Stadiums in WA/SA the capacity for the future

Discussion in 'The Footy Industry' started by Pleasedontfail11, Aug 16, 2011.

Put it out there
  1. stmookeyj

    stmookeyj BFSC Platinum

    Western Bulldogs
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Oct 02
    Posts:
    14,998
    Location:
    Queensland
    Just one out of left field....do stadia in these parts really need so much in the future if so many people now are staying away from games to watch on TV?

    (Log in to remove this ad.)

  2. Eastern Rangers

    Eastern Rangers BFSC Platinum

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Royals & Subi
    Joined:
    Aug 06
    Posts:
    18,771
    Location:
    Perth
    After the grants commission was introduced following the 1933 referendum. 1901-1934 WA funded most of our own projects on the back of unthinkable levels of debt.

    Most of that time was before the GST was introduced. The GST has increased the pool of money being equalized, today it is very different to thirty years ago because WA doesn't have access to a host of revenue that south eastern states had during those years.

    Sure WA has to pay back the south eastern states, but we are still a smaller economy with a smaller population. We also have seventy years to do it (if all things are equal). :rolleyes:
  3. Rob

    Rob Club Legend

    Fremantle
    Other teams:
    Peel Thunder
    Joined:
    Nov 00
    Posts:
    18,940
    Location:
    South of the river
    People staying away from games? Where do you get that idea? We pay the highest prices in Australia for the worst stadium in Australia and still manage to sell out most games.
  4. Kwality

    Kwality Team Captain

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Aug 11
    Posts:
    4,651
    Location:
    Tootgarook

    Oops, indeed my mistake. :mad:
  5. stmookeyj

    stmookeyj BFSC Platinum

    Western Bulldogs
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Oct 02
    Posts:
    14,998
    Location:
    Queensland
    Reality is in these times is that in the near future with all games live on TV (hopefully on the West Coast), will the consumer see more value for money paying $40 for 12 weekends of the year or about $300 a year for a membership (not including transportation or food/drink) that may get them a reserved seat, or will they use the same money to watch the same game in their living rooms? Families and consumers are going to have to make a choice between the 2 (or worse) as finances are going to get tighter and tighter to get to football matches no matter what capacity stadium.
  6. Rob

    Rob Club Legend

    Fremantle
    Other teams:
    Peel Thunder
    Joined:
    Nov 00
    Posts:
    18,940
    Location:
    South of the river
    LOL, $300 for a membership. Maybe for the really shit seats. Adults pay over $500 in most parts of Subi for the year.

    The vast majority of games have been live on Fox against the gate for years. It won't have the slightest impact. Not sure where you get the idea that finances are going to get tighter, at least in the long term.
  7. Kwality

    Kwality Team Captain

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Aug 11
    Posts:
    4,651
    Location:
    Tootgarook
    Finances are a convenient excuse for clubs that cant put bums on seats &/or get supporters to become members - after 100 years + its time these club members got real, got honest, say too many teams in a particular market, shock horror, a reality check?
  8. Papa G

    Papa G Club Legend

    Port Adelaide
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Apr 06
    Posts:
    9,418
    Location:
    The Bitter End
    Where is this notion that Freo sell out Subi regularly come any rate? No need for the Lol you're a Port supporter what would you know, but seriously how often does Freo get over 40,000 at Subi? My impression, and correct me if I'm wrong is that Freo get mainly low to mid 30's (a good crowd I might add for a team that is playing basically only interstate opposition) but nothing to suggest that they need a stadium with a 70,000 capacity.
  9. jorel6669

    jorel6669 All Australian

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Jun 04
    Posts:
    6,429
    Actually, this is a valid point. Sunset is a major pain to a number of games scheduled in Perth due to the need to cater to a Melbourne TV audience. Sunlight is not a problem... it's when the Sun is directly in your line of sight that is.

    60k is too low. For the years away it is, 70k should be their foundation, with options to expand. Far too conservative and I fear we're simply going to be in the same situation as now - waiting lists.

    There's a lot of options they can explore to sell seats - limited game packages, stadium memberships.

    And if the WA sides suck and attendances drop, 30k is going to look just as meagre in a 60k stadium as it would in a 70k stadium.
  10. Rob

    Rob Club Legend

    Fremantle
    Other teams:
    Peel Thunder
    Joined:
    Nov 00
    Posts:
    18,940
    Location:
    South of the river
    I think you're confused. A sellout simply means all tickets sold, not all seats occupied. Eg. Freo's last home game against collingwood was sold out, despite the ground having over 10k empty seats. Not every member shows up to every game.
  11. Kwality

    Kwality Team Captain

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Aug 11
    Posts:
    4,651
    Location:
    Tootgarook
    stadium memberships .... what is in that for footy? Why are you anti footy club, why would you want Medallion Club style memberships stealing members from the clubs.

    The Eagles clearly need to come up with a solution to the empty booked seating when the waiting list is hanging out to see a game.

    (Log in to remove this ad.)

  12. Papa G

    Papa G Club Legend

    Port Adelaide
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Apr 06
    Posts:
    9,418
    Location:
    The Bitter End
    Actually, I think it is you who is confused. The question begs, if the majority of your games attract 30-35,000 why do you need a 70,000 plus stadium? If 10,000 can't be arsed rocking up to a game against the reigning premier, it just shows that the demand isn't actually there. With 70,000 plus seats available, you may even see a decline in membership numbers as it will be easy to get seats and this 10,000 that aren't rocking up regularly might save their dough and just pay for the games they want to go to. The cashed up bogan's intellect can stretch this far. He may decide that he's at the mine site for half the games and realise even though he does have cash to burn, it's still a waste of money.
  13. Rob

    Rob Club Legend

    Fremantle
    Other teams:
    Peel Thunder
    Joined:
    Nov 00
    Posts:
    18,940
    Location:
    South of the river
    Dude, if the game is sold out, then the demand for tickets exceeds the number of seats. I'm not sure you understand that. Using Freo's game against Collingwood as an example, despite there being over 10k empty seats, if you had of rocked up on gameday without a ticket, you wouldn't have got in. Consequently you can't say 'only 31k could be arsed rocking up' given anyone that wanted to go on the day and didn't have a ticket couldn't get in.

    Mind you, that game was an outlier. It was expected to be a smashing, and duly was. Hence the low member turnout (and when I say 'low', that's relative. Most clubs don't get 75% of their members showing up for any games, let alone their worst. Your club looks to have had at least HALF it's membership not bother watching you play Collingwood). When we're going well, crowds average in the high 30k's with almost all games sold out. If we ever win a flag then we'd be able to sell 60k memberships (i.e reserved seats) easily to a world class stadium. Hell, a couple of top 4 years in a row would probably do it.

    Based on your comments, Anzac Day clearly has no more demand for tickets because there are at least 10k empty seats to the game. Which is obviously false.

    It is possible, but IMO unlikely. A far superior stadium is more likely to attract spectators, and it's probably fair to suggest that the vast, vast majority of members, when offered a much better seat at presumably the same price won't turn down the opportunity. In addition to others that would no doubt buy a membership if they didn't have to sit in the nosebleed section of Subi with their knees in their chest because the seats are so poor. In any case, it's not like half our members go missing every game, generally the member turnout is 80%+, even in shit years. If the crowd is about 34k then 80% of members have shown up. And most our games get over that.

    Do you have any examples of your phenomenon at work?
  14. sydney eagle

    sydney eagle All Australian

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    South Sydney Rabbitohs
    Joined:
    Jan 06
    Posts:
    5,183
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Could they make it a rule that any booked seats not occupied by the end of the first quarter of the main game can be resold to people who turn up at the ground ? Get in early or you lose your booked seat !
  15. The Reaper

    The Reaper Club Legend

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    East Fremantle
    Joined:
    Jan 06
    Posts:
    18,931
    Location:
    Perth
    How many people are going to bother turning up after a quarter on the off chance that they may get a seat?
  16. Silent Alarm

    Silent Alarm Is your bed made? Is your sweater on?

    Fremantle
    Other teams:
    Arsenal
    Joined:
    Jul 10
    Posts:
    10,641
    Location:
    Melbourne via WA
    What about an iPhone app.

    You simply 'check in' to your membership seat. Although this would mean a lot of people would miss out on half a quarter of footy (or so).

    Could possibly give another, second backup to crowd numbers as well.

    Main detriment is the fact that not everyone has an iPhone.
  17. Rob

    Rob Club Legend

    Fremantle
    Other teams:
    Peel Thunder
    Joined:
    Nov 00
    Posts:
    18,940
    Location:
    South of the river
    Most stadium memberships don't assign seats, and in any case even if they did most wouldn't give them up anyway. No-one's going to rock up at quarter time on the off chance they can get in.

    With medallion club members they can legally resell their seats for any individual game (or at least I assume it's legal given the number on ebay), but it's still half empty for a lot of events where the rest of the ground is full.
  18. Oneiros

    Oneiros All Australian

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Cleveland Browns, San Jose Sharks
    Joined:
    Jul 11
    Posts:
    4,245
    Location:
    Perth
    Don't cry to us about that; we both tried to avoid getting into the Commonwealth in the first place and then had a referendum to leave in the 30s and had to stay, so its only right and proper that you paid for us to be there ;)
  19. jadr76

    jadr76 Draftee

    Adelaide
    Other teams:
    Norwood, Thunder & Palmerston
    Joined:
    Sep 11
    Posts:
    31
    Location:
    Darwin
    I haven't read every post in this forum, but I believe that plans for Adelaide and Perth stadiums are short sighted. Both cities should be planning to build facilities that are capable of hosting the grand final. I would suggest stadiums in excess of 80,000. Governments in both cities should be seeking to host the grand final on a rotating basis. I suggest that over a six year period that Melbourne hosts three grand finals, with Adelaide, Sydney and Perth hosting one each.

    Just think that over the last 20 years non-Victorian teams have won 50% of all AFL Grand Finals, yet not a single one of these games has been played outside of Melbourne...

    It is time to smash the monopoly the Victoria has on the "Australian" Football League Grand Final.
  20. grimface_87

    grimface_87 Team Captain

    North Melbourne
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    May 08
    Posts:
    2,760
    Location:
    The 'Vale
    Doesn't the MCG have a contract to host the AFL Grand Final until about 2050? It was part of the deal to give up its right to host at least one Prelim each year.
  21. eskabah

    eskabah Rookie

    St Kilda
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Feb 12
    Posts:
    79
    Location:
    Oa
    I have done some research of my own, the MCG is on land owned by the state, on a 99 year lease to the MCC. Meaning that the structure is owned by the MCC, but only for now.

    And I also believe that the WACA is on a similar deal, but the lease from the WA government is 999 years, not a typo, almost a millennium!
  22. DardySingh360

    DardySingh360 All Australian

    Fremantle
    Other teams:
    Claremont, Arsenal FC
    Joined:
    Mar 11
    Posts:
    3,004
    Location:
    WA
    Pretty sure the Guinness Brewery in Dublin has a 9999 year lease :D
  23. Kwality

    Kwality Team Captain

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Aug 11
    Posts:
    4,651
    Location:
    Tootgarook
    Where does the MCG Trust fit in that?

    My understanding is the Trust appointed the ground manager, ie the cricket club (no it did not go to public tender).
  24. RussellEbertHandball

    RussellEbertHandball BFSC Gold

    Port Adelaide
    Other teams:
    The Mighty Blacks
    Joined:
    Nov 04
    Posts:
    21,148
    Location:
    SE Oz
    I think you need to do a little bit more reseach. The land the MCG is built on, is crown land and owned by the MCG Trust, a government Trust. There currently isn't a 99 year lease. Maybe the original lease was for 99 years but not currently. Yes the Great Southern Stand and Northern Stand are shown in the books of the MCC as MCG building improvements as are the loans taken out to build the stands. Basically those stands are leasehold improvements and are the MCC's assets as long as there is a lease in place.

    There is a lease, which was varied in 2002 and a ground management agreement which was also varied in 2002 between the MCG Trust and the MCC.

    At the following link you can download the 2010-11 MCG Trust Annual Report.

    http://www.mcg.org.au/About the G/MCG Trust/Annual Report.aspx

    Some snippets from the Annual Report

    From the P&L
    From the Notes to the Financial Statement

    You can down load the 2010-11 MCC Annual Report with concise financials and the 2010 MCC Annual Financial Report at

    http://www.mcc.org.au/News/Publications/Annual Report.aspx

    From Note 22. Related Party Disclosures

    a) MCG Trust

    The Club is party to a “Deed of Variation of Lease” with the MCG Trust pursuant to which, the Club’s
    existing tenancy of the MCG was extended until 31 March 2042 with an option to extend its lease over the members’ reserve for a further 25 years.

    Under a separate management agreement with the MCG Trust and the State of Victoria, the Club’s role
    as ground manager of the MCG has also been extended until 31 March 2042.

    No your research is wrong. The WACA own the land freehold and manage the oval themselves. That is why they have development proposals to build apparments next to the WACA and flog them off to earn revenue. You can't sell them if you don't own the land and set up sub leases.

    From the WA Major Stadia Taskforce report various volumes, which the direct link no longer exist but the indiviual chapters can be found at the WA Department of Sport and Recreation

    http://www.dsr.wa.gov.au/multipurposestadium

    From Page C-6

    THE STADIUM & THE CITY VOLUME 2 - TECHNICAL REPORT
    SECTION C – GOVERNANCE AND FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY
    Prepared by the Major Stadia Taskforce
    May 2007

    CONTENTS
    1.0 Governance and Venue Management C-5
    1.1 Background C-6

    ......

  25. Kwality

    Kwality Team Captain

    West Coast
    Other teams:
    Joined:
    Aug 11
    Posts:
    4,651
    Location:
    Tootgarook

    Appears your research has mislead you eskabah, how so?

    Perhaps you could confirm your bona fides by listing some links to your claims, e.g ownership of the WACA ...