harness racing track and not too far from the city and the proposed Olympic village. Surely the horses can be moved without too much outcry and it looks like a perfect spot to develop a stadium and warm-up track. And it does appear it was very much in the mix in early talks during the bid (and before Anastasia got Gabba fever). 

Honestly, though, this is the sort of thing that should have been pinned down well before Brisbane was anointed. Not two years after it was waved through with assurances that “we have lots of options”. It’s embarrassing.

Edited February 9 by Sir Rols

[Australian Kiwi]

12 minutes ago, Sir Rols said:

 

Honestly, though, this is the sort of thing that should have been pinned down well before Brisbane was anointed. Not two years after it was waved through with assurances that “we have lots of options”. It’s embarrassing.

As has been pointed out in the media over the last few days, they have effectively squandere the bonus years they have. 

To make your point: they now have 8 and a half years to go. 

Eight and a half years before Sydney 2000 was 1992. Sydney was still bidding, but it had cemented in place that its stadium would be at Homebush Bay. If you were to compare the progress of the two, Sydney 2000 preparations were effectively further ahead than Brisbane 2032's. 
I can't tell if the bonus years are a blessing or a curse. A blessing that the city is avoiding an Athens/Montreal style scramble at the last minute, or a curse that its giving time to bicker. 

[Australian Kiwi]

Interesting too that the idea of Queen Elizabeth II Stadium is effectively a full circle moment for Brisbane's Olympic journey. It was the site of the 1982 Commonwealth Games, and its upgrade was central to the 1992 Olympic bid: 
 

[Nacre]

A summer games held outside the summer would also mean rewriting the calendars of all of the sports in the world. And yet . . .

9 hours ago, FYI said:

But I really would like to know how much of a "clash" there was between the Nov/Dec 2022 World Cup VS the 'regular' U.S. season in the NFL (& other sports).

Yeah. Not much.

If FIFA was perfectly happy messing up the calendar of every (association) football league in the world to put the World Cup in freaking Qatar, then I don't think that the likes of the Badminton World Federation and World Archery would be able to put up much resistance to an Olympic Games in Melbourne held in November.

[Gonzo]

1 hour ago, Sir Rols said:

Surely the horses can be moved without too much outcry

The QLD govt in 2022 already purchased the site in readiness for Brisbane 2032 new stadium and the horses will be moving to a new facility near the Gold Coast, but then as you said .... Anna contracted Gabba Fever

https://www.racingqueensland.com.au/news/november-2022/queensland-centre-of-excellence-secured

[Australian Kiwi]

26 minutes ago, Nacre said:

A summer games held outside the summer would also mean rewriting the calendars of all of the sports in the world. And yet . . .

 

Northern Summer, you mean.

And would it? I feel like this assumption is thrown around a lot. Its been done previously. The Olympic Movement could make it happen if they wanted to, but they haven't. 

Until then, they are cutting off a very significant number of cities that cannot host during July-August but could host if this was broadened to include Northern Autumn: Sydney, Melbourne, Johannesburg, Cape Town, Buenos Aries, Santiago, Delhi, Dubai...

[Gonzo]

The only issue with the Albion Park site is that it is located in a flood zone. So extra cost will be required for flood mitigation (and maybe that was the reason why it was dumped originally? Nobody really knows....)

[Gonzo]

And here we go as I predicted ....

Gabba gone ... Brisbane Arena next

Welcome to Hicksville 2032

Quote

Economic modelling of the planned Brisbane Arena Olympics project found the showpiece venue would cost nearly $1bn more than the income and benefits it generated, intensifying doubt over a second key 2032 Games build.

The analysis for the Queensland government showed the 17,000-seat auditorium did not even reach the halfway point of breaking even.

https://archive.md/EJbWs

[FYI]

So, I was watching a video earlier which was talking about the 2032 Olympics & whole gabba issue. And the narrator saying how Brisbane was Australia's "new" number one city, (do you Aussies agree, lol).

But anyway, I found one of the officials in the video's remarks interesting, that putting the venues needed for the Games aside for the moment (& which is what is bringing about a lot of the in-fighting there, per-se, especially the Gabba), is that the main reason Brisbane raised their hand for the Games ITFP (& which is a point that is also getting lost because of trying to figure out the venues first), it's so they could greatly improve on their transport infrastructure & that the Games are a great way to "enable" such projects. 

Well, as most of us here know all too well, when you do that, all those infrastructure projects being done inevitably get tied to the Olympic budget, fair or not. But I thought those are the types of things that the IOC in the new-norm era is trying to get away from. So that (unnecessary) costs blowouts don't get out of hand & then get blamed on the Olympics (only build it if you "need" it). But seems to me that's EXACTLY what they're getting with Brisbane.

As was pointed out earlier in the thread, Brisbane is only half the size of Melbourne & Sydney, so therefore, with only half the infrastructure. I get that cities will undoubtedly would want to improve themselves as time goes on, but like that official also said in the video, they've already wasted some of their lead time with a lot of the venue issues, so they can't afford to waste anymore time going forward with improving their transport network with only 8-1/2 years to go at this point. Cause with delays also comes with more money spent. And I also couldn't help but noticing when they showed one of their downtown shots, but it reminded me a lot of Peachtree St. in downtown Atlanta. The parallels are uncanny. Oh, well, Melbourne.

[Australian Kiwi]

23 minutes ago, FYI said:

So, I was watching a video earlier which was talking about the 2032 Olympics & whole gabba issue. And the narrator saying how Brisbane was Australia's "new" number one city, (do you Aussies agree, lol).

They refer to themselves as "Australia's New World City". I think its just a bit of gassing themselves up, but its not really true. 

I'm a Melburnian and even I can admit that Sydney is really our only true alpha global city (as in that its the only one that can really get close to competing with the likes of London or New York). That status will not change, even as Melbourne takesover as Australia's biggest city. 

Brisbane can call itself whatever it wants but the sugar hit of a two week event will fade with time (just ask Atlanta). Sydney will still have its internationally recognised landmarks, and Melbourne will still its impressive list of international sports and arts events 

[Australian Kiwi]

2 hours ago, Gonzo said:

And here we go as I predicted ....

Gabba gone ... Brisbane Arena next

Welcome to Hicksville 2032

https://archive.md/EJbWs

At this point even Perth is more Olympic ready than Brisbane (Perth Arena, Optus Stadium, Subiaco.....)

Even Optus Stadium gives most recent Olympic Stadiums a run for its money....

[Victorian]

I would be really surprised if the Gabba rebuild did not go ahead. With or without an Olympics, it needs a redevelopment. The Olympics was just going to speed it up. It is in such an ideal location close to the city and close to great public transport. QSAC does not achieve both of these neither does Carrara Stadium which also has transport issues. 

[FYI]

43 minutes ago, Australian Kiwi said:

They refer to themselves as "Australia's New World City". I think its just a bit of gassing themselves up, but its not really true. 

Oh, I realize it's not really true. I was basically being tongue-in-cheek (hence the lol). I mean, I can understand some local, civic pride, but let's not go overboard, either. Which is why I just found the guy's, whatever the exact coined term he used, to be quite laughable. Brisbane is no more Australia's 'new world city' than Pittsburgh is to the U.S.'

46 minutes ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Brisbane can call itself whatever it wants but the sugar hit of a two week event will fade with time (just ask Atlanta). Sydney will still have its internationally recognised landmarks, and Melbourne will still its impressive list of international sports and arts events 

Exactly. But that still doesn't stop a lot of those lesser-known cities from day-dreaming. Even our own resident Brisbane cheerleader thinks that 2032 is somehow going to put Brisbane on the global map.

Many people have probably even forgotten that London hosted the 2012 Olympics. But London is still London, world renowned for many, many other things. The Olympics don't make a city truly global. That takes decades, & sometimes centuries to accomplish. But that's going a bit off-tangent now, to the roller coaster ride that Brisbane is going through right now, precisely because it's not really a global city (& likely never will be).

[Sir Rols]

1 hour ago, FYI said:

So, I was watching a video earlier which was talking about the 2032 Olympics & whole gabba issue. And the narrator saying how Brisbane was Australia's "new" number one city, (do you Aussies agree, lol).

But anyway, I found one of the officials in the video's remarks interesting, that putting the venues needed for the Games aside for the moment (& which is what is bringing about a lot of the in-fighting there, per-se, especially the Gabba), is that the main reason Brisbane raised their hand for the Games ITFP (& which is a point that is also getting lost because of trying to figure out the venues first), it's so they could greatly improve on their transport infrastructure & that the Games are a great way to "enable" such projects. 

Well, as most of us here know all too well, when you do that, all those infrastructure projects being done inevitably get tied to the Olympic budget, fair or not. But I thought those are the types of things that the IOC in the new-norm era is trying to get away from. So that (unnecessary) costs blowouts don't get out of hand & then get blamed on the Olympics (only build it if you "need" it). But seems to me that's EXACTLY what they're getting with Brisbane.

As was pointed out earlier in the thread, Brisbane is only half the size of Melbourne & Sydney, so therefore, with only half the infrastructure. I get that cities will undoubtedly would want to improve themselves as time goes on, but like that official also said in the video, they've already wasted some of their lead time with a lot of the venue issues, so they can't afford to waste anymore time going forward with improving their transport network with only 8-1/2 years to go at this point. Cause with delays also comes with more money spent. And I also couldn't help but noticing when they showed one of their downtown shots, but it reminded me a lot of Peachtree St. in downtown Atlanta. The parallels are uncanny. Oh, well, Melbourne.

Power and finance in Australia is focussed in Sydney and Melbourne. Cities like Perth and Brisbane anchor large states with big mining and pastoral wealth, but NSW and Victoria are more diversified economically, host the banking HQs and other big companies like Qantas and retailers and such, and also host the major sports league HQs. It’s from the boardrooms and political party headquarters of Sydney and Melbourne that influence flows. West Australians and Queenslanders tend to resent that and have a chip on their shoulders about Sydney and Melbourne and their urban elites.  

Yes, Brisbane and the region from the Gold Coast to the Sunshine Coast is growing in population - the climate is certainly nice - and that of course brings a level of urbanity and sophistication (as opposed to the rest of the state which is a conservative backwater). It certainly is a growing sunbelt region and may fancy its future importance. But it’s still a regional centre more than a national centre.

I can’t speak to its infrastructure plans, but a lot of it - like the city rail - was already going on before the Olympics win. It was needed to support the population growth. The big problem I see is that the former Federal Government gave a huge blank cheque in promising to meet half the costs of the Games and Qld saw the opportunity to milk what they could from it and up their ambitions. The Gabba upgrade was not part of that Federal commitment, but was only really possible because Federal money relieved other cost strains. But this far out from the games, when costs-of-living is a rather big political sore point at the moment, spending on such an event seems a bit extravagant now. Not to mention other blowbacks like the nearby schools etc. It’s always a potent argument that Olympics money should rather be spent on hospitals and schools, much less the games actually causing a school to be demolished.

Personally, I think Coates saw that at the time, 2020–21, Brisbane had its biggest and best opportunity to snare the Olympics by surprise, and may not have had such an opportunity again. He ran with it. But I think it was possibly a decade too early for Brisbane to be really ready for it. They might have had more things i place (like an upgraded Gabba) a few more years down the track. But of course, they would have faced stiffer competition than an embryonic bidding field stalled by an epidemic where most didn’t even realise the bidding was on or imminent. 

 

Edited February 9 by Sir Rols

[Sir Rols]

32 minutes ago, Victorian said:

I would be really surprised if the Gabba rebuild did not go ahead. With or without an Olympics, it needs a redevelopment. The Olympics was just going to speed it up. It is in such an ideal location close to the city and close to great public transport. QSAC does not achieve both of these neither does Carrara Stadium which also has transport issues. 

Two days ago I would have agreed with you (albeit in a less expensive upgrade form). But now, as the ABC puts it:

Queensland politicians all agree the $2.7 billion Gabba redevelopment plan is dead

I can’t see it being politically resurrected now. In fact, Brisbane Arena may now well be at risk as well.

[Sir Rols]

The funny thing is, I don’t the IOC itself were ever really too happy with the Gabba plan. It was sprung on them last minute, after they’d already decided on Brisbane, and they had to be re-assured and smoothed over to accept it. I think Coates was only too happy to kill it now it was becoming a political and support liability.