Couldn’t organise a piss-up on Queens Wharf

21 comments on “Couldn’t organise a piss-up on Queens Wharf ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Cnr Joe 1

   14 April 2010 at 12:57 pm

   sorry, was that supposed to read ‘chucking up in a a big tent’?
   we are talking about rugby here..
   ha ha captcha – months
2. Tigger 2

   14 April 2010 at 1:10 pm

   Already posted in Open Mike but figure it’s pertinent here…

   Key needs a tent for party-central Waiohopai must be looking to make use of their uninflated dome plastic I smell a match

   http://static.stuff.co.nz/1233108507/144/394144.jpg
   • Lanthanide 2.1

     14 April 2010 at 1:45 pm

     The ‘supertop’ tent used in Auckland for various gigs was sold at auction for $10 a few weeks ago, they could’ve bought that.
3. Jim Nald 3

   14 April 2010 at 1:12 pm

   As a National-voting family member of mine has been grudgingly saying lately:

   “this is looking like a Government of Missed Opportunities”
4. tc 4

   14 April 2010 at 2:18 pm

   Another good example of the do nothing nat’s….McCully did nothing for a year and then had to back Sideshow’s vacuous ‘Party Central’ idea when it’s a no brainer a decent cruise ship terminal is required which has a long term economic benefit.

   The viaduct’s already there and designed for it sort of and they could take over one of the old america’s cup boat bases and there’s your party central done and dusted with some fitout tweaks.
5. Daniel 5

   14 April 2010 at 2:28 pm

   Without commenting on the choice of Queens Wharf in the first place, a high-quality tent is actually a very suitable venue for this sort of thing. At the Vancouver Olympics all the major party venues were tents, and they worked extremely well. I partied in several of them, and they were robust, warm, and simple, the beer was abundant and the atmosphere was great.
   • Rich 5.1

     14 April 2010 at 6:33 pm

     The beer will not be abundant or any good here.

     What will happen is that the rights will be sold to an industrial cleaning company or similar, who will sell warm Tui at $7 a bottle using cheap volunteer or minimum wage staff.

     They will justify high prices, crap service and big queues on the grounds that it stops people getting drunk and thus meets their Sale Of Liquor Act obligations.
     • Daniel 5.1.1

       14 April 2010 at 10:15 pm

       I never said the beer was cheap, or good, although it was better than tui (I believe it was $8 a pint, and keep in mind that’s $CAD, and that beer is generally cheaper here anyway).

       And don’t knock the volunteers, just about everyone I met working at the olympics was a volunteer, although I doubt we’ll get quite the same outpouring of support for the RWC.
6. Daniel 6

   14 April 2010 at 2:37 pm

   Although using the old America’s Cup bases would have probably been better. I watched the 2007 America’s Cup down there, and it was very nice, although I don’t know how many are unnoccupied these days. But if you needed more space, I’m sure you could clear some of the surrounding areas and throw up some (sorry) tents. And if you fast tracked the bridge across to Te Wero island, you’d have a nice direct connection to the Britomart area.

   PS do you select your captchas to be amusing? Last one: argues, this one: appeal

   [lprent: Nope. It is just a dump of an english dictionary with words of a given size range and the quotes removed. ]
   • Daniel 6.1

     14 April 2010 at 10:09 pm

     lprent: i wasn’t really serious, I’m sure it’s some sort of observer bias, but the name (if it has one) eludes me at this point. Although…. captcha: picks – as in, words you’ve picked as captchas…. a bit of a stretch maybe?
7. Tom 7

   14 April 2010 at 3:12 pm

   Since when has the government been in the ‘party venue’ business anyway? Why not let the private sector provide visitor hospitality? Are there no enterprising folks left in Auckland? Anyhow, who is going to ‘partay’ in a cold draughty tent when there are bars and clubs and pubs just down the road? The whole idea is without merit and should be dropped.
   • Lanthanide 7.1

     14 April 2010 at 4:09 pm

     Clearly the point is that no private enterprise would waste money on a white elephant like that, which is why the government needs to do it.

     Or, more charitably, the government would make “party central” free admission, whereas any private venue of the same type would need to charge some kind of fee to cover the cost of construction etc.

     [lprent: Update your comment defaults. It is putting through your e-mail. ]
   • DeeDub 7.2

     14 April 2010 at 4:13 pm

     Since John Key decided to make such a big noise about it, mate. He’s such a headline junkie that he just makes s**t up on the back of an envelope to get in the news. Doesn’t matter if it never happens. eh?
8. tc 8

   14 April 2010 at 4:13 pm

   Whatever they go with I’d suggest it’ll be a place to avoid like the plague with so many more purpose built venues like your local.
9. Jim Nald 9

   14 April 2010 at 5:54 pm

   Our current PM is very well skilled with coating plain air (airy fairy) ideas with chocolate

   Hon Easter Egg comes to mind

   I might post him one (they are still some on special at a supermarket)
10. Neil 10

    14 April 2010 at 6:22 pm

    It would be nice to think that the partisan-style politics could be set aside breifly for the WC.

    The reason there’s been nothing done on Queens wharf is not because of central govt, it’s because Auckland has been unable to make a decision.

    Labour couldn’t give Auckland $500m for a stadium and National have faced exactly the same Tiggerish Auckland.

    A temporary structure to house some of the partying as is now being suggested sounds quite sensible given that Auckland has no long-tern vision for the waterfront. It’s practical and not horrendously expenseive.

    Just as a would not have minded Mallard’s stadium, I’m more that willing to accept Key’s Party Central as a valuable contribution to the games. And it progresses Auckland’s access to the hitherto restricted waterfront.

    Why not give the anti-Key thing a rest on one issue at least.
    • Craig GlenEden 10.1

      14 April 2010 at 8:34 pm

      I will tell you why Key deserves all the negative stuff he gets from posters on this site. Its because he is a straight out bullshiter. He talks big and delivers nothing, not only that but he has shown time and time again that he does not care about NZ and the things that New Zealanders value.

      He is all bluff and mirrors a good example is his little stunt re wailing he makes out he’s got some cunning plan and that he is going to be the big saviour when in reality his plan is to be pro whaling.
      He is the typical Ricky Gervais Character from the office manager. Every one knows he is a Dick except him. Take a look at the goober on the news standing their with Obama, he is just a bloody noddy and it shows.
      The Rugby Union don’t deserve any support either in my view, look at how they have shown no value or belief in our Kiwi artists with the theme song choice for he cup and then their position over the latest issue, claims re match fixing is to say “they having nothing to do with it its between the team and the Government”, please.That was the final straw for me I wont be going to any games as a result of that cope out, what a disgrace.
    • Daniel 10.2

      14 April 2010 at 10:34 pm

      I don’t know if, given the chance, Aucklanders would make a good choice regarding the site, but it is unbelievable arrogance on the part of the central government (first Mallard with the stadium, then Key with Party Central) to waltz in and demand we make a decision in a matter of months.

      The RWC will come and go, and will ultimately mean next to nothing for Auckland in the long term. Unless it is a catastrophic failure, like all the buses breaking down simultaneously, or the stadium collapsing, then the details will have little long term impact. Most people will see it on TV and think “ooh, Auckland, rugby, looks like people are having a good time. Maybe I’ll visit”, and most won’t. The people who are here will probably be focused on other things, like, I don’t know, rugby. I don’t think they will travel all this way to critique the stadium location, or the party facilities.

      Queens Wharf is a precious piece of Auckland’s waterfront, and we are only going to redevelop it once in the foreseeable future, so lets plan a little more long term than 2011.

      And Key should definitely be in for some criticism over this whole thing, for trying to push a decision on Aucklanders, and for politicising the process of enhancing waterfront access. We should put aside partisan-style politics, but that means more than the opposition not criticising JK’s plans, it means all parties discussing the issue with transparency, and good faith, and not rushing the process to secure anyone’s legacy, or to please anyone except Aucklanders.
11. jcuknz 11

    14 April 2010 at 8:08 pm

    As it is the cheapest option appaently from media reports it is obviously the correct solution and just imagine how unique and suprising it will be to have cruise liners disgorging their passengers into a tent 🙂
    I’m sure the poor of Auckland will appreciate not having to find rates to pay for the previous extravagent concepts … not to mention tax-payers funding the governments contribution.
12. Jim Nald 12

    14 April 2010 at 8:26 pm

    This Party Central flop is really symbolic of things that are wrong with John Key, Cully & co

    Talk talk talk, can’t get the basics right, poor follow through

    Next predictable thing would be they’ll spin and sheet the blame to someone else
13. Mutante 13

    16 April 2010 at 2:07 am

    My bet is that Auckland won’t come to a decision, neither will the Gubbernmint come up with anything better, it’ll be hyped to shit and thrown up in a hurry, and if the resulting fiasco is coupled with anything less than a resounding All Black victory then there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth for years to come from just about everybody, and possibly even mass suicides.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS