Jump to content

Punt Road redevelopment

Blind_turn
Blind_turn
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I don't think it's odd. There could be a number of reasons such as land value(ie, keeping it from becoming more expensive), Government directive (ie, if it's government owned land or a government-led project, the government might be insisting on secrecy) or not wanting to give those who may oppose the development opportunities to kill off the proposal before the funding is locked away. 

Stop being logical LDC. For god sake man can’t you see the conspiracy here? 

  • Quote
    • Haha 2
     
    3 minutes ago, old dee said:

    Stop being logical LDC. For god sake man can’t you see the conspiracy here? 

    I know the internet is full of conspiracy theories, misinformation and, unfortuately, personal abuse. What astounds me is how much appears on a site like this one where everyone who contributes is essentially on the same side!

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    18 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    I know the internet is full of conspiracy theories, misinformation and, unfortuately, personal abuse. What astounds me is how much appears on a site like this one where everyone who contributes is essentially on the same side!

    Yes some days you would think we were on the Tigers site arguing the Dees point of view. The electronic world of the 21st century has some great benefits but the social media area is the haven of ever nut case and there even nutter theories. 

  • Quote
    •  
    5 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    I don't think it's odd. There could be a number of reasons such as land value(ie, keeping it from becoming more expensive), Government directive (ie, if it's government owned land or a government-led project, the government might be insisting on secrecy) or not wanting to give those who may oppose the development opportunities to kill off the proposal before the funding is locked away. 

    You will need to explain the land value one to me, keeping it from becoming more expensive, especially as it applies to an area in close proximity to the MCG. 

  • Quote
    On 12/3/2020 at 8:43 PM, Better days ahead said:

    I think Port Melbourne is as good a spot as any. The whole area is ripe for development. 

    Not just as "good as any" better than most.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    On 12/5/2020 at 9:20 AM, Kent said:

    other than North port oval ( smaller that Etihad or MCG) where else is there enough space in Port

    I thought all  the large industrial sites have been snapped up by landbankers

    Perhaps with govt support some of the land bankers can be redefined.

  • Quote
    53 minutes ago, Half forward flank said:

    You will need to explain the land value one to me, keeping it from becoming more expensive, especially as it applies to an area in close proximity to the MCG. 

    I could imagine that a potential site may become more expensive to buy or lease should it become clear that it is in consideration for all or part of a redevelopment. I expect that much of the land will likely be Government owned, but some could be privately owned. I wouldn't want us to have to pay over the odds (to buy or lease) because it leaked out that we were considering that site. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    On 12/5/2020 at 6:53 PM, Neil Crompton said:

    It would appear that a significant number of posters on here for some reason don't believe a word of what Glen Bartlett has told us at the beginning of July about our new training facility. In his podcast he has clearly stated that: 

    - our new training and administration facility will be in the MCG precinct area.

    - it will include a social club

    - the training oval will not be MCG size - due to space restrictions

    - we will have a second training facility at Casey (including MCG size oval, and a good sized indoor kicking area)

    - the initial phase (to analyze option sites, establish the requirements for the new development, and recommend a preferred option) has been completed

    - the second phase of the development is now in full swing - ie focusing on the preferred site only, and finalizing the Concept Master Plan for this site.

    - the entire process from analysis, through concept development, to detailed design to construction completion was going to be about a 4 year process (from memory)

    Until proven otherwise, I'm more than happy to not only believe what Glen has outlined, but also to be very excited about what he has outlined. Yes its too many years overdue, but it looks very real at the moment. 

     

    Thanks NC 

    Had not seen that articulated.

    Was there any detail of the initial phase analysis of options? Was Port Melbourne included in that?

    4 year process probably not too long for a substantial development, but it would be good to see the announcement and that the preferred site was in fact The site.

    Until then I restrain my excitement as it still doesn't look any more real.

  • Quote
    •  
    58 minutes ago, dpositive said:

    Perhaps with govt support some of the land bankers can be redefined.

    So d how would you define them? 

    There is a group who were in the know and snapped up the large sites

  • Quote
    1 minute ago, Kent said:

    So d how would you define them? 

    There is a group who were in the know and snapped up the large sites

    I think a govt process allows for compulsory acquisition, with values set by independent body. I think that also follows set negotiation processes.

    As DJ I think said there is still some commercial areas which might be conducive to alternative relocation exchange etc.

    Should have been a consideration in phase 1 of the process I'd imagine 

  • Quote

    5 minutes ago, Kent said:

    So d how would you define them? 

    There is a group who were in the know and snapped up the large sites

    Could have added that those" in the know" may be subject to insider trading or conflict of interest regulation. So I assume none of that went on  so ROI decisions would be applied.

  • Quote
    2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    I could imagine that a potential site may become more expensive to buy or lease should it become clear that it is in consideration for all or part of a redevelopment. I expect that much of the land will likely be Government owned, but some could be privately owned. I wouldn't want us to have to pay over the odds (to buy or lease) because it leaked out that we were considering that site. 

    Gotta say what you suggest is all just guess work. I do not believe that it is at the point of selecting between two or more sites, Phase 2, according to Bartlett,  when no one can even identify one site being looked at within the MCG precinct.

    Edited by Half forward flank

  • Quote
    15 hours ago, Half forward flank said:

    Gotta say what you suggest is all just guess work. I do not believe that it is at the point of selecting between two or more sites, Phase 2, according to Bartlett,  when no one can even identify one site being looked at within the MCG precinct.

    It's your prerogative not to do so, of course, but I'll accept what the President has said, as helpfully summarised by Neil Crompton a couple of pages back.

    "- the initial phase (to analyze option sites, establish the requirements for the new development, and recommend a preferred option) has been completed

    - the second phase of the development is now in full swing - ie focusing on the preferred site only, and finalizing the Concept Master Plan for this site."

     

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    2 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    It's your prerogative not to do so, of course, but I'll accept what the President has said, as helpfully summarised by Neil Crompton a couple of pages back.

    "- the initial phase (to analyze option sites, establish the requirements for the new development, and recommend a preferred option) has been completed

    - the second phase of the development is now in full swing - ie focusing on the preferred site only, and finalizing the Concept Master Plan for this site."

     

    so the preferred site is??? I'm with HFF and don't think we have a site yet. Again when did the 4 year plan commence ? We are at least 18m months in.

     

  • Quote
    2 minutes ago, Kent said:

    so the preferred site is??? I'm with HFF and don't think we have a site yet. Again when did the 4 year plan commence ? We are at least 18m months in.

     

    It's a sad state of affairs when we can no longer trust the statements of public figures. 

  • Quote

     

    22 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    It's your prerogative not to do so, of course, but I'll accept what the President has said, as helpfully summarised by Neil Crompton a couple of pages back.

    "- the initial phase (to analyze option sites, establish the requirements for the new development, and recommend a preferred option) has been completed

    - the second phase of the development is now in full swing - ie focusing on the preferred site only, and finalizing the Concept Master Plan for this site."

     

    My recollection of the interview Bartlett did back in July is that he was bullish on the home base. Plans to be announced imminently (my impression 6-12 months). He didn’t give himself much wriggle room should the plans hit a snag, put his neck on the line well and truly. No announcement within the next 12 months and he’ll have to resign.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    1 hour ago, Kent said:

    so the preferred site is??? I'm with HFF and don't think we have a site yet. Again when did the 4 year plan commence ? We are at least 18m months in.

     

    Is the reason you don't think we have a site because they haven't yet told you what the site is?

  • Quote
    46 minutes ago, whelan45 said:

    Is the reason you don't think we have a site because they haven't yet told you what the site is?

    They have said nothing but to outline a process over 4 years

    we either have a preferred site or not

    I see no reason for the lack of clarity

  • Quote
    57 minutes ago, Kent said:

    They have said nothing but to outline a process over 4 years

    we either have a preferred site or not

    I see no reason for the lack of clarity

    I disagree with the opinion that because the public doesn't know the preferred site yet, we must not have one. 

    Edited by whelan45
    Typo

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    1 hour ago, Kent said:

    They have said nothing but to outline a process over 4 years

    we either have a preferred site or not

    I see no reason for the lack of clarity

    Just because you cannot see a reason for the lack of clarity, does not mean there isn't one.

  • Quote

    Does anyone know what year we stopped training at the MCG  AKA our home?

    I bet it correlates with our lack of success and that we trained on the MCG in the 1960s and before.

    Edited by Pickett2Jackson

  • Quote
    29 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

    Does anyone know what year we stopped training at the MCG  AKA our home?

    I bet it correlates with our lack of success and that we trained on the MCG in the 1960s and before.

    Well after we fell in a hole. 

  • Quote
    1 hour ago, whelan45 said:

    I disagree with the opinion that because the public doesn't know the preferred site yet, we must not have one. 

    I agree with this. I would expect we will not know until plans are quite advanced, and funding in place.

  • Quote
    •  
    1 hour ago, whelan45 said:

    I disagree with the opinion that because the public doesn't know the preferred site yet, we must not have one. 

    Disagree all you like that's great.

    In the absence of something there is nothing! There is no reason that the club shouldn't talk about the preferred option

  • Quote

    • Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • GAMEDAY: Fremantle

      It’s Game Day, and the Demons return to the MCG wounded, undermanned and desperate. Still searching for their first win of the season, Melbourne faces a daunting task against the Fremantle Dockers. With key pillars missing at both ends of the ground, the Dees must find a way to rise above the adversity and ignite their season before it slips way beyond reach. Will today be the spark that turns it all around, or are we staring down the barrel of a 0–6 start?

        • Like
      • 10 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Fremantle

      A month is a long time in AFL football. The proof of this is in the current state of the two teams contesting against each other early this Saturday afternoon at the MCG. It’s hard to fathom that when Melbourne and Fremantle kicked off the 2025 season, the former looked like being a major player in this year’s competition after it came close to beating one of the favourites in the GWS Giants while the latter was smashed by Geelong to the tune of 78 points and looked like rubbish. Fast forward to today and the Demons are low on confidence and appear panic stricken as their winless streak heads towards an even half dozen and pressure mounts on the coach and team leadership.  Meanwhile, the Dockers have recovered their composure and now sit in the top eight. They are definitely on the up and up and look most likely winners this weekend against a team which they have recently dominated and which struggles to find enough passages to the goals to trouble the scorers. And with that, Fremantle will head to the MCG, feeling very good about itself after demolishing Richmond in the Barossa Valley with Josh Treacy coming off a six goal haul and facing up to a Melbourne defence already without Jake Lever and a shaky Steven May needing to pass a fitness test just to make it onto the field of play. 

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 06

      The Easter Round kicks off in style with a Thursday night showdown between Brisbane and Collingwood, as both sides look to solidify their spots inside the Top 4 early in the season. Good Friday brings a double-header, with Carlton out to claim consecutive wins when they face the struggling Kangaroos, while later that night the Eagles host the Bombers in Perth, still chasing their first victory of the year. Saturday features another marquee clash as the resurgent Crows look to rebound from back-to-back losses against a formidable GWS outfit. That evening, all eyes will be on Marvel Stadium where Damien Hardwick returns to face his old side—the Tigers—coaching the Suns at a ground he's never hidden his disdain for. Sunday offers two crucial contests where the prize is keeping touch with the Top 8. First, Sydney and Port Adelaide go head-to-head, followed by a fierce battle between the Bulldogs and the Saints. Then, Easter Monday delivers the traditional clash between two bitter rivals, both desperate for a win to stay in touch with the top end of the ladder. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons?

        • Thanks
      • 200 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Essendon

      What were they thinking? I mean by “they” the coaching panel and team selectors who chose the team to play against an opponent who, like Melbourne, had made a poor start to the season and who they appeared perfectly capable of beating in what was possibly the last chance to turn the season around.It’s no secret that the Demons’ forward line is totally dysfunctional, having opened the season barely able to average sixty points per game which means there has been no semblance of any system from the team going forward into attack. Nevertheless, on Saturday night at the Adelaide Oval in one of the Gather Round showcase games, Melbourne, with Max Gawn dominating the hit outs against a depleted Essendon ruck resulting from Nick Bryan’s early exit, finished just ahead in clearances won and found itself inside the 50 metre arc 51 times to 43. The end result was a final score that had the Bombers winning 15.6 (96) to 8.9 (57). On balance, one could expect this to result in a two or three goal win, but in this case, it translated into a six and a half goal defeat because they only managed to convert eight times or 11.68% of their entries. The Bombers more than doubled that. On Thursday night at the same ground, the losing team Adelaide managed to score 100 points from almost the same number of times inside 50.

        • Sad
        • Clap
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Essendon

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 14th April @ the all new time of 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect another Demons loss at Kardinia Park to the Cats in the Round 04. Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.

        • Thanks
      • 63 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Fremantle

      The Demons return home to the MCG in search of their first win for the 2025 Premiership season when they take on the Fremantle Dockers on Saturday afternoon. Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 477 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All