Barnyb

AC36 Auckland NZ

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, KiwiJoker said:

Whoa!  Using your stated criteria, what AC teams were "national" over last couple of Cup cycles?

Very, very few, but they mostly put their nation in their team name.  This is done to engender some national pride.  In Team NZ's case it is also in the hope of receiving some tax payer money.

The AC has always been contested between privately owned and operated teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, trt131 said:

Very, very few, but they mostly put their nation in their team name.  This is done to engender some national pride.  In Team NZ's case it is also in the hope of receiving some tax payer money.

The AC has always been contested between privately owned and operated teams.

How you are funded is irrelevant. Its about the culture of a team, the ethos and the way it conducts itself that dictates whether or not it is a National Team, so how about you get a life idiot! And FYI Dalton has stated he is NOT looking for government funding for the defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, KiwiJoker said:

Whoa!  Using your stated criteria, what AC teams were "national" over last couple of Cup cycles?

The teams that did so ~by choice~ including for commercial-appeal reasons.

Russell Green who claims to have been a big part of the AC36 Protocol was a guest on a TFE livecast. I asked why sailor crew nationality, instead of Design and Build nationality (per the 1958 Interpretive Resulotion by the NYYC that stood as the only IR, as the definition of Constructed in Country, for many decades) is instead the emphasis in this Protocol. Green’s answer, which I transcribed and posted here in perfect detail, was all about commercialism.

His response was flagrantly Deed-ignorant in his reasoning for how sailor nationality is now emphasized yet ‘Design and Build’ almost completely not. He went on and on about the commercialism, so maximizing that is where his priority clearly lies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Stingray~~ said:

The teams that did so ~by choice~ including for commercial-appeal reasons.

Russell Green who claims to have been a big part of the AC36 Protocol was a guest on a TFE livecast. I asked why sailor crew nationality, instead of Design and Build nationality (per the 1958 Interpretive Resulotion by the NYYC that stood as the only IR, as the definition of Constructed in Country, for many decades) is instead the emphasis in this Protocol. Green’s answer, which I transcribed and posted here in perfect detail, was all about commercialism.

His response was flagrantly Deed-ignorant in his reasoning for how sailor nationality is now emphasized yet ‘Design and Build’ almost completely not. He went on and on about the commercialism.

That's a laugh. Russell Green is anything but Deed-ignorant. OTOH he is quite adept at blowing smoke up critic's arses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, sclarke said:

How you are funded is irrelevant. Its about the culture of a team, the ethos and the way it conducts itself that dictates whether or not it is a National Team, so how about you get a life idiot! And FYI Dalton has stated he is NOT looking for government funding for the defense.

You should quit now as every time you post you just dig a deeper and deeper hole.  FFS the ethos and the way it conducts itself dictates whether or not it is a National Team, I never read such bollocks.

You are so wrapped up in your nationalism and misplaced pride that are now spouting absolute trash.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, trt131 said:

You should quit now as every time you post you just dig a deeper and deeper hole.  FFS the ethos and the way it conducts itself dictates whether or not it is a National Team, I never read such bollocks.

You are so wrapped up in your nationalism and misplaced pride that are now spouting absolute trash.

Just because you have no sense of National pride, doesn't mean National Teams don't exist. Maybe in your tiny idiotic little mind. You're so wrapped up in your opinionated bullshit dribble that you are now talking absolute crap, just like you always have. Team NZ is, was and always will be a NATIONAL team to all of its supporters, so deal with it and Piss off moron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sclarke said:

Just because you have no sense of National pride, doesn't mean National Teams don't exist. Maybe in your tiny idiotic little mind. You're so wrapped up in your opinionated bullshit dribble that you are now talking absolute crap, just like you always have. Team NZ is, was and always will be a NATIONAL team to all of its supporters, so deal with it and Piss off moron.

So you have now resorted to name calling.  Just shows your intellect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, trt131 said:

So you have now resorted to name calling.  Just shows your intellect.

This proves my point.

A National team in every way.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, trt131 said:

Nope, it proves my point exactly

You're wrong again mate. Its just not your day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarkey, Team NZ is a New Zealand team, just as the NZ Breakers are in the NBL and the Phoenix are in the A League.  Those teams have imports to bolster the team but they are not the National Team as are say the All Blacks or Black Caps.  Would you still call the All Blacks the National Team if the brought Izzy Folau into the team or the Black Caps used Virat Koli.

You national pride is blinding you.

By the way I could not be bothered look at your vids, too boring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, trt131 said:

Clarkey, Team NZ is a New Zealand team, just as the NZ Breakers are in the NBL and the Phoenix are in the A League.  Those teams have imports to bolster the team but they are not the National Team as are say the All Blacks or Black Caps.  Would you still call the All Blacks the National Team if the brought Izzy Folau into the team or the Black Caps used Virat Koli.

You national pride is blinding you.

By the way I could not be bothered look at your vids, too boring.

Yes, most of the All Blacks are Island imports anyway. Tongans, Samoans, Fijians, but they're still the NZ All Blacks. It doesn't matter where you come from, because when you wear the fern, you represent NZ, its people and its culture. Only Kiwi's can understand it, so don't bother trying to convince anyone ETNZ isn't a National sports team, because to those who matter, they are, to those who don't matter, like you, possibly not, but You don't matter anyway so who cares what you/ they think. And moaning about sucking up to people for government money is irrelevant because they neither had any when they won nor want any to defend. 

Your non-existent sense of National pride is blinding you. They are, have been and always will be a National sports team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sclarke said:

Yes, most of the All Blacks are Island imports anyway. Tongans, Samoans, Fijians, but they're still the NZ All Blacks. It doesn't matter where you come from, because when you wear the fern, you represent NZ, its people and its culture. Only Kiwi's can understand it, so don't bother trying to convince anyone ETNZ isn't a National sports team, because to those who matter, they are, to those who don't matter, like you, possibly not, but You don't matter anyway so who cares what you/ they think. And moaning about sucking up to people for government money is irrelevant because they neither had any when they won nor want any to defend. 

Your non-existent sense of National pride is blinding you. They are, have been and always will be a National sports team.

I think you make a very good point here and really clears up a lot of the nationality conversation . 

If we take this statement and change a few words why would one be true and not the other .

It doesn't matter where you come from , because when you where the US flag you represent USA , its people and its culture .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sclarke said:

Nope proves my point.

SClarke They are winding you up.

As long as you and I believe in TNZ that is all that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, maxmini said:

I think you make a very good point here and really clears up a lot of the nationality conversation . 

If we take this statement and change a few words why would one be true and not the other .

It doesn't matter where you come from , because when you where the US flag you represent USA , its people and its culture .

 

Because they don't represent the flag, they represent the owner who pays their checks. Thats the difference. As I've always said, they don't represent NZ for the money or the paycheck Unlike those who have represented Oracle Team USA. They represent NZ because it means something, which is why All Blacks have turned down much, much more lucrative offers abroad to stay in New Zealand. The heritage, the tradition and the culture of the All Blacks and the jersey is what drives those guys to play for the All Blacks, not the money, like those at Oracle Team USA. Pride in the country, and the team is what drove the guys at ETNZ to stay, even though it meant taking a huge pay cut, instead of taking up offers with other teams. Thats the difference. Hey I would have no problem with it if these guys did what the protocol asked and resided in or were citizens of the country they challenge under. But they don't, they act like mercenaries, or like American sports stars who are traded to and from Franchise teams like cattle.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sclarke said:

Because they don't represent the flag, they represent the owner who pays their checks. Thats the difference. As I've always said, they don't represent NZ for the money or the paycheck Unlike those who have represented Oracle Team USA. They represent NZ because it means something, which is why All Blacks have turned down much, much more lucrative offers abroad to stay in New Zealand. The heritage, the tradition and the culture of the All Blacks and the jersey is what drives those guys to play for the All Blacks, not the money, like those at Oracle Team USA. Pride in the country, and the team is what drove the guys at ETNZ to stay, even though it meant taking a huge pay cut, instead of taking up offers with other teams. Thats the difference. Hey I would have no problem with it if these guys did what the protocol asked and resided in or were citizens of the country they challenge under. But they don't, they act like mercenaries, or like American sports stars who are traded to and from Franchise teams like cattle.

They do represent the flag , they just happen to do it for a better pay check .

You said it best " It doesn't matter where you come from ".

Whats good for one is good for the other. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, maxmini said:

They do represent the flag , they just happen to do it for a better pay check .

You said it best " It doesn't matter where you come from ".

Whats good for one is good for the other. 

 

They represent the flag, any flag, any flag in the world, that pays the most money, that is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sclarke said:

They represent the flag that pays the most money, that is all.

But they do represent which is the point that up until your very clear explanation was once an issue of contention .

" It doesn't matter where you come from "

Thanks again .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, maxmini said:

But they do represent which is the point that up until your very clear explanation was once an issue of contention .

" It doesn't matter where you come from "

Thanks again .

 

Again, they don't represent the flag, they represent the paycheck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sclarke said:

Again, they don't represent the flag, they represent the paycheck.

like who?

JS has only moved teams without his old team ending once, and that was from Luna Rossa to Oracle, and to be honest, any skipper of a team foreign to their home would make that deal seeing as they had a guaranteed entry to the final. whats more is that he has not raced against an Aussie team in his life in the AC, he has been a part of every existing AUS challenge since he has been a part of the AC (discounting team AUS)

tom Slingsby, Kyle Langford and nearly all of the other Oracle sailors have only represented Oracle or have had similar experiences to JS

i'm not 100% sure what makes you think that

just because they get payed more by Oracle doesn't mean that they're money hungry capitalist pigs

but please, give me an interview or any reasoning behind them only representing their paycheck

its not like all the Aussies in their team could represent their own country

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is some confusion about who represents what.

The individual sailors and designers etc. represent their team .. ETNZ or Land Rover Bar or Prada whatever.

The teams represent their clubs RNZYS etc.

The clubs represent their country New Zealand USA etc. sometimes there will be more than one team representing the same country like the USA and Italy etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Exactly

plus the 'nationality' or eligibility requirements for representatives differs from sport to sport - and even from event to event in some cases*

For the AC the Defender and the COR got to set the eligibility requirements this time - just as the did last time, etc etc

*Rugby World Cup 7s vs Olympic Rugby 7s as an example

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, trt131 said:

Would you still call the All Blacks the National Team if the brought Izzy Folau into the team ..

Mate, you were going well until you mentioned Folau in the same sentence as the All Blacks - he would not make the All Blacks because he's a one-trick pony. We've already got 2 of the best Fullbacks in the world and the best wingers to boot: so where would Folau fit in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2018 at 11:45 PM, inebriated said:

ummmm, ok then?

i was just saying that a 4 challenger AC wouldn't be all that successful commercially for NZ and it would be much less exciting then an AC with 6+ challengers

wouldn't you agree?

I'm happy with a one-on-one Challenge for AC36 - we would still get the excitement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Indio said:

Mate, you were going well until you mentioned Folau in the same sentence as the All Blacks - he would not make the All Blacks because he's a one-trick pony. We've already got 2 of the best Fullbacks in the world and the best wingers to boot: so where would Folau fit in?

Gotta agree with you there. Folau is a good Wallaby but does not rank internationally. Just go back to last year when our new boy (Rieko Ioane) ran around him to score in the corner for the 1st(?) Bledisloe 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/01/2018 at 5:47 AM, Indio said:

so where would Folau fit in?

Someone has to bring around the orange segments at half time.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/11/2017 at 12:30 PM, Nutta said:

Here's how this cycle will go:

Win AC35. [done]

Name Auckland as AC36 venue [done]

Auckland Council ineptitude [in progress]

Central Government intervention [pending]

Public outcry over cost for a "rich man's sport" [just starting] 

Media beat ups/sensational headlines over costs [just started]

ETNZ has to publically defend themselves for not contributing $ to venue construction [pending]

New facilities built, somehow, despite best efforts of Auckland Council, media, and public protest. [2019/2020]

Media starts covering AC36 [2021]

Mass NZ support for ETNZ despite previous massive outcry against costs, venue etc. [2021]

ETNZ defend AC36 [2021]

Crowds enjoy fantastic new facilities, cost never mentioned again [pending]

We're tracking pretty well on this...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AC36: Emirates Team NZ switches focus from bases to competitors

AUCKLAND – Now that New Zealand has sorted out the location and configuration of the team bases for the 2021 America's Cup (the 36th Defense of the America's Cup, or AC36 in Cup shorthand), the head of Emirates Team New Zealand, Grant Dalton (NZL), says he is switching his focus to recruiting entries.

https://www.sailingillustrated.com/single-post/2018/04/04/AC36-Emirates-Team-NZ-switches-focus-from-bases-to-competitors

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would be interesting to listen too, except ...do have a version with Hoskings whiney voice edited out?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a con...says Auckland Uni Prof....

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/university-of-auckland/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503679&objectid=12026499

 

America's Cup "overblown"

Politicians should stop using unrealistic economic studies to justify holding big events in NZ: expert.

The 2021 America's Cup should see an end to overblown official estimates on how hosting big events will earn New Zealand "millions and millions of dollars" in burgeoning economic benefit.

For too long, says Tim Hazledine, professor of economics at the University of Auckland Business School, such estimates have been painting rosy pictures of the financial bounty for host nations of big events – when the reality is otherwise.

"There are good reasons to host big events like the America's Cup, the Lions tour and the Rugby World Cup," he says. "But direct economic benefit usually isn't one of them."

....etc, including

"In total, you can find about $150 million actual money-in-the-pocket benefits to New Zealand."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nav said:

It's a con...says Auckland Uni Prof....

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/university-of-auckland/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503679&objectid=12026499

 

America's Cup "overblown"

Politicians should stop using unrealistic economic studies to justify holding big events in NZ: expert.

The 2021 America's Cup should see an end to overblown official estimates on how hosting big events will earn New Zealand "millions and millions of dollars" in burgeoning economic benefit.

For too long, says Tim Hazledine, professor of economics at the University of Auckland Business School, such estimates have been painting rosy pictures of the financial bounty for host nations of big events – when the reality is otherwise.

"There are good reasons to host big events like the America's Cup, the Lions tour and the Rugby World Cup," he says. "But direct economic benefit usually isn't one of them."

....etc

I found it ironic that a paid advertising campaign pretending to be content accused someone else of hyperbole...

Also negativity doesn't sell... It's a basic tenant of advertising...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

I found it ironic that a paid advertising campaign pretending to be content accused someone else of hyperbole...

Go....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

Eh?

Yeah exactly.

(So would you care to explain the bolded text^^)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, nav said:

Yeah exactly.

(So would you care to explain the bolded text^^)

Sure thing...

The NZ Herald's 'Brand Insight' section is a euphemistically titled space for what is commonly known in the industry as 'sponsored content' - ie content that is paid for by a third party (in this case Auckland Uni) - 'sponsored content' is also a euphemism for paid advertising. It's in a newspaper, but it's not newsworthy, or even op-ed, it simply exists to say whatever the organisation paying for the content wants it to say. Sponsored content has value to advertisers because it is perceived by readers and viewers as being a news story, or having the balance that journalistic integrity typically provides. Sponsored content is highly controversial in that it blurs the separation of church and state (editorial and advertising) that has been at the heart of the news publishing industry for over a century.

http://harvardpolitics.com/united-states/sponsored-content-in-the-media-emerging-threat-or-evolution-of-the-industry/

So to clarify, Auckland Uni is running an advertising campaign and paying NZME a lot of money for it, including posting this piece of content for them as if it was a valid news story. So I found it ironic that a piece of 'research' that had to be paid-to-publish (in order to imply it's newsworthy and worth reading) making it at best a form of PR and perception engineering to lobby for their agenda (ie promoting Auckland Uni), is criticising another group for doing the exact same thing (PRing and lobbying their agenda).

https://www.business.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/news-and-media/nz-herald-brand-insights.html

:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for explaining the 'BI'.

So...what do you think of his figures :D

And how does explaining the changes made over time to another report (criticising it - as you put it!?) and suggesting politicians be more financially realistic while at the same time suggesting there are many good reasons to host the Cup......promote Auckland University?

Do you have an agenda?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, nav said:

And how does explaining the changes made over time to another report (criticising it - as you put it!?) and suggesting politicians be more financially realistic while at the same time suggesting there are many good reasons to host the Cup......promote Auckland University?

That is a bloody good question! Which I'm sure the head of marketing at AU and the account manager at NZME will have plenty of powerpoints and sexy 'metrics' to explain :-)

I'd argue that negative stories might provide some brand awareness (that you would think about AU more), but don't help drive brand affinity (the feel-good mabo vibes you get when you think about AU).

I probably do have an agenda, although I'd need to think about it more carefully in order to determine exactly where it lies... my point was more to point out the hypocrisy that came with this article ;-) "don't believe the PR about AC, but believe this PR about AU"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paid content is the total death of news media, well for attracting my eyes at least. 

Followed closely by regurgitated social media and heavily agenda biased opinion pieces!

If I want to read silly nonsense I'll come to Sailing Anarchy Forums instead thank you very much!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 9/7/2017 at 12:28 PM, Indio said:

We're talking about an honest AC36 in a city that has experience hosting AC events - not some out-of-the-way little island country conned into spending $75+-mil to host an event they had no connection with. We'll get more Challengers than AC35...

 

On 9/7/2017 at 12:37 PM, MischiefBDA said:

I bet you don't

 

On 9/29/2017 at 7:44 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

Bet?  I'll take that bet. How about a grand to start with?

 

oooh girls ... cutting it fine :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZ government to pay $100 million for America's Cup hosting new budget still rolling out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$40 million of that sum is the so called "event fee".

Never ever thought a one off yachting regatta could scoff through such a whopping chunk off change.

In my view the public purse has been severely diddled by the whole AC event and the $250 million would have better given to our nurses as a welcome change from their paltry pay rates.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

$40 million of that sum is the so called "event fee".

Never ever thought a one off yachting regatta could scoff through such a whopping chunk off change.

In my view the public purse has been severely diddled by the whole AC event and the $250 million would have better given to our nurses as a welcome change from their paltry pay rates.

 

What?? You clearly don't know how the event works. If we loose it the event will be at least two years, if we win it its at least 6 or 10 or more years. Take a Commonwealth games it now costs $1 billion to the nation that hosts and it only last a few weeks. High performance sports gets 35 million EVERY year for no return except us feeling good when we win a bronze in snowboarding. Its a paltry amount for such an event and the return in physical dollars are enormous. You also might have missed Health's new budget of $18.2 Billion??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

$40 million of that sum is the so called "event fee".

Never ever thought a one off yachting regatta could scoff through such a whopping chunk off change.

In my view the public purse has been severely diddled by the whole AC event and the $250 million would have better given to our nurses as a welcome change from their paltry pay rates.

For Priscilla and others who don't get it, Duncan Johnstone in stuff.co.nz did a pretty good job last December of explaining  the concept of event fees for international sport in general and specifically for the next America's Cup in Auckland

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/99609051/grant-dalton-fires-back-over-americas-cup-event-fee-criticism

"A separate company has already been formed to run the regattas, called America's Cup Events Ltd. It's a replica of the America's Cup Events Authority that ran the last two regattas and received considerable payments to do so – $30m from San Francisco and $80m by Bermuda.

"The event fee will only cover partial costs of the Auckland extravaganza with Team New Zealand under pressure to find significant sponsorship to top it up.

"'It's not a fee to host an event, an appearance fee, a royalty or anything like that. It's to run the actual event and all the logistics,' Dalton insists."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct KJ, also New Zealand paid $1.2 Billion for the 2015 RWC including a $150 million hosting fee to the IRB based in England

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a one off 4 team event so the reference to the RWC is a nonsense.

"'It's not a fee to host an event, an appearance fee, a royalty or anything like that. It's to run the actual event and all the logistics,' Dalton insists."

I call bullshit and fake news along with the much touted billion dollar bonanza that will wash out through the economy.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Priscilla said:

This is a one off 4 team event so the reference to the RWC is a nonsense.

"'It's not a fee to host an event, an appearance fee, a royalty or anything like that. It's to run the actual event and all the logistics,' Dalton insists."

I call bullshit and fake news along with the much touted billion dollar bonanza that will wash out through the economy.

 

That acid reflex will probably abate if you look for news and view elsewhere!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, KiwiJoker said:

That acid reflex will probably abate if you look for news and view elsewhere!

Priscilla queen of the dessert has always had a love hate relationship with world class sporting events hosted on NZ and frankly herself.

I think she must be a soul-cruiser not interested in competition, which is fair enough, but I'm not sure why she decides to frequent competition forums like AC anarchy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My family had Trawlers in the viaduct before we won AC29. The viaduct was a smelly eyesore. I was living in southern California and on water supporter in San Diego. With the cup coming to Auckland I invested in the Viaduct and owned business in it. from 1997-2003 we saw teams arrive, investment and absolute boom in trade and returns. The Americas cup is a very unique event in the the defender decides where it is at and the challengers have to come for an extended time. These are large groups with families and yes, very well paid. Auckland changed it heart because of it. We had restaurants and bars filled for years (and still now) and a vibrancy seen no where else in New Zealand. These events have been a blessing for Auckland and I'm sure the next one will be as well. When we spent $500m just the stadium Eden park for the RWC, it should be considered one of worst capital expenditures of all time. By resource consent Eden park can only be used for the maximum of 16 night events per year and of the there are no more the 3 non-sporting events per year.

No other sporting event in the world has returns like this (apart from the big TV rights events like the FWC and Superbowl)

oldvia.jpg

newvai.jpeg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

well said.

At the start of the search for a venue i mentioned for me the best possible outcome would be to get rid of some of the tanks in a timely manner, and save some of the land for parks, event centers, and hospitality. And rescue it from the waterfront apartment development crowd.

I lived on the water in False Creek Vancouver for ten years, and saw the sun eclipsed by towering apartment developments with token green spaces. You only get one chance to make the decisions that result in the lo-rise people based waterfront as pictured above, and as we have seen in this process, it is very difficult to wrest the land from the developers.

Auckland and New Zealand will be proud of the outcome of this process, and in years to come we can all enjoy the legacy whatever the outcome of the Match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lived in this bay for 4 years before the marina was built and the berths gifted to the owners of the new condo in front of the bay.

daviesStreet.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! I stayed for a month or so in Kitsilano and then Port Coquitlam with some kiwi friends back in 1980 (when mount. St. Helens erupted) and I remember False Creek being a bit like how the viaduct basin used to be, except False Creek was probably more industrialised. How things have changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, barfy said:

^

well said.

At the start of the search for a venue i mentioned for me the best possible outcome would be to get rid of some of the tanks in a timely manner, and save some of the land for parks, event centers, and hospitality. And rescue it from the waterfront apartment development crowd.

I lived on the water in False Creek Vancouver for ten years, and saw the sun eclipsed by towering apartment developments with token green spaces. You only get one chance to make the decisions that result in the lo-rise people based waterfront as pictured above, and as we have seen in this process, it is very difficult to wrest the land from the developers.

Auckland and New Zealand will be proud of the outcome of this process, and in years to come we can all enjoy the legacy whatever the outcome of the Match.

Well your heart was/is in the right place but your understanding of recent history is a bit thin.  

Wynyard point, ie the Tank Farm, was slated by the city for development as a park as part of the broader redevelopment of the area that has been evolving for years.

So far, so good.

Hopefully it will survive future deviations from the park plan and become the legacy we wish for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2018 at 5:23 PM, Priscilla said:

$40 million of that sum is the so called "event fee".

Never ever thought a one off yachting regatta could scoff through such a whopping chunk off change.

In my view the public purse has been severely diddled by the whole AC event and the $250 million would have better given to our nurses as a welcome change from their paltry pay rates.

 

Why stop at nurses: what about the teachers and police?? But of course a Russky bot wouldn't know that :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, KiwiJoker said:

Well your heart was/is in the right place but your understanding of recent history is a bit thin.  

Wynyard point, ie the Tank Farm, was slated by the city for development as a park as part of the broader redevelopment of the area that has been evolving for years.

So far, so good.

Hopefully it will survive future deviations from the park plan and become the legacy we wish for.

Well your on point there, but I don't know what side your on. The tank farm is due for redevelopment as apartments and commercial wrecking our waterfront as BarFly poinst out what happened in False creek.

the Council's Panuku developments is behind this, they are the same company the brought the car park in Takapua to turn them and the markets into apartments. evil guys but that is IMHO. Their mission statement is turning the sites spread across a block of land bordered by Beaumont, Pakenham Street West, Halsey and Madden Streets,will eventually be the location for 500 new homes (apartments) and 48,000 m2 of commercial space. I'm looking at doing a Documentary on this. The say save our waterfront but what they mean is save our waterfront for apartment and commercial views. havens forbid you move/decrease the POA

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, kiwi777 said:

Well your on point there, but I don't know what side your on. The tank farm is due for redevelopment as apartments and commercial wrecking our waterfront as BarFly poinst out what happened in False creek.

the Council's Panuku developments is behind this, they are the same company the brought the car park in Takapua to turn them and the markets into apartments. evil guys but that is IMHO. Their mission statement is turning the sites spread across a block of land bordered by Beaumont, Pakenham Street West, Halsey and Madden Streets,will eventually be the location for 500 new homes (apartments) and 48,000 m2 of commercial space. I'm looking at doing a Documentary on this. The say save our waterfront but what they mean is save our waterfront for apartment and commercial views. havens forbid you move/decrease the POA

Whoa!  Hold your horses. Honestly, I haven't looked at the latest envisaged by Panaku for Wynyard Point but as of about 18 months ago it was slated to be all green space and park with a small grouping of apartments at the inboard end and the preservation of a few small legacy shipyards.  For the avoidance of doubt I'm fully in favour of that and have been all along. 

The Beaumont/Pakenham/Halsey/Madden block you're referring to has been a wasteland for years. It was designated years ago by Panaku for low rise apartments and commercial space with a broad new green avenue running down its north/south axis.  Worth noting it''s not waterfront real estate. Not in any direction by one city block at least. A documentary? The block in question is already partially built out.

If you're looking for a cause celebre whipping post then take aim at the 12-story new luxury hotel proposed for the inner Viaduct Basin. Colliers is still looking for a developer, noting the site "has water on two sides." The site at One Market Square is currently the home of Headquarters restaurant. If built the monstrosity will tower over the other five-story new construction around the Basin's edge.  A fucking travesty. It's not yet consented and the locals are up arms. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11842688

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Panaku will win out. at least the sun will not be eclipsed by huge hi-rise apartments that are owned by foreign interests that never use them; cause they are on the south side of the harbour.

anyway, I believe the Cup will give us another leg up with some tanks gone, and a bit of momentum against the monstrosities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, KiwiJoker said:

Whoa!  Hold your horses. Honestly, I haven't looked at the latest envisaged by Panaku for Wynyard Point but as of about 18 months ago it was slated to be all green space and park with a small grouping of apartments at the inboard end and the preservation of a few small legacy shipyards.  For the avoidance of doubt I'm fully in favour of that and have been all along. 

The Beaumont/Pakenham/Halsey/Madden block you're referring to has been a wasteland for years. It was designated years ago by Panaku for low rise apartments and commercial space with a broad new green avenue running down its north/south axis.  Worth noting it''s not waterfront real estate. Not in any direction by one city block at least. A documentary? The block in question is already partially built out.

If you're looking for a cause celebre whipping post then take aim at the 12-story new luxury hotel proposed for the inner Viaduct Basin. Colliers is still looking for a developer, noting the site "has water on two sides." The site at One Market Square is currently the home of Headquarters restaurant. If built the monstrosity will tower over the other five-story new construction around the Basin's edge.  A fucking travesty. It's not yet consented and the locals are up arms. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11842688

btw, you should look at simon herbert's vision for bayswater, with the drawings of the marina showing "green spaces" which are really parking lots between the condos with 24 parking spaces for the 400+ berths. It's easy to call a bit of land a "green space". Currently the bit of sidewalk in front of the car park in bayswater is a "green space".

oh, and look at the "green spaces" strip in false creek. just a couple lanes in front of the condos. 

Great for roller blades tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2018 at 12:00 AM, barfy said:

btw, you should look at simon herbert's vision for bayswater, with the drawings of the marina showing "green spaces" which are really parking lots between the condos with 24 parking spaces for the 400+ berths. It's easy to call a bit of land a "green space". Currently the bit of sidewalk in front of the car park in bayswater is a "green space".

oh, and look at the "green spaces" strip in false creek. just a couple lanes in front of the condos. 

Great for roller blades tho.

Don't quite understand your paint re green space.. The Wynyard Point concept I viewed was parkland - hectares of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like he thinks the green space requirements within developments are being 'met' in very questionable ways. A public park nearby does not obviate the developers obligations....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, nav said:

Sounds like he thinks the green space requirements within developments are being 'met' in very questionable ways. A public park nearby does not obviate the developers obligations....

Agreed,  but we're talking about the entirety of Wynyard Point (save for some legacy buildings) as "green space" aka a public park. 

If I understand correctly, barfy is trying to imitate it may be a disguised parking lot!

Fat chance!  This is a rare, undeveloped showpiece corner of the harbour and will be treated as such.

Of course hopes and aspirations for WP are just that.  The may not survive the pressure of actual development.  For now though things appear to be on a healthy track.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am talking about Empire's (Simon Herbert) plans for Bayswater which shows spaces between all the condos as "green spaces" in one plan, "shared spaces" in another. But in reality will most likely be car parks for the condos as this is the only place for the 300 vehicles that will come from this development. 

My point is look carefully at plans where a developer designates "green space" , "shared space". 

Panuku in the news again...along with Simon and his empire. Again an acquisition that is going on in private, probably won't be such a theft as Bayswater was, but still some questions need to be asked. Plenty of public benefit paraded.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/104068656/Apartment-blocks-proposed-for-Hobsonville-Marina-residents-say-they-re-not-wanted

I'm glad that sensible politicians (oxymoron) steered the process for the Cup away from these pirates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, barfy said:

I am talking about Empire's (Simon Herbert) plans for Bayswater which shows spaces between all the condos as "green spaces" in one plan, "shared spaces" in another. But in reality will most likely be car parks for the condos as this is the only place for the 300 vehicles that will come from this development. 

My point is look carefully at plans where a developer designates "green space" , "shared space". 

Panuku in the news again...along with Simon and his empire. Again an acquisition that is going on in private, probably won't be such a theft as Bayswater was, but still some questions need to be asked. Plenty of public benefit paraded.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/104068656/Apartment-blocks-proposed-for-Hobsonville-Marina-residents-say-they-re-not-wanted

I'm glad that sensible politicians (oxymoron) steered the process for the Cup away from these pirates.

Look mate! ..... this thread is about "AC36 Auckland NZ" and not your shaky "evidence" about the evil intentions of Panaku across far-flung part of Aucl;smf to deprive us of "green Space" in the name of progress.

in the Wynyard Quarter I like everything i've seen in relation to what Panaku has done and is doing  and the way that it has, at Auckland Councils bidding, taken aboard the ETNZ suggestions  and refined the AC36 planning to fine tune its impact and minimise incursions into the harbour.  Not that I think a degree of incursion wouldn't mean a jot and might actually improve the area.

Measured against all the Cup venues since WWII, Auckland promises to be the best yet -- compact,  close to the heart of the city, easily accessible to the public, tons of bars,, cafes and restaurants in sight of the bases or within close walking distance, 

And this arrangement is good for the next three defences, assuming ETNZ can prevail over some potentially pretty serious challengers, some of which have yet to formalise tjeor bids.

What's not to like!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True that, I like. It will be/is a great venue.

Just saying I'm glad the long drawn out process of venue design had input from other stakeholders than Panuku...like ETNZ. I thought, and discussed here, best outcome is a better base for ETNZ, and some tanks gone, and some parks in the Wynyard rather than packing the point with condos.

And just saying don't trust a developer when they tell you how sweet their development will be for the local residents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2018 at 5:26 PM, KiwiJoker said:

Whoa!  Hold your horses. Honestly, I haven't looked at the latest envisaged by Panaku for Wynyard Point but as of about 18 months ago it was slated to be all green space and park with a small grouping of apartments at the inboard end and the preservation of a few small legacy shipyards.  For the avoidance of doubt I'm fully in favour of that and have been all along. 

The Beaumont/Pakenham/Halsey/Madden block you're referring to has been a wasteland for years. It was designated years ago by Panaku for low rise apartments and commercial space with a broad new green avenue running down its north/south axis.  Worth noting it''s not waterfront real estate. Not in any direction by one city block at least. A documentary? The block in question is already partially built out.

If you're looking for a cause celebre whipping post then take aim at the 12-story new luxury hotel proposed for the inner Viaduct Basin. Colliers is still looking for a developer, noting the site "has water on two sides." The site at One Market Square is currently the home of Headquarters restaurant. If built the monstrosity will tower over the other five-story new construction around the Basin's edge.  A fucking travesty. It's not yet consented and the locals are up arms. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11842688

Hold on, sounds like your an apartment owner. I think a waterfront hotel is not a bad idea, at least it will be open to the public. The travesty is our harbor is not seen by the public on the CBD side and it should be!! Only in Devenport and a part of princess wharf do you get harbor view attractions. Private Lo or High rise apartments or commercial 100m from the foreshore should not be built or have their views protected!! The harbor is for the people not for ACC to make 1 time money. Selling our harbor for private use is scandalous and people buying them need to get real.  

tank farm.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, kiwi777 said:

Hold on, sounds like your an apartment owner. I think a waterfront hotel is not a bad idea, at least it will be open to the public. The travesty is our harbor is not seen by the public on the CBD side and it should be!! Only in Devenport and a part of princess wharf do you get harbor view attractions. Private Lo or High rise apartments or commercial 100m from the foreshore should not be built or have their views protected!! The harbor is for the people not for ACC to make 1 time money. Selling our harbor for private use is scandalous and people buying them need to get real.  

To be clear my sole objection is the notion of building a 12-story hotel right on the water's edge, where other developments were all constrained to four or five stories. Of course it is only a proposal.

And, no, I live on the North Shore and the harbour views from the ferries are just fine thank you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KiwiJoker said:

To be clear my sole objection is the notion of building a 12-story hotel right on the water's edge, where other developments were all constrained to four or five stories. Of course it is only a proposal.

And, no, I live on the North Shore and the harbour views from the ferries are just fine thank you.

 

"Harbor views from the ferry are just fine." Sad!! I would like this (same position in Sydney waterfront), instead of this on Quay st.

sydneyharbour.jpg

rsz_img_20180309_174003.jpg

rsz_1img_20180309_174057.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kiwi777 said:

"Harbor views from the ferry are just fine." Sad!! I would like this (same position in Sydney waterfront), instead of this on Quay st.

sydneyharbour.jpg

 

Yeah!  Well, I'd like a Maserati instead of a Corolla!

Let's end this thread drift.  Not germane to AC 36 developments in Auckland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2018 at 1:30 PM, KiwiJoker said:

Agreed,  but we're talking about the entirety of Wynyard Point (save for some legacy buildings) as "green space" aka a public park. 

If I understand correctly, barfy is trying to imitate it may be a disguised parking lot!

Fat chance!  This is a rare, undeveloped showpiece corner of the harbour and will be treated as such.

Of course hopes and aspirations for WP are just that.  The may not survive the pressure of actual development.  For now though things appear to be on a healthy track.
 

Pure bullshit.

You don’t work for Panuku by any chance.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2018 at 1:30 PM, KiwiJoker said:

[snip]

Of course hopes and aspirations for WP are just that.  The may not survive the pressure of actual development.  For now though things appear to be on a healthy track.
 

hopes; may not survive; things are good.

with rhetoric like that there's a place for you overseas in an administration that would appreciate you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KiwiJoker said:

Yeah!  Well, I'd like a Maserati instead of a Corolla!

Let's end this thread drift.  Not germane to AC 36 developments in Auckland.

and we are discussing the base development and the legacy that it leaves future generations. remember, once you build 12 story hotels right up against the water there is no going back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, barfy said:

and we are discussing the base development and the legacy that it leaves future generations. remember, once you build 12 story hotels right up against the water there is no going back.

I had intended to quit this useless and mindless exchange but a couple of final thoughts for you and Prissy  .....

Pay attention for fuck's sake! If you actually read what i wrote, i never said/implied/suggested that 12-story hotels perched on the waterfront should be allowed.  Got it!  i'm agin it!

And as for Prissy's "bullshit" comment ..... back at you mate!.  Panuku (aka the Auckland Council) has shown itself supportive of AC 36 development and planning. I hold no brief for Panuku but I admire the concept they've arrived at for the next defence through a consensus process with all parties. I'll be the first to holler if they deviate from their published Resource Consent application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, KiwiJoker said:

Yeah!  Well, I'd like a Maserati instead of a Corolla!

Let's end this thread drift.  Not germane to AC 36 developments in Auckland.

Rubbish, Nice veiws in public spaces are very achievable in auckland. We are spending $1Billion on cycleways and footpaths. What we don't need is Ports of Auckland, Tank farms and a Navel base and a City Council which is the highest paid in the world with little accountablity. It's not drifting off thread, the AC36 is a key part of this.

Where you lost me anyway on this thread is when you said about "supporting Low-rise apartment views and rights"

'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, KiwiJoker said:

I had intended to quit this useless and mindless exchange but a couple of final thoughts for you and Prissy  .....

Pay attention for fuck's sake! If you actually read what i wrote, i never said/implied/suggested that 12-story hotels perched on the waterfront should be allowed.  Got it!  i'm agin it!

[snip]

ya, sorry for that shameless troll :)

i read you...just my point all along here has been huge waterfront condo dev in the name of bettering the experience for the locals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, barfy said:

just my point all along here has been huge waterfront condo dev in the name of bettering the experience for the locals

exactly, in no way waterfront condos are good for the community. Unfortunately they get the go ahead as some people make money from them. The protests Sydney had when they tried to got the opera house built was immense.

I really wish the ones in the Viaduct were not built. People brought them and immediately started protest on the bars, clubs and events underneath them. Some got closed as a result. What do you expect when you purchase on top a bar? Same with people that buy next to an airport or Eden park, Western springs. Very little compassion

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Right here is the dreamers concept of the Western Reclamation end plan detailed.

The reality will be another Orwellian blob of concrete cluster fuck profiteers paradise.

Nobody is at all willingly prepared to disclose the amount that Willis Bond has paid to the Council for the 125 year ground leases granted.

cVrxEjz.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ha.

I love the pocket park.

and the "extended linear park", and the ones beside it, would degenerate into car parks.

The amazing marine industry in the area was/is slated to lower floors of apartments, if they can afford the rent, i was told by someone involved in the development plans. When I mentioned it was a world class industry hub and should be respected before the industry moves to Henderson i was at once snubbed.

This

is the best part of AC36 in Auckland, a chance to claw back some of this land for a great event and future generations to enjoy; future sailing events, concerts, and generally being able to look at the harbour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2018 at 5:24 PM, Priscilla said:

 

Right here is the dreamers concept of the Western Reclamation end plan detailed.

The reality will be another Orwellian blob of concrete cluster fuck profiteers paradise.

Nobody is at all willingly prepared to disclose the amount that Willis Bond has paid to the Council for the 125 year ground leases granted.

cVrxEjz.jpg

Thanks.  Your post implies that Willis Bond has committed to a 125 ground lease for Wynyard Point.  The company has done that for other parts of the Wynyard Quarter which are already being developed.  AFAIK,  Wynyard Point remains uncommitted and is still in the development stages.  Your illustration of proposed development there is a new one for me.  Source, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality for the vibrant super yacht and supporting businesses is for no or severely limited access for customer parking .

I trade with a wonderfull engineering supplier in that locality and Council has never made any effort whatsoever to assist in providing parking facilities wtf.

The area in general is a traffic nightmare and Panuku shows no interest in mitigating their Amsterdam cyclors dream to meeting the on the ground commercial reality.

The Cup will only further the chaos.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites