Remove this Banner Ad

Perth Stadium (Optus Stadium)

  • Thread starter Thread starter HaroCant
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The_Wookie said:
Well i wouldnt call it a chinese wall for a start. And I dont wave conspiracys around like dollar notes at a strip club.
Click to expand...

Where do you get dollar notes from?
 
Garlic muncher said:
If we look at that photo, the footbridge was initially across to East Perth ( where the little inlet is) where there is cafes, eateries and a pub etc, now the footbridge is going to where Gloucester Park ( trotting track way to the left on the photo ), there is nothing of note down there, just Trinity College, WACA and Gloucester Park, no Eateries etc and if you wanted to go back to the Eatery precinct at East Perth it is a another 10 minute walk up the hill.
Click to expand...

The Gloucester Park area will be for parking, plus the bus link for central city ( Cat ).

The eateries are catered for at Burswood, ( stadium area + casino ).

It is bugger all distance to walk from the Gloucester park area to the Claisbrook eateries.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Defacto said:
why would it be a disaster for football... if it gets communicated that the AFL, WCE and Freo cannot play games at the new stadium due to how bad the deal is, and they choose to play at subi, the pressure will be on the liberal government for screwing up the financials/making it unattractive

they cant have another fiona stanley here and they know it
Click to expand...
Because playing at a stadium that is well passed it's use-by date whilst a brand new stadium is left unused due to WA Football acting like spoilt children won't be fans/members preferences. Why would members want to continue paying top dollar at Subi Oval, with it's wooden seats t uncovered areas from the rain/sun? Tbh fans wouldn't even care about WA Football in this situation. WAFC is already getting a sizeable amount, it's about time fans put themselves first and that is to go to a stadium that has been long over due.
 
The_Wookie said:
Well i wouldnt call it a chinese wall for a start. And I dont wave conspiracys around like dollar notes at a strip club.
Click to expand...

I have been involved in tendering for the MCG - Ron Evans/Spotless kept the work. Not a conspiracy, its who you know, a wink is as good as a nod to a blind man.
 
Unlike Adelaide Oval Looks like the new stadium wont have its own piece of legislation but will governed by this agreement

The new Perth Stadium DBFM Project Design, Build, Finance and Maintain (DBFM) Project Agreement SP0793712
The State of Western Australia (State of Western Australia) and
Minister for Works (Minister for Works) and
Western Australian Sports Centre Trust, trading as VenuesWest (Governance Agency) and
Westadium Project Co Pty Ltd in its personal capacity and as trustee for Westadium Project Unit Trust (Project Co)

and this document is the Project Summary of above dated February 2015
http://www.treasury.wa.gov.au/uploa..._Strategy/newPerthStadium_Project_Summary.pdf

Above links came from
http://www.treasury.wa.gov.au/Treasury/Public_Private_Partnerships/new_Perth_Stadium__–_Design,_Build,_Finance_and_Maintain_Project/
 
Last edited:
Kwality said:
That strip club ... you know, that one ...
Click to expand...

I don't know any strip club where $1 would get you anything...Was more a comment about how I haven't seen a $1 note in a very long time (not Aus currency anyway). If memory serves, the last I saw were framed and on a wall in a bar.
 
What concerns football fans in WA who have an interest in the whole of WA football not just their AFL team, is how the money will be distributed.

All we have so far is a promise from quite possibly the biggest liar of a premier the state has seen that "football will be no worse off".
This has now changed to "the WAFC will have a stream of revenue to support and grow local football at the WAFL and community level".
Which the minister for sport has followed up with this contradiction "We are looking at a whole raft of different financial models going forward".

Could you be any more vague.

The future of WA football is up in the air at the moment and reliant on the integrity and good will of the state government.
All this while the AFL circle in seeing there dream of getting the Dockers and Eagles licences back get closer and closer.
I know some fans of the eagles and dockers think this to be a good idea as they will no longer have to pay a licence fee to the WAFC.
Just wait till the AFL start to decide how external revenue is distributed back to the WA clubs and see if we are better off.

See article below for another POV

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...k=b13e40a16f5a919a9369a8fc342be749-1454999852
 
Whatname said:
What concerns football fans in WA who have an interest in the whole of WA football not just their AFL team, is how the money will be distributed.

All we have so far is a promise from quite possibly the biggest liar of a premier the state has seen that "football will be no worse off".
This has now changed to "the WAFC will have a stream of revenue to support and grow local football at the WAFL and community level".
Which the minister for sport has followed up with this contradiction "We are looking at a whole raft of different financial models going forward".

Could you be any more vague.

The future of WA football is up in the air at the moment and reliant on the integrity and good will of the state government.
All this while the AFL circle in seeing there dream of getting the Dockers and Eagles licences back get closer and closer.
I know some fans of the eagles and dockers think this to be a good idea as they will no longer have to pay a licence fee to the WAFC.
Just wait till the AFL start to decide how external revenue is distributed back to the WA clubs and see if we are better off.

See article below for another POV

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...k=b13e40a16f5a919a9369a8fc342be749-1454999852
Click to expand...
But the issue is that the people who are paying to support the WAFC and WA Football are the members and fans of the AFL clubs who have been getting a pretty rubbish deal for the last decade or so. The whole idea about the new stadium was that it is 'Fan First' and that is what the WAFC has never been. It has never been about giving the fan a good deal, it has always been primarily about supporting WA Football. To make it clear I have no problem with it. However that is not how you run a facility where the main focus should be making the best experience for the paying customer. Trust me if PSM had the best application they would have run it but they didn't.

The issue is that the WAFC and some people thought the PSM were entitled to get the contract, which they weren't. They obviously didn't have the experience, skill or reputation to compete with the other bids. So instead of whinging they should put their energy into negotiating with the State government rather then making ridiculous threats like not playing at the new stadium.
 
Last edited:
FootyFan96 said:
But the issue is that the people who are paying to support the WAFC and WA Football are the members and fans of the AFL clubs who have been getting a pretty rubbish deal for the last decade or so. The whole idea about the new stadium was that it is 'Fan First' and that is what the WAFC has never been. It has never been about giving the gan a good deal, it has always been primarily about propping up WAFL clubs. To make it clear I have no problem with helping WAFL clubs survive, I love going to watch it and do frequently. However that is not how you run a facility where the main focus should be making the best experience for the paying customer. Trust me if PSM had the best application they would have run it but they didn't.

The issue is that the WAFC and some people thought the PSM were entitled to get the contract, which they weren't. They obviously didn't have the experience, skill or reputation to compete with the other bids. So instead of whinging they should put their energy into negotiating with the State government rather then making ridiculous threats like not playing at the new stadium.
Click to expand...

You need to understand that the WAFL clubs get less than 15% of what the Eagles and Dockers contribute to the WAFC, the rest is spent on admin and country, amateur and junior football.
You also need to understand that the license for the Eagles and Dockers is owned by the WAFC which means the Eagles and Dockers are a subsidiary of the WAFC. It was done this way for a number of reasons not least being what the hell do the Eagles and Dockers care about WA football, do you really think the Eagles and Dockers want to help junior development and pathways to the AFL? They are a subsidiary and as such their owners like in any business in the world can do as they like with their profits.
Do you think that a business owner should be able to do with their profits as they choose?
Don't know why you would be angry with the WAFL clubs as they get very little of the pie, be angry with the WAFC if you want but the WAFL clubs are hardly being propped up by the two AFL clubs.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

greatwhiteshark said:
You need to understand that the WAFL clubs get less than 15% of what the Eagles and Dockers contribute to the WAFC, the rest is spent on admin and country, amateur and junior football.
You also need to understand that the license for the Eagles and Dockers is owned by the WAFC which means the Eagles and Dockers are a subsidiary of the WAFC. It was done this way for a number of reasons not least being what the hell do the Eagles and Dockers care about WA football, do you really think the Eagles and Dockers want to help junior development and pathways to the AFL? They are a subsidiary and as such their owners like in any business in the world can do as they like with their profits.
Do you think that a business owner should be able to do with their profits as they choose?
Don't know why you would be angry with the WAFL clubs as they get very little of the pie, be angry with the WAFC if you want but the WAFL clubs are hardly being propped up by the two AFL clubs.
Click to expand...
I am not angry with the WAFL clubs, I am angry with the WAFC, I should of just said WA Football spending (i have edited my previous response) . What I am saying that money from rent at Subi should have been first spent on maintaining and improving the patron experience at the venue then spend rest on development, WAFL etc. But it wasn't.

Basically what I am saying is that is that they never had a 'fan first' approach to their operations at Subi and I think that is what hurt their bid in the end.
 
FootyFan96 said:
I am not angry with the WAFL clubs, I am angry with the WAFC, I should of just said WA Football spending (i have edited my previous response) . What I am saying that money from rent at Subi should have been first spent on maintaining and improving the patron experience at the venue then spend rest on development, WAFL etc. But it wasn't.

Basically what I am saying is that is that they never had a 'fan first' approach to their operations at Subi and I think that is what hurt their bid in the end.
Click to expand...

I agree totally with that, I am a premium Eagles Member still sitting on a wooden bench. The Eagles are not innocent here either as they continue to put membership up bleeding their fans and offering nothing in return for the cost off the field.
It is an important point I make about the WAFL clubs as many many think they bleed and try to halt success of the Eagles and Dockers and that could not be further from the truth.
 
I actually don't mind who manages the stadium and absolutely agree that the fan experience at domain was poor.

The big concern for me and what has been paid scant lip service is the funding model going forward.
Obviously the WAFL and Local footy would be a little nervous at the moment as they are unsure where the money will be coming from.

I also have great concerns that this is part of a grand plan to replace the WAFC with AFLWA which will answer direct to AFL head office. A bit of a conspiracy theory I know but the AFL are known to want the 2 WA licence's back and if that was to happen I fear for the future of our local WAFL competition.

But it should be all ok, Col has promised that "WA footy will be no worse off".
 
Whatname said:
I actually don't mind who manages the stadium and absolutely agree that the fan experience at domain was poor.

The big concern for me and what has been paid scant lip service is the funding model going forward.
Obviously the WAFL and Local footy would be a little nervous at the moment as they are unsure where the money will be coming from.

I also have great concerns that this is part of a grand plan to replace the WAFC with AFLWA which will answer direct to AFL head office. A bit of a conspiracy theory I know but the AFL are known to want the 2 WA licence's back and if that was to happen I fear for the future of our local WAFL competition.

But it should be all ok, Col has promised that "WA footy will be no worse off".
Click to expand...

Not a conspiracy theory mate I think it's common knowledge the AFL want that.
Sell it to them I say, be worth about 60-70 million plus for the two licenses and give them 14 days to pay it like the VFL did to the Eagles in 1986 lol
Tongue in cheek of course but I would never sell the licenses ever if I was the WAFC.
 
telsor said:
The government/stadium management don't have to involve the WAFC though, they 'only' have to get an agreement with the AFL.

If the AFL says they play there, then they play there, if the AFL says they don't, they don't.

So really, the WAFC is irrelevant to the negotiations, they're just probably the beneficiaries of (some of) the income.
Click to expand...

Not sure you understand this state.

It is highly unlikely the AFL have any desire to piss off both WA clubs. But irrespective, if the government goes behind the back of the WA clubs and suckers them into playing there when they don't want to, then it would be political suicide.
 
holybishop said:
People aren't going to blame the government for building the shiny new stadium that the public were crying out for. They'll blame football for choosing to stay at Subi.
Click to expand...

In the end that's highly unlikely to happen, but you can bet that if it does then it'll be sold as how the clubs will be millions of dollars worse off despite the additional capacity.

If you think the bulk of football fans are going to take the side of a bunch of politicians over their 2 footy clubs then you have completely misjudged them.
And non-football fans are just going to see a billion dollar plus expense completely wasted, so the government gets blamed by them too.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Are we blaming the government for having a legitimate tender process and awarding the tender to someone who's submission was comfortably better than all others?

Are we blaming the government that the quality of the PSM submission wasn't good enough to finish top 2?

Are we wanting to forgo much better submissions in favour of a poor one?

Funding models will need to change, that's obvious. We have time. Having a tanty because you're not deemed good enough is pathetic.
 
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-09/wa-football-in-good-hands-says-wafc
Points of Interest:
  • No AFL at DS Post 2017
  • DS to stay a fully function venue 2018 and beyond until agreement on lease is undertaken
  • WCE may need to stay at DS till 2018-19
  • DS available for for WAFL and AFL preseason games 2018 and beyond
  • DS WILL eventually close and WAFC will move to WACA
  • WAFC are currently reaching a memorandum of understanding with the WACA for move to WACA ground
  • Lastly chill out, WA Football should be good without having to hand over control to AFL
 
Rob said:
Not sure you understand this state.

It is highly unlikely the AFL have any desire to piss off both WA clubs. But irrespective, if the government goes behind the back of the WA clubs and suckers them into playing there when they don't want to, then it would be political suicide.
Click to expand...

I mightn't understand the state, but the AFL's modus operandi when it comes to stadia is fairly clear....They do what's good for them, and the clubs have to take it.

Witness Docklands, AO and MCG deals.
 
telsor said:
I mightn't understand the state, but the AFL's modus operandi when it comes to stadia is fairly clear....They do what's good for them, and the clubs have to take it.

Witness Docklands, AO and MCG deals.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. In any case, the AFL didn't have a lot to do with the AO deal. It was the SANFL that controlled both AFL clubs at the time.
 
I agree that Subi Oval was very poor from a fan's perspective but those saying the winning tender was comfortably ahead, remember it's just words on paper from a company trying to make money. A better guide would be their track record and I don't hear that many people going into bat for the 'amazing fan-first' experience of ANZ Stadium.
 
Not sure this latest provides complete comfort:

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/30777557/stadium-bid-secret-until-deal-is-signed/

but you wouldn't expect disclosure of the nos. until the deal is done.

the interesting wash up a little bit down the track is what happens to the Subi/ Domain site, remembering that it's leased, not owned , by the footy commission? Assume this is what partly lies behind the comment (elsewhere) re 'looking at a range of financial models going forward.'
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Boyohboywowwee
    • Like
Is it time for another SCG upgrade or a Perth stadium like stadium built in Sydney
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
197
Views
14K
Seedsfan
Seedsfan
Bunk Moreland
The next Melbourne stadium
2 3 4 5
Replies
114
Views
14K
Tandy
Tandy
ibd77
International Stadiums That Could Be Converted For AFL
Replies
6
Views
753
kid_a
kid_a

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom