Stadiums in WA/SA the capacity for the future

[Pleasedontfail11]

I have been curious about stadiums in SA/WA for a while now. I know that SA is getting the Adelaide oval built (55,000 capacity??) and I have heard that WA may be getting a new stadium built. What capacity should these stadiums be for the future of the AFL? Is bigger better? Will the crowds be massive if big stadiums are built?

 

[RooBoyz24]

In Perth the Stadium should be around the 80,000 and have a Roof.That way you could use it for a variety of sports.

 

[Tassieboy]

Adelaide Oval will seemingly be closer to 50,000. The stadium planned at Burswood in Perth is expected to seat 60,000 - not enough IMO

 

[summerfan]

Adelaide Oval will seemingly be closer to 50,000. The stadium planned at Burswood in Perth is expected to seat 60,000 - not enough IMO

Agreed when adelaide hit form and the stadium being so close to the city and with better public transport i can easily see crowds of 60k plus watching a game. And with showdowns half the supporters wont be able to get in.

 

[Byron_Clanger]

In Perth the Stadium should be around the 80,000 and have a Roof.That way you could use it for a variety of sports.

This, I wanna see my team play for once

 

[Kwality]

In both states today footy controls 100% of the revenue, no MCC/Docklands taking a peice of the pie.

SA footy will soon allow cricket members priority seating, what will WA do?

Priority should be club members.

 

[fushy]

Why does the stadium in Perth need a roof?

 

[grimface_87]

In both states today footy controls 100% of the revenue, no MCC/Docklands taking a peice of the pie.

SA footy will soon allow cricket members priority seating, what will WA do?

Priority should be club members.

I suppose it's no difference really to the MCC

 

[Pj.Rj.Hj]

The "Build it and they'll come" ethos is long gone with stadiums. Stadiums are no longer benchseat, cut and fill with bomb rubble, post war public works facilities. Over the last 25 years the ceiling has gone through the roof in Stadium standards. The rest of the World has adopted the American Stadium model as their respective sports leagues have reach new teirs in proffesionalism and income. Required Stadium facilities and comforts are the money makers that keep teams profitable. It's about finding the right balance of as many VIP boxes and Suites as possible while serving the demand for general admission (but at a premium price) to maintain atmosphere. Those in charge would rather see 50 000 every week in a 55 000 seater than mass variation in a 70 000 seater.

It's only because of traditional precident and the number of reserve seating (MCC) that the MCG has a capacity of 100 000. Cities all over the World with vastly greater populations than Melbourne don't build stadiums that large anymore. 100 000 seems an iconic figure in building a monument, not even Beijing's Bird nest hold that much. Jeddah in Saudi Arabia and Bagdad Iraq are the only cities in the world planning to build 100 000 seaters (certainly not needed) for political image ends.

If the ground never existed and Melbourne built a new primary stadium it would very unlikely to be more than 85 000. Stadiums are by their nature very hard to run at a profit, to limiting supply is a method most use. The NFL doesn't like seeing venues over 80 000 and the Washington Redskins have resently reduced the capacity of their stadium.

I still haven't been able to work out if the 50 000 mentioned for Adelaide Oval is just Seats, everything in the new structures or the Full Capacity including the retained Grass banks. Using relevent stats and formula's provided by the likes of HOK Populous Architiects (world leaders in Stadium design and development) the SA Gov has found that the 50 000 is the optimal capacity while still having a competitive number of corporate factilities for a City that is growing very slowly ( by mid century Adelaide still won't be as large as Perth is now). Until Perth finishes it's design competition I think the Adelaide Oval design is the most beautiful in the nation.

Perth's plan is for a 60 000 Capacity (54 000 non corporate seats) Stadium designed to easily expand to 70 000 within its building envelope. Like any Stadium, it is being designed to serve it's cities needs for a 40/50 year life span. During that time Perth will grow to 3.5 / 4 million. Another reason for the higher capacity compared to those in Adelaide and Brisbane is help Perth be an attractive competitor to the Eastern Seaboard for International Soccer, Rugby, League, Athletics etc. As Perth will be the last of Australia's cities to replace it's major Sporting centre piece, it promises to be the most expensive and hopefully the most magnificent. That is until the current venues have run their life and are replaced.

 

[Kwality]

So how often do the US stadiums you refer to get used Pj,Rj,Hj ???

22 events per year (AFL footy in Perth) is low, too low I'd argue.

AFL footy pays all the bills at the MCG, with cricket drawing less & less in the crowds stakes - why Adelaide Oval needs footy.

 

[Pj.Rj.Hj]

So how often do the US stadiums you refer to get used Pj,Rj,Hj ???

22 events per year (AFL footy in Perth) is low, too low I'd argue.

AFL footy pays all the bills at the MCG, with cricket drawing less & less in the crowds stakes - why Adelaide Oval needs footy.

As I mentioned the Waskington Redskins I'll mostly discuss the NFL. Firstly lets not forget the money going through the NFL compared to the AFL. Season tickets and corporate areas cost many times more than in Australia even if some of our Stadiums match their quality and comforts.

As far as NFL games a year. 8 regular season games, 2 preseason games. Possibility of Playoff games.

Many will bid for the Superbowl.

Some host College Football programs as well as bowl games like Pittsburgh's Heinz Field, New Orleans Superdome, Dallas' Cowboys Stadium, Phoenix's Uni of Phoenix Stadium etc.

Many of the larger markets will host Soccer internationals and club exhibition games.

Covered Stadiums can host the NCAA Basketball Final 4.
Then there are novelty extreme sports events, concerts of a stadium scale etc

All the stadiums have varying convention facilities so not every event needs to use the pitch.

So a poorly run NFL venue will at least host 10 NFL games a year but an attractively flexible venue will host plenty more major events, maybe even 25+.

New MLB Ballparks cost around the same as the NFL stadia. Not too many of them seat over 50 000 and they will host over 80 MLB games a year.

NBA and NHL type Arenas can cost as much as outdoor stadia. The Current Perth Arena will cost more than Etihad Stadium (not considering inflation) they will be used over 40 times for by each tenant. Then there's concerts, exhibitions, trade shows. Acer Arena in Sydney is consistantly in the top 10 most financially successful large arena's in the world and that is without a sporting tenant.

Are the last 2 comments just your own points or are you asking me a question?

 

[Rob]

We don't need a roof in WA. It won't have anywhere near the same number of events as Etihad and in any case, our weather isn't as cold and wet as Melbourne (yes, I know we get more rain, but we have a lot less rainy days).

I'd expect the cost of a retractable roof alone would probably be in the 9 figures, and that money would be better off spent on other stadium facilities.

 

[Kram]

Don't get why people keep banging on about 80k++ for Perth, it would be a white elephant.. 60k is an optimal size for the medium term, just need to make sure it's possible to upgrade to about 70k in the future.

 

[ChrisFooty]

60,000 is plenty for perth.

 

[8732watitdo]

I doubt whether we could fill an 80,000 seat stadium, other than on derbies. 60,000 is a good start for us.

 

[muesli]

60-65k for Perth i'd Reckon

 

[Admiral Byng]

60,000 for Perth will be fine for starters.

The playing surface doesn't need a roof, but we should aim for 75%+ of the seats for paying spectators being undercover.

 

[Evelyn208]

Key word is - starters. They should have built a new stadium 5 years ago. Planning is going to take years, then the construction... this is not a quick project. Why settle for a mediocre number when you are building for the NOW, not the FUTURE. Even if you don't fill it up every week - even if you fill it up 3 or 4 times a year. It will bring concerts, the ability to petition for world sports (i.e. soccer). It's good for the city, its good for the AFL and good for the people. Aim high - and then round up.

 

[Kwality]

Key word is - starters. They should have built a new stadium 5 years ago. Planning is going to take years, then the construction... this is not a quick project. Why settle for a mediocre number when you are building for the NOW, not the FUTURE. Even if you don't fill it up every week - even if you fill it up 3 or 4 times a year. It will bring concerts, the ability to petition for world sports (i.e. soccer). It's good for the city, its good for the AFL and good for the people. Aim high - and then round up.

Clearly you have no intention of footing the bill.

Are you planning to force soccer, league & union to use the ground? While you are it, why not jack boot the flannelled fools out of the WACA & seal the gates.

 

[Evelyn208]

So why do we use the MCG when it isn't at capacity? Surely we should only use stadiums that will fill to the brim. Seriously, what?

 

[Admiral Byng]

Key word is - starters. They should have built a new stadium 5 years ago. Planning is going to take years, then the construction... this is not a quick project. Why settle for a mediocre number when you are building for the NOW, not the FUTURE. Even if you don't fill it up every week - even if you fill it up 3 or 4 times a year. It will bring concerts, the ability to petition for world sports (i.e. soccer). It's good for the city, its good for the AFL and good for the people. Aim high - and then round up.

yeah, starters.

My understanding of what they will do is build the foundations and the general layout as if it were about a 75,000 seater, but build it to 60,000 initially. That way it can be upgraded later without tearing the whole lot down.

The concept has been raised before. The new rectangular stadium in Melbourne was built with foundations of a 55,000 seater but built to only 30,000 initially. Just that they didn't tell the guy who designed the roof.

As long as we avoid the roof issue.

 

[The_Wookie]

The "Build it and they'll come" ethos is long gone with stadiums. Stadiums are no longer benchseat, cut and fill with bomb rubble, post war public works facilities. Over the last 25 years the ceiling has gone through the roof in Stadium standards. The rest of the World has adopted the American Stadium model as their respective sports leagues have reach new teirs in proffesionalism and income. Required Stadium facilities and comforts are the money makers that keep teams profitable. It's about finding the right balance of as many VIP boxes and Suites as possible while serving the demand for general admission (but at a premium price) to maintain atmosphere. Those in charge would rather see 50 000 every week in a 55 000 seater than mass variation in a 70 000 seater.

It's only because of traditional precident and the number of reserve seating (MCC) that the MCG has a capacity of 100 000. Cities all over the World with vastly greater populations than Melbourne don't build stadiums that large anymore. 100 000 seems an iconic figure in building a monument, not even Beijing's Bird nest hold that much. Jeddah in Saudi Arabia and Bagdad Iraq are the only cities in the world planning to build 100 000 seaters (certainly not needed) for political image ends.

If the ground never existed and Melbourne built a new primary stadium it would very unlikely to be more than 85 000. Stadiums are by their nature very hard to run at a profit, to limiting supply is a method most use. The NFL doesn't like seeing venues over 80 000 and the Washington Redskins have resently reduced the capacity of their stadium.

I still haven't been able to work out if the 50 000 mentioned for Adelaide Oval is just Seats, everything in the new structures or the Full Capacity including the retained Grass banks. Using relevent stats and formula's provided by the likes of HOK Populous Architiects (world leaders in Stadium design and development) the SA Gov has found that the 50 000 is the optimal capacity while still having a competitive number of corporate factilities for a City that is growing very slowly ( by mid century Adelaide still won't be as large as Perth is now). Until Perth finishes it's design competition I think the Adelaide Oval design is the most beautiful in the nation.

Perth's plan is for a 60 000 Capacity (54 000 non corporate seats) Stadium designed to easily expand to 70 000 within its building envelope. Like any Stadium, it is being designed to serve it's cities needs for a 40/50 year life span. During that time Perth will grow to 3.5 / 4 million. Another reason for the higher capacity compared to those in Adelaide and Brisbane is help Perth be an attractive competitor to the Eastern Seaboard for International Soccer, Rugby, League, Athletics etc. As Perth will be the last of Australia's cities to replace it's major Sporting centre piece, it promises to be the most expensive and hopefully the most magnificent. That is until the current venues have run their life and are replaced.

The MCG holds 40+ AFL games a year alone, at least one a fortnight will top the 60-70k mark at the moment, with several clubs boasting members of 40,000+ (including tenants and non tenants). The MCC members is booked out til Jesus comes back, and the AFL members are another 54000 on top of that. Dont forget Waverly was built as a new stadium and they operated comfortably side by side for man a year with nary a suggestion that either was going broke.

3 million people went to the MCG last year. lol. Theres no comparison to a standard NFL stadium.

Of course Adelaide and Perth are different stories.

Edit: for reference there are 10 stadiums with a capacity greater than the MCG around the world. 5 of them belong to teams in the US College football leagues. It seems that while the NFL isnt fond of them, the NCAA loves the damn things.

 

[Kwality]

Didnt know this:

Melbourne Cricket Club chief executive Stephen Gough said the MCC had no say whether Carlton or any other club played more games at the ground because the AFL had struck its own deal with the MCC and the league did not want clubs making separate deals with the stadium.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...in-new-deal-20110823-1j8fd.html#ixzz1VtKYmMfL​

 

[Forey Johnson]

Why does the stadium in Perth need a roof?

It Doesnt, and would be a disaster if it did get built with a roof.

Also, 60000 is plenty for perth. What people don't realise is that you need to keep the pressure on seats, so that people feel the need to get in and snap up tickets while they can. If there is no pressure on seats, then people will be less swayed into getting tickets.

to build an 80,000 seater and to have a quarter of the stadium empty each week would be a disaster

 

[Jonts]

Think AO only needs to be 45-50k Cricket priority is the Western Stand only 15k or so? and there is a a fair amount of football supporters that will become cricket members or become on the waiting list. At AO port and the crows should both be aiming for 38k+ each day anyway

there is a limit on Adelaide oval with the general admission and hill so there will be around 43 thousand seats or so?