Does that fee include or exclude arena advertising, catering etc given the landlord doesn't care about crowds?
Is a one off event the same per event fee as 24 x AFL games?
Fair dinkum ...
-
Guest - BigFooty Tipping 2025 - Get on! - $500 first prize - Weekly Prizes - Click to Join
PLUS Your club board comp is now up!
Design Ideas for new Perth Stadium
- Thread starter Admiral Byng
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Does that fee include or exclude arena advertising, catering etc given the landlord doesn't care about crowds?
Is a one off event the same per event fee as 24 x AFL games?
Fair dinkum ...
There are many different management models.
- Banned
- #1,129
If a stadium doesn't equate to "common good" what does?
Why does you say this stadium have to so revenue conscious when other recent stadia aren't?
Is the indoor stadium cost effective?
Is the rectangular stadium cost effective?
This stadium will have the best chance because it's hosting an AFL match every week
with possible AFL finals and WAFL GF, IR games not to mention the RU, rl, soccer games
and other big events.
- Banned
- #1,130
Well they'll be an AFL game every week for 24 weeks.
With a very conservative estimate of attendance at 50K
and nrl averaging 15k currently that equates to 72 games of nrl.
The actual "break even" point is quite irrelevant.
It's quite obvious from the proposed use that the stadium is going to be used by large crowds at least once every week. That puts the new stadium's usuage standing right up there.
The MCG and Docklands carry a phenominal load. Perth Stadium and AO will be similar except cricket did the right thing and joined in filling the summer months. compare that to the scannergun approach of NSW which has a multitude of stadia but doesn't have one decent stadium with any decent crowds.
Not everybody is a sports fan. I am an AFL fan, but I'm just playing devil's advocate. The common man/woman will not be able to play in this stadium. If it were, then we may be able to consider it a 'common good'. It is only for professional sporting events. Watching professional sporting events isn't necessary for human well-being.
Maybe because other stadia should be revenue conscious. If you are paying for a stadium (through your taxes) that you don't get to enjoy, you would at least hope that it's a decent investment that will pay you back in the long run.
I don't know.
I don't know
Hope so.
Clearly a person who likes to pay their way, cheers, me to.
AFL footy WA style, can pay its way, it should because it can.
Not sure that's anything but a discredited theory. People buy a membership because they want to go to the footy, and a membership is significantly cheaper (>30%) than buying a ticket each game. Add to that the hassle in buying tickets every game, and the better seat you're more likely to get with a membership.
Victorian clubs provide the complete contrary result to what you're saying. They all have membership bases over 30k, yet getting a seat to just about every game is easy and cheap. For most clubs, their members regularly don't show up - member turnup rates for many games are shocking, i.e well under 50%. If what you were saying actually happens, all Victorian clubs would have abominable memberships. After all, why would anyone become a member when they can just walk up and attend a game?
In Perth, member turnup rates are much, much higher, usually over 80%. Members here buy memberships to attend football games. I can't see too many dropping their membership if seats were easier to get.
If a new stadium was perceived to be a good investment, wouldn't the clubs/AFL pay for it themselves?
Of course the two W.A. AFL teams are indirectly owned by the government through the WAFC so that confuses matters
I guess you could then consider the gate takings (from taxpayers paying to enter their own stadium) to be revenue for the state.
Of course the two W.A. AFL teams are indirectly owned by the government through the WAFC so that confuses matters
I guess you could then consider the gate takings (from taxpayers paying to enter their own stadium) to be revenue for the state.
- Banned
- #1,135
So RU, rl and soccer should be given their stadia because nobody's intersted in those sports ?
How about, let's make the biggest and best sport (AFL) even better and see if we can benefit from that.
- Banned
- #1,136
Why don't other sports pay for their stadiums?
Isn't it more logical to finance the successful sports and gain the greatest benefit?
Indeed.
Sure but benefit to whom? The weekend warrrior can't use it. If we are talking about return on taxpayer's money, how long is it going to take to cover the initial capital outlay and running costs? You would make the same calculations when deciding whether to put solar panels on your roof, or buying Woolworths shares.
- Banned
- #1,138
The government redirects revenue to any number of projects.
Most people use only a small proportion of what's provided.
For example the arts receives money. Very few people attend let alone participate.
There'll be well over a million visitors per year to the new stadium.
That's quite impressive.
- Banned
- #1,139
Any person can attend if they so wish.
Just like you can attend some art function if you so desire.
Then over a million visitors a year is a great return.
Well the indoor stadium that suffered a major cost blowout will never approach anything like payback.
The rectangular stadium similarly wil never see black ink.
The Perth Stadium will return the maximum for each dollar input.
Name a stadium that runs as a profit.
A hospital isn't expected to return a profit but it can be run as efficiently as possible.
.
Groundworks have started. They start building next year.
It's happening. This is Colin's pet project, the one he'll be remembered for. He'll sell his own wife to ensure it gets built.
That and Elizabeth Quay.
- Banned
- #1,144
Or as I prefer to call it the "Riverside Drive blockade debacle"
- Banned
- #1,145
Funny, by the time it's finished he wont be in office.
Labor will have sold off the name and take credit for expanding it to 70k
which they would say should have been done in the first place.
As long as McGowan is the opposition leader the Libs will win the next election.
spudmaster
Brownlow Medallist
To help teams combat Sandilands
- Banned
- #1,148
Not everybody is an arts fan.
Not everybody is in hospital.
Not everybody is a driver.
Not everybody is a user of public transport
Not everybody is a user of public education.
However with well over a million people projected to use Perth stadium that shows worth.
- Banned
- #1,149
I agree they should.
Perth stadium will have big games of AFL, WAFL, IR, RU, rl, soccer and events so it will be one of the best returning stadiums built.
How is Perth Oval supposed to make a return with crowds approaching 10k?
How is the indoor stadium supposed to make a return with such a high build cost and low capacity?
The WACA doesn't have to make a return because it was gifted to them.
Subiaco makes a return mainly because of the low land lease.
If they did a deal with the WAFC then they could sell off Subiaco as a contribution.
The AFL is making a contribution unlike any other sporting code at any other stadium.
If the WACA had been involved then that would have been a major benefit.
In the end Packer has been gifted multi-million potential and contributing nil.
In other states common sense prevails with cricket and football co-operating.
One of the worst stadiums must be ANZ. It was widely praised for it's design and costing for the Olympics, but as a regular stadium it's quite useless in attracting crowds because so liitle of the ground has good viewing. Possibly if they'd spent more on the stadium build then they'd have a stadium that could function like the MCG.
You believe the WAFC own Subi ...
Perth stadium will have big games of AFL, WAFL, IR, RU, rl, soccer and events so it will be one of the best returning stadiums built.
A wink as good as a nod to a blind man.
