Isaac
Years ago

Venuetix/Weslo possible buyer of Dome

Spotted a report on the news last night suggesting that Venuetix, and its parent company the Weslo Group, are a potential buyer for the Distinctive Homes Dome.

If the restrictions on the venue are lifted, it would be a good match - Weslo run crowd control, ticketing, event management, etc.

Topic #17253 | Report this topic


Number 44  
Years ago

There is no way that the restrictions will be lifted off the Dome. I was some what involved with one of the parties bidding to buy it a couple of years back.

I can assure you that it will not be lifted. The Ent Centre will not let it happen. And they are owned by the Gov, so no it will not happen.

Reply #203295 | Report this post


Axe  
Years ago

How can the government actually impose restrictions on it's use when it is privately owned? Just curious.

Reply #203301 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

It was part of the sale to make it private, that the restrictions remain in place.

Reply #203305 | Report this post


Jack Toft  
Years ago

Sorry, what are the restrictions? eg basketball only?

Reply #203308 | Report this post


Axe  
Years ago

Was there no expiry put on that agreement? Or a date where it is revisited?

Reply #203311 | Report this post


Bo Hamburger  
Years ago

Maybe there could be a clause added that allowed 'B-grade' events to be held at the Dome.

Reply #203314 | Report this post


Wayville 24  
Years ago

The restrictions that used to be on the venue were two fold.

One was applied by the State Government to limit competition for the Entertainment Centre. In return the Government gave the then building owner BASA $250,000 a year as conpensation.

That agreement does not exist.

The restriction currently in place is a Land Zoning restriction which clearly states what the site can and can not be used for. Concerts for example fall outside the Compliant use of the land and therefore can not be held on the site without a fair bit of legal running around. Plus after all that the Council would have to approve such an event and IMO no Council would, as they have nothing to gain.

Reply #203315 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

Generally sports only events I think. Someone needs to invent the sport of "competitive cheering for a musical act"...

Reply #203319 | Report this post


Number 44  
Years ago

I also forgot to add that the Government has just agreed to expand the Ent Cent and have a new auditorium which will hold the smaller concerts for up to 2500 people.

Reply #203321 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Plus after all that the Council would have to approve such an event and IMO no Council would, as they have nothing to gain.


Wasn't part of the sale arrangement of the Dome that the council would 'own' all land and hence any parking revenue made for events (basketball or otherwise) would be theirs?

Reply #203325 | Report this post


Bo Hamburger  
Years ago

What about tackling it this way?

It just depends how loosely you define 'post-match' - for me, same calendar year should suffice. :)

Reply #203330 | Report this post


EC  
Years ago

I don't think Venuetix/Weslo would be interested in the Dome if these restrictions were not lifted. As far as I'm concerned, the Government should have given up on the restrictions when it gave up funding it and selling it to a private buyer. How can the private owner of the Dome be in competition with the government controlled Entertainment Centre. Its like saying that I can't sell confectionery in my corner deli because its in conflict with the deli on the opposite corner that sells chocolate. If the Dome is a suitable venue for a multitude of different events, it should be allowed to host them.

Reply #203396 | Report this post


lockstock  
Years ago

Axe - my guess is this funny thing called the Law. Regulations too. Seems strange I know

Reply #203405 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

"How can the private owner of the Dome be in competition with the government controlled Entertainment Centre."

Because they offer the same service.

Reply #203418 | Report this post


EC  
Years ago

Isaac, just like my corner deli and the one on the opposite corner. No one can tell me not to sell something because its in conflict with what the other deli is selling (hypothetical). The Dome and the Entertainment Centres are both entertainment centres, the only difference is the government has decided that one can host any form of entertainment it wants and the other, sports only. My deli wouldn't do too well if I could only sell bread and milk while the other had a whole range of goods. Its hardly a fair situation. Doesn't it come under Restraint of Trade?

Reply #203500 | Report this post


Statman  
Years ago

EC if your Bread and Milk only Deli opened up under those resrictions and then was sold with the same restrictions in place then thats just tough for them. Just because they have found that they need to sell more than just bread and Milk to be viable doent mean they can change the rules that were in place when they started. (unless of course the other fully stocked deli can be convinced (compensated) to remove the restrictions.

Its just like the NBA player in another thread who has stuffed up by riding his motorbike when his contract says he cant. Too late after you have signed up to winge about the restrictions...if you dont like it, try to negotiate them out and if you cant do that then you have to decide if you want the business afterall.

Reply #203509 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

EC, you're forgetting that the government owns the Entertainment Centre and has the ability to restrict the competition. That doesn't tend to happen with corner delis.

Reply #203521 | Report this post


Kent Brockman  
Years ago

i get where you are coming from EC the stadium used to get a benefot of $250,000 per year not to compete. To make sure that BASA complied rules where passed to make it so.

The 250k has gone but the rules stay.So it is not right IMO

Makes me think lawyers would have a healthy paypacket finding out if you could change it though.

Reply #203523 | Report this post


EC  
Years ago

Kent, that's exactly my point. You would think that the government had given up on its rights to restrict the use of the Dome when it gave up on its funding. You would think the only reason the government had to restrict the use of the Dome was because it was contributing to it. This contribution evened out some of the revenue lost by not hosting other events. What is the government giving back in lieu of what it has taken away?

Reply #203524 | Report this post


Interested  
Years ago

Did anyone stop to think that it may have just a little to do with Government noise regulations and disturbing the peace for the residents that live in the area surrounding the Dome.

Reply #203527 | Report this post


Kent Brockman  
Years ago

what as opposed to the public dump that they used to enjoy before the stadium was built?

The dome held a Tom Jones concert apparently in its early years and had no issues with residents.

The zoning laws where passed to protect the entertainment centre which for a long time was losing money. Money was paid to the dome owners to offset any lost income from concert revenue.

the money is gone but the restrictions remain i dont know how that is legal.

I guess venuetix know more about it than what we do here.

Reply #203531 | Report this post




You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.



Close ads
Little Streaks - The fun and interactive good-habits app designed especially for kids.
Serio: Tourism photography and videography

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 5:41 pm, Tue 19 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754