The new Maze Stadium

[Evil Genius]

Evil Genius,

I imagine gaelic games fans aren't that exercised because they are content in getting a top class, purpose built gaelic games stadium for next to nowt in comparison with having to stump up say a minimum of £50M GBP to build one ourselves.

Aside from the fact that this will compete directly with the GAA's own stadia at Casement and Clones, are you really happy for taxpayers money to be spent on a stadium which the GAA won't actually own. Wouldn't you much prefer if GAA's share was given to them to spend as they wish?

Even after HQ's pathetic giveaway deal on Croker, the membership would still tend to trust that the GAA will negotiate a good deal and would only ever enter into agreement on a sound economic basis. When it comes to money, we like to think of ourselves as cute hoors. The VAT issue is a red herring.

I've no doubt that the GAA will negotiate a good deal, financially, but is that the only criterion to be considered? Also, if it's correct that VAT will be payable on ticket sales in NI, but not for the same game in Clones, how is that a "red herring"? It effectively means that the revenue from 42,000 fans at Clones will only equal 34.650 in the Maze.

I'm happy to be treated equably with soccer and rugby, but would be pissed off to the highest degree if a soccer and rugby only stadium were built with direct or indirect public funding.

It was never proposed  to fund rugby and soccer only (nor should it be). Personally, I'd love it if the three sports were treated equally. However, when HMG declared that all sports must agree, or it simply would not get built, not every sport was in an equal position to negotiate. The IFA has little money, and is tied into an 80 year lease to play at Windsor (at the Governments insistence, I might add). Windsor is increasingly unfit for purpose and so the IFA has no choice.
The URFU doesn't actually care; so long as it gets its planning permission and modest Government funding to refurbish Ravenhill, it will still stage 95% of Ulster games as before, with only one or two rugby games per year at The Maze.
Whereas, GAA was in a strong position to negotiate. Consequently, when presented with 4 possible sites - 3 in Belfast, plus the Maze - it insisted that all 3 Belfast sites were unacceptable to it, thus leaving football and rugby obliged to accept the Maze. Not only that, but they also vetoed the original plan for 28,000 seats, insisting on a minimum of 42,000. Now I don't blame the GAA one iota for playing their hand cleverly; however, as Dealer, the Government should have known that the other two sports had been dealt a couple of cards short.

Belfast City Council had better watch themselves on this one - unless they hand over another city centre park to the gaa to build our own stadium, I'd bet they'd get cleaned by the courts on equality legislation grounds.  We haven't forgotten that in the early eighties, the british govt gave the IFA/Linfield a brand new stand, and then refused the same deal to the GAA even though our crowds were three times bigger.
We'll not stand for it this time, in the new era of equality.

I'm quite certain BCC has taken careful advice on this; interestingly, neither SDLP nor SF Councillors have cried "foul" over this. In fact, in return for donating a small, little used section of Ormeau Park, the Council will receive free a brand new Leisure Centre, for use by all the Community. The sports stadium will be developed privately and so will not cost anyone in Belfast (or elsewhere) a penny, unlike the Maze, which will cost up to £100 million of everybody's taxes.
As for your earlier complaint about the GAA being discriminated against, if that was the case, then that was unfair, but BCC's present proposals are nothing like that. (In fact, in return for funding one new Stand at Windsor, the Government of the day insisted on the IFA being given a 100 year lease by Linfield, to stop Linfield accepting the money then later turfing the IFA out. Which is all very well, except they forgot a clause which would allow the IFA to back out. Consequently, whether the IFA moves to the Maze or elsewhere, they've still got to compensate Linfield for almost 80 years remaining on the Lease. The figures haven't been disclosed, but this almost certainly runs into millions of pounds)

On the GAA side, the only gripes would be from the more reactionary  elements opposed to sharing with NI soccer, opposed to the location because its not in nationalist area, opposed because its sponsored by the british govt, etc.These elements are very much in the minority and would not be representative. After the casement fiasco, any hijacking of gaa policy by those who put their narrow sectional interests ahead of the gaa's best interests should be resisted.

Understood.

I still don't fully understand the hostility of NI soccer fans on this one. Some say its the location, others say its the capacity, and others say their fans would be too far from the pitch.

All of the above apply, and then some more. Nobody builds out of town stadia anymore, anywhere in the world. Public transport is non-existent and with one access route (the M1), access and egress for thousands of cars arriving and departing at the same time, on e.g. a wet Wednesday evening in November, will be a total nightmare. (Remember the chaos caused recently by that road accident on the M1?). With the stadium far too big for most soccer crowds, the atmosphere will suffer hugely. There simply won't be enough events to support any range of entertainment facilities (bars, restaurants etc), other than the usual fast-food outlets, so only the die-hard fans will turn up, watch the game, then go straight home. Whereas, the more casual fans, who go for a day out, simply won't bother. Lisburn has one hotel, some miles from the Stadium. Away fans will all be dependent on non-existent public transport to get them in and out of Belfast, where they will be staying. And GAA pitches are so much bigger than soccer pitches (even more so rugby), that binoculars will be needed to see the action from the back of the stands.

On location, how would you persuade GAA fans that they're kids are safe in Belfast?

Seems to work OK for Casement. I'm all for giving GAA's share to them directly, to spend as they wish. If they prefer to upgrade thier Provincial stadia instead, good for them!

Regarding capacity, its a bit rich saying that just because you can't fill it, nobody else should be able to. I know it might surprise a few NI fans, but the reality is that they do share this corner with GAA fans, who make up larger attendances and who have an equal right to be accommodated in any new civic stadium. There's a touch of "domination, or non-participation" on the ni fans side.

It is not a case of being anti-GAA on this one. Exactly the same would apply if we were talking Baseball or Cricket. Neither of those sports share their stadia in the USA or Australia with American Football, soccer or rugby (though they do with Aussie Rules, since they also need huge pitches). In the end, GAA, soccer and rugby should all be funded fairly, so that each is able to develop stadia suitable for their own particular needs. Under the present plans, GAA doesn't have to compromise over pitch size or capacity, only soccer and rugby. Indeed, when the plans were amended, so that only 35,000 seats would be installed for soccer, with some capable of being removed to allow 42,000 for GAA, this means that GAA fans get a choice of sitting (comfort) or standing (cheaper), a choice which is denied to soccer and rugby fans.

And as for pitch size and distance from the action, many of the stadiums in the Japanese world cup had bigger distances. If its good enough for the World Cup, it should be good enough for NI.

Not so. Besides, the World Cup was a one-off, with stadia capable of being altered after the tournament. Whereas the Maze will be a permanent arrangement for the next 50 years. (Besides, the Japanese stadia were much bigger capacity than the Maze)

Maybe these so-called reasons are only a smokescreen for not wanting a taig about the place?

Your last comment is unworthy and incapable of being supported by any evidence whatever. Football in NI enjoys mixed participation at all levels, from playing, officiating, administering and spectating.

For some random recent examples of this, see:
http://www.irishfa.com/grassroots/football-for-all/football-for-all-campaign/
http://ourweecountry.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16096
http://www.irishfa.com/grassroots/football-for-all/
http://ourweecountry.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16045
http://www.irishfa.com/grassroots/football-for-all/football-for-all-corner/

However, I sincerely don't wish this to become a squabbling match between the two codes. Rather, having outlined some of the reasons why the soccer community is deeply unhappy about this stadium being foisted upon us, without any consultation whatever, but at the cost to us of millions of our taxes, I merely wish to know whether fans of Ulster GAA see it the same way or not.

[Smokin Joe]

I'm never sure about the VAT issue. I would have assumed that the GAA, and/or its relevant bodies (provincial councils, etc.) would be registered for VAT, North and South. In that case, VAT is not an issue. In fact it's a cash flow positive, since you can hold on to the money for a while. But we continue to hear about Clones being VAT-free, but Casement not.

Can any of our accountants (North and South) clarify?

Hardy, I can confirm that as the Ulster Council is VAT registered in Northern Ireland (UK) it does not have to pay output VAT on gate receipts in ROI, whereas it does when the games ar eheld in Northern Ireland.
Though I was also told that this does not influence the decision in whether to hold games in the North or South

[Hardy]

Thanks Joe. The fact that the Ulster Council is UK registered helps my understanding. But I'm still a bit (a lot) confused. Is it:
1. The Irish government doesn't charge VAT on gate receipts?
2. The Ulster Council, as a 'foreign' company not registered for VAT here doesn't (can't) charge VAT?
3. The Ulster Council collects the VAT but doesn't pay it over, since it's not registered here? (That would be illegal, I suppose)

Unless it's number 3, I can't see an advantage or disadvantage either way for the Ulster Council vis-à-vis Clones vs. Casement. They either charge the VAT and pay it on, or don't charge the VAT and there's nothing to pay. The only difference I can see is for the customer – in theory, games at Clones should be cheaper at the turnstile than games at Casement and games organised by the Ulster Council in Clones cheaper than those organised by, say, Central Council. Unless they're screwing the customer and charging the same at each venue, but not having to pay on VAT from Clones.

Wait a minute ... it's dawning ...

They wouldn't treat their own members and patrons like  that, would they?

[Smokin Joe]

Thanks Joe. The fact that the Ulster Council is UK registered helps my understanding. But I'm still a bit (a lot) confused. Is it:
1. The Irish government doesn't charge VAT on gate receipts?
2. The Ulster Council, as a 'foreign' company not registered for VAT here doesn't (can't) charge VAT?
3. The Ulster Council collects the VAT but doesn't pay it over, since it's not registered here? (That would be illegal, I suppose)

Unless it's number 3, I can't see an advantage or disadvantage either way for the Ulster Council vis-à-vis Clones vs. Casement. They either charge the VAT and pay it on, or don't charge the VAT and there's nothing to pay. The only difference I can see is for the customer – in theory, games at Clones should be cheaper at the turnstile than games at Casement and games organised by the Ulster Council in Clones cheaper than those organised by, say, Central Council. Unless they're screwing the customer and charging the same at each venue, but not having to pay on VAT from Clones.

Wait a minute ... it's dawning ...

They wouldn't treat their own members and patrons like  that, would they?

Hardy, you hit the nail on the head at the end.

Say Armagh play Fermanagh in Clones (as they did twice this year), and the ticket price is £20. 
If the games is held in the North £17.02 is shown as income and £2.98 is teh VAT which is payable to HMRC.
As the game is held in Clones the Ulster Council will still charge £20 (or €30) but they get to keep the £20 as income.

The above is the current situation with the Ulster Council.

However, on closer examination, I'm not sure this is correct, as VAT Notice "The Single Market" states:

"2.2 How is VAT charged and accounted for on supplies of goods to customers who are not VAT
registered in another Member State or to private individuals?
For unregistered customers, or private individuals, VAT is normally charged in the Member State from which
the goods were despatched. However there are some exceptions which are explained in paragraph 2.3.
2.3 What are the exceptions to the general principles in paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2?
The exception to the general principles are:

 the supply of goods to be installed or assembled in another Member State - see section 8;

 the supply of new means of transport. You can find further information in Notice 728 Motor vehicles,
boats, aircraft: intra – EC movements by persons not registrable for VAT.

 the supply of excise goods for private purposes - see section 10.

 supplies to diplomats, international organisations, NATO forces and other entitled persons and bodies
in other Member States which may in certain circumstances be relieved from VAT. You can find
further information in paragraph 10.16 and Notice 703 Exports and removals of goods from the United
Kingdom.


Therefore I don't see how the UC can get away without charging VAT as they are not supplying VAT registered people / businesses.

[Billys Boots]

Shamrock Shore is likely to know the score on this one - I'd have thought that maybe sporting events might be VAT exempted or VAT neutral in Mexicoland.

[Smokin Joe]

Shamrock Shore is likely to know the score on this one - I'd have thought that maybe sporting events might be VAT exempted or VAT neutral in Mexicoland.

I'd have thought that the fact that VAT is chargeable on NI ticket receipts means that as a result of this sentence "For unregistered customers, or private individuals, VAT is normally charged in the Member State from which the goods were despatched" VAT would have to be charged as if the supply took place in NI when the goods are being supplied by a NI VAT registered organisation regardless of the VAT rules in Mexico.

[Billys Boots]

What if the Ulster Council is also VAT registered in Mexicoland?

[Smokin Joe]

What if the Ulster Council is also VAT registered in Mexicoland?

That is certainly possible.

[Billys Boots]

It would appear that it would seem well worth their while registering in both NI and ROI.