News Stadium: The NEW Home of Football in WA

[Mockcockpit]

Although not really initially a fan of the move to Cockburn, looking at that video it's hard to mount a case that the move won't be beneficial to the football club. Once Cockburn is finished and the new stadium is finished I guess we are set to become a powerhouse of the AFL. Yay?

 

[Docker82]

Although not really initially a fan of the move to Cockburn, looking at that video it's hard to mount a case that the move won't be beneficial to the football club. Once Cockburn is finished and the new stadium is finished I guess we are set to become a powerhouse of the AFL. Yay?

I wouldn't expect it to drastically make us better. It's more that if we don't make it we'll fall behind (if we haven't already) in facilities to the point where we just can't compete.

As for the move to Cockburn. A lot of the worlds greatest sporting clubs don't train or play at the place the club was named after. (Most Victorian clubs wouldn't) The name of club in this day and age is very much just a brand name. You see a better opportunity and you grab it, even if it's a fair way down the road.

 

[Frank J Moose]

It's more that if we don't make it we'll fall behind (if we haven't already) in facilities to the point where we just can't compete.

The current digs st Freo oval are if not the worst in the league, in the bottom two. The upgrades to Arden St and the Western Oval mean those venues are way ahead of Freo.

Everyone would prefer to stay at Freo but to do so would require the acquisition of the prison or the hospital.

 

[The Anchorite]

Everyone would prefer to stay at Freo but to do so would require the acquisition of the prison or the hospital.

Could change our name to the Doctors, which is what I initially heard when they first announced the team.

 

[E Shed]

The current digs st Freo oval are if not the worst in the league, in the bottom two. The upgrades to Arden St and the Western Oval mean those venues are way ahead of Freo.

Everyone would prefer to stay at Freo but to do so would require the acquisition of the prison or the hospital.

there was a perfectly sane proposal floated to stay at Freo but that would have required the Freo council taking their head out of their asses and doing something non-heritage/nimby for the first time in their lives.

 

[FreoRicci]

Love the idea of the grass being catered for less shifting and turning, helps in the injury prevention. Freo Oval turf has often being labelled the worst in AFL for training. Remembred Belly saying it is a firm, unsafe track a few years back.

 

[FreoRicci]

The current digs st Freo oval are if not the worst in the league, in the bottom two. The upgrades to Arden St and the Western Oval mean those venues are way ahead of Freo.

Everyone would prefer to stay at Freo but to do so would require the acquisition of the prison or the hospital.

Also the acquisition of the local community centre across the road as well as extending the facilities beyond the car park would help. Lucky for Arden St and Western Oval, there is space to expand and hardly heritage sites surrounding the area. Had the chance around 2001/2002 to expand it even more during the first build but yep Freo council were overly protective.

 

[BartBart]

FYI - I've put a photo update of the stadium in the Stadium board.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/the-new-perth-stadium.1036103/page-69

 

[Righteo]

FYI - I've put a photo update of the stadium in the Stadium board.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/the-new-perth-stadium.1036103/page-69

I respect that you didn't just post the full set here again to get another 30 likes

Great photos as always mate, this thing is just flying along.

 

[Clems Knee]

A new and well written article in The West raises some worrying questions about our shiny new stadium.

The new Perth Stadium deals will have the potential to destroy football in Western Australia. We know part of the cost: $1.379 billion. We also know the builders will receive a monthly payment for 25 years, but we don't know what that deal is yet, or how much will be left for the operators of the stadium.
And if the operators aren't the WAFC, then how much will WA football and the AFL clubs lose per year, either absolutely or relative to what they get at Subiaco?
The final line of the article:
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/30571851/will-the-stadium-pay-its-own-way/
says
"Taxpayers are again asked to take the Barnett Government on trust." Bugger that.

 

[Rob]

The problem is that the deals weren't arranged before it was built. It was the same at nib, where the government spent over $100 million upgrading the ground without any deals signed with the Glory or the Force. Then the whining commenced and both groups effectively held the government to ransom because they had nowhere else to play. The WAFC are probably going to do the same but on a higher level - how embarrassing would it be for the government to build a stadium but no-one wants to play there because it's too expensive?

In the end i'd be surprised if the ground ran at a loss - there should be enough revenue generated from the AFL clubs alone to cover the annual running costs. I wouldn't expect too much of a return for the government on the capital outlay though.

 

[JunglistPosse]

Latest pic

 

[estibador]

Cool sky... almost looks like a painting.

 

[Taylor]

A new and well written article in The West raises some worrying questions about our shiny new stadium.

The new Perth Stadium deals will have the potential to destroy football in Western Australia. We know part of the cost: $1.379 billion. We also know the builders will receive a monthly payment for 25 years, but we don't know what that deal is yet, or how much will be left for the operators of the stadium.
And if the operators aren't the WAFC, then how much will WA football and the AFL clubs lose per year, either absolutely or relative to what they get at Subiaco?
The final line of the article:
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/30571851/will-the-stadium-pay-its-own-way/
says
"Taxpayers are again asked to take the Barnett Government on trust." Bugger that.

Articles like that are usually hiding the interests of a group, or commission in this case, behind the facade of worrying about community or the code.

The licencing deal worked well for the WAFC while they had control over the big money moving in, now they might need to require the AFL to fund the WAFL like it does the rest (other than the SANFL) but it will be an end of an era. WCE and FFC might own their own licences and keep those extra millions.

 

[basashi]

The problem is that the deals weren't arranged before it was built. It was the same at nib, where the government spent over $100 million upgrading the ground without any deals signed with the Glory or the Force. Then the whining commenced and both groups effectively held the government to ransom because they had nowhere else to play. The WAFC are probably going to do the same but on a higher level - how embarrassing would it be for the government to build a stadium but no-one wants to play there because it's too expensive?

In the end i'd be surprised if the ground ran at a loss - there should be enough revenue generated from the AFL clubs alone to cover the annual running costs. I wouldn't expect too much of a return for the government on the capital outlay though.

I would like to propose a $2 gate fee on all the other teams in the league to help pay for the stadium. It seems fair.

 

[GordonT]

/sarcasm on

Brilliant idea!
Talking from a Victorian point of view though I think this could be taken further.

Tullamarine airport +$10 for all non Victorians (Goes to Allikat so Freo get 1st priority when flying ).
MCG is twice the size of the NPS so +$4 entry fee for all non Victorians (Make it +$8 to cover the cost of past upgrades).
+200% toll road fees for non Victorians.
Any food or drink that's from Victoria +200%, its not free ya know , you can BYO but the dumping fees for interstate rubbish are exorbitant.

/Sarcasm off

 

[FreoRicci]

The problem is that the deals weren't arranged before it was built. It was the same at nib, where the government spent over $100 million upgrading the ground without any deals signed with the Glory or the Force. Then the whining commenced and both groups effectively held the government to ransom because they had nowhere else to play. The WAFC are probably going to do the same but on a higher level - how embarrassing would it be for the government to build a stadium but no-one wants to play there because it's too expensive?

In the end i'd be surprised if the ground ran at a loss - there should be enough revenue generated from the AFL clubs alone to cover the annual running costs. I wouldn't expect too much of a return for the government on the capital outlay though.

As if WA Football isn't already destroyed. The only profit/bargaining chip WAFC has is part owner of Subi Oval so they charge high fees for Fremantle to hire and train on the oval, as well as "tax" for grassroot football. WAFC suffers from the tall poppy syndrome of wanting to force AFL footy as the major sport and squeezing out other sports to do so. No commission such as WAFC should be allowed to benefit solely from running a stadium.

 

[Rob]

As if WA Football isn't already destroyed. The only profit/bargaining chip WAFC has is part owner of Subi Oval so they charge high fees for Fremantle to hire and train on the oval, as well as "tax" for grassroot football. WAFC suffers from the tall poppy syndrome of wanting to force AFL footy as the major sport and squeezing out other sports to do so. No commission such as WAFC should be allowed to benefit solely from running a stadium.

LOL, 'squeezing out other sports'? The WAFC charge far less to the ARU to stage a test at Subi oval than they do to both AFL clubs to play a regular season AFL match.
I'm not necessarily in favour of the WAFC getting operating rights to the new stadium, but it has to go to someone. All other things being equal i'd rather the WAFC get it than some private company whose sole intent is profit.

 

[Clems Knee]

As if WA Football isn't already destroyed. The only profit/bargaining chip WAFC has is part owner of Subi Oval so they charge high fees for Fremantle to hire and train on the oval, as well as "tax" for grassroot football. WAFC suffers from the tall poppy syndrome of wanting to force AFL footy as the major sport and squeezing out other sports to do so. No commission such as WAFC should be allowed to benefit solely from running a stadium.

I don't understand what you mean here?

 

[scon]

If I gave Barnett $100 to go down the IGA and do some shopping I would anticipate him returning with a packet of bacon,a lettuce,half a kilo of mild cheddar and a reverse mortgage totalling several billion.

 

[estibador]

Well at least he remembered the bacon.

 

[salim malik]

I thought Col was trying to save his bacon.

 

[Halfbaked]

If I gave Barnett $100 to go down the IGA and do some shopping I would anticipate him returning with a packet of bacon,a lettuce,half a kilo of mild cheddar and a reverse mortgage totalling several billion.

You forgot the 30 minute interview telling us how lucky we are that he is running the place.

Then the 20 million spent on the media letting us know the new loan stuffing our credit rating is just what the state needed.

 

[Rob]

If I gave Barnett $100 to go down the IGA and do some shopping I would anticipate him returning with a packet of bacon,a lettuce,half a kilo of mild cheddar and a reverse mortgage totalling several billion.

In all fairness, $90 of that $100 was distributed to Tasmania and South Australia first.

 

[Halfbaked]

In all fairness, $90 of that $100 was distributed to Tasmania and South Australia first.

How about those record mining royalties. He has had more money that any WA government by a long shot and miss managed most of it.