What a farce.

BSA have already decided to not move to association model because they cant afford it finacially, so they are going to waste $90K to have someone tell them what they have already decided themselves.

Aurecon provide social planning services (amongst other things) which primarily involve investigations into which urban centres are well serviced or poorly serviced (in this case in relation to basketball infrastructure). They are not a South African company, but a multi-national company that formed through the merger of a Australian engineering company and a South African engineering company. Locality (being Adelaide) the merger also involved a urban, traffic, environmental and urban design planning company called QED.

The research will provide valuable information to BSA, especially which areas should be provided additional support to facilitate growth in the sport, however like everything, what BSA does with the knowledge will determine the success of the study.

The biggest challenge for BSA (as I see it) will be managing the politics within the local basketball fraternity and accessing the financial resources to deliver upon the recommendations of the report.

Interesting to find out if there are any connections to this company from within BSA or whether this was put out to tender and is all above board?

It is great to see an outside, neutral company involved. We should not underestimate the power of having a third party involved in a review. If they do it properly and have the right information provided to them, then a good result will prevail.

As far as the money is concerned, it should be seen as an investment and for that level of $, I would expect that Aurecon would be investing around 1,000 man hours in the project. Anything less than 500 man hours in the project is not value for money.

I think this is a step in the right direction and hope Aurecon consult with the SA basketball community and provide an opportunity to provide constructive feedback as part of their SWOT analysis of their review.

Jack - $90 per hour, presumably to include GST and expenses? I don't think so. If you get those rates there's either a loss-leader situation or you're getting the graduates doing the work - not the experienced staff.

Although Adelaide is traditionally a low paying market for consulting work, anything less than $200 per hour (excluding GST) for experienced staff is pretty cheap - usually boutique rates. If there's a connection with BSA, through the partners or directors, you might get a goodwill discount.

Top tier consulting firms will charge $3,000 a day for experienced staff and more for partners/directors.

PeterJohn, I would expect $300/hr for the Project Director and would be charging out $200 /hr for the Project Manager. They would probably budget a week for the PD and probably a month for PM. In most projects these guys just review the reports and get the cannon fodder doing the footwork.

In something like this, I would expect that labour would be stacked with a couple of graduates (0-5 yrs exp) (say $75/hr), one or two more experience people (5-15 yrs) $150/hr overseeing them, and don't forget they also include secretaries for typing up reports.

Disbursements would be paid on top of this and the only real disbursements would be car travel which Aurecon would probably charge a set km rate. They might also bring in a structural engineer to assess stadiums if that is part of their scope, or if they see a problem. This would be a variation.

The 30 year plan for Adelaide would be one thing that gets considered in this analysis.

Hopefully Aurecon will do a good estimate as to where our facilities are at this point in time,just worried if there is any money to do anything with?Lets keep our fingers crossed!

Agree with Big Ads the politics and money to act on the findings will be a major hurdle.

Not sure of the cost of building a Wayville type structure but i wouldnt think it would be much considering its really a large tin shed.

How about converting some old factories around Adelaide into multi court facilities?

Salisbury Council just got given the old bridgestone facility for a sporting complex. Could convert one of their old facilities into something better than Hilcrest Stadium I am sure

IMO -

south
north
west

all mid-large local clubs - need an upgrade to new stadiums - North Pooraka way, South would have been a boon to get into the new aquatic centre precinct, west are good around the port.

all need 3 court stadiums - starplex type model is good - so it will need co-operation not just a BSA venture.

we must move forward and have development along with historical practices.

clearly business feasibility studies will need to occur as these new projects do not come from thin air.

only in the advertiser the other day i was reading a story on lack of new building projects in SA. Were here are some cases.

We have private schools with better stadiums and teh yare not the mantle of basketball in SA.

mt barker is another developing area - lot of young families - let's hope they get introduced to the great game...

Just noticed this after coming home from work tonight:

http://www.basketballsa.com.au/index.php?id=62&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=582&cHash=f8c37dc564

http://www.portenf.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/PAE_spot_WardMap2006_CTP.pdf

Apparently there is a new stadium still under construction about 10km north of Port at Osborne.
Near a railway station.
Its like the distance of Gepps Cross to Parafield.
No idea if its 2 or 3 courts or if any?
The City of Port Enfield is rapidly changing with lots of new schools with new stadiums plus the home of Bearcats and Rockets.
Are stadium bookings meeting supply and demand?

Im not sure ,is the Rockets stadium/Shed council leased and dont they need some glass and lights(IE starplex quality)?
Why this study as well?Why am I suspicious?
My own feeling is another 'extra' 3 or 4 courts, also replacing 2 existing down South and another 2 extra plus replacing 2 North existing.Finally something like 3 new in western area to meet demand.The Hills I have no idea.
Anyone from country give us realistic wish list for our Rural BBall Cousins?

You know what ?Having Councils,schools and sport clubs all wanting the same things in Adelaide is the key issue here!Administrative confusion in planning and low population with low spending pool add up to not much happening.

I dont want to let the cat out the bag but the key to developing basketball stadiums and resources in this state to an outstanding level in my opinion is partnerships with larger private schools.

The value proposition and opportunities is simple and significant in my opinion for schools:
- Financial return from a tournament over a long weekend, Friday night games, Sunday morning trainings, Saturday night ABL games is around $50k per annum.
- Plus the opportunity to showcase the schools facilities through the district games played there, a tournament, maybe hosting a national championship, hosting WNBL/NBL preseason games etc. etc. Get these things in the media.
- the proximity of a club competing in the peak competition in South Australia means more students are attracted to play for the club. This develops the schools basketball program. School has more success in state schools knockouts and National Schools Championships.
- the club based at the venue is a great marketing tool. Prospective students from outside the school play for the club and make many friends with students at the school. Staff involved with the club showcase the school by default.

The latter 2 equal more enrolments for the school.

The opportunities are endless. Why aren't school's clubs willing to work together its a model that could deliver great opportunities and benefits to both parties!

jnx I like your idea. But you would need to go find colleges with money or ones with great stadiums already like Trinity and St Peters.

Centrals - Trinity (4 court New)
Woodville - Adelaide High School (??)
West - ??
Forestville - Pulteney (1 Court Old)
South - Westminster (2 Court New)
Sturt - Cabra (1 Court old)
Southern - Woodcroft (??)
Eastern - Cornerstone (1 Court New)
Norwood - St Marys (2 Court New)
North - ??

Maybe BSA could sell up what they own and help out certain colleges with rebuilds. *Conditions apply

What does BSA currently own?

doesn't port /enfield include woodvillle and magic - not just north and west ?

shotclock - that stadium has been as osborne for years - it was ok but not up to district standard - ie had rubber floor or similar - not timber.

Don't know if dimensions were ok as well?

got no idea what the new one will be like - was a 1 court facility as well.

would have been ok for a training facility.

They were running a social comp out of there.

I seem to recall it was leFevre recreation centre ? or similar ?

The new stadium at Osborne has 2 courts (supposedly full size) and due for completion in May.

I think we missed the boat when the Education Revolution building was on. A school 2 mins from Hillcrest has new gym - not full sized. There must be many of these around the city. A bit of consultation and forward thinking and we could have had a heap of good training facilities if nothing more.

Victoria will not build anything less than 4 courts.

Having 5 or 6 is preffered. Until Basketball in this state understands that we need to make a focus of a 6 court stadium out North, and then use the surplus to build elsewhere, we will never move forward.

This review will:

1. Assess the state of sports facilities available for our current and future basketball participants; reporting on all key data to provide an accurate understanding of current and future basketball infrastructure needs.
2. Determine financing and management options for all priority upgrades, expansions or new built recommendations
3. Determine Basketball SA's role in future management and/or securing of facilities and facility access and projects.

The best thing about this review, it that the government is paying for it via a grant from Office for Recreation and Sport, so no-one will be able to whinge about it coming out of the coffers.

How thorough the review will be, and how much latitude the review will get will be two variables closely monitored.

There is no doubt that stadium ownership by BSA carries significant risk and the burden of potential repayments is something that weighs heavy on the minds of many.

Stadium availability is a key issue and I would suggest that the optimum stadiums are those 3 court stadiums which allow flexibility of scheduling. As jnx noted above, it is more about forming strategic alliances with schools (or existing facilities) to mutual benefit. Private schools are well placed in this regard as they seek to obtain a return from their assets.

One question to ask is whether BSA should take on a long term lease on stadiums to rent back to clubs, or whether the clubs should be responsible for their own facilities.

Like some posters have noted above, I hope that politics doesn't get in the way.

flinders 80 - there are some even better school courts around

all immaculate

Immanuel - Novar Gardens
Walford - Unley Park
St Aloysius - City
Mt Lofty rec centre / Heathfield - Longwood

What is Nazareth's like ? that was a decent stadium.

Annesley, Sacred Heart, CBC and Seymour are ok - but a bit older.

What is Prince's like - not been there for years ?

Have South considered playing games at Immanuel?

Jack,

BAS missed out on the bid to run Immanuel as it made a poor level and financial bid.

The centre is currently run after hours by Unley Life Be in It as they forster a holistic approach to all sports and domestic level local competitions.

anon,

But at least they do a good job of providing the appropriate service and get kids playing sport.

BSA seem to be doing the opposite with the number of junior teams decreasing each and every year.

If BSA was planning on using these facilities as a cash cow, and then wasting that money on employees who dont provide any real tangible service, how is that any different?