- Banned
- #1,151
Do I? WTF do I say that?
Glad you agree.
One thing you can bank on is Col getting things efficient and cost effective.
-
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
Do I? WTF do I say that?
Glad you agree.
One thing you can bank on is Col getting things efficient and cost effective.
Here is one of your claims amongst many
If they did a deal with the WAFC then they could sell off Subiaco as a contribution.
So who is they in cosworld, that could sell off Subi.
Whilst you are at, what is this:
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.
- Banned
- #1,153
Now as a devout Australian Footrball fan and a West Australian you would remember when the ANZ as owner of the old markets site proposed a land swap for Subiaco so they could sell off Subiaco as residential and a new stadium could be built on the old market site. Remember that ? Technically a land swap but basically the same thing.
Now, the government could/could have easily done a similar deal with Subiaco Oval or the WACA. Now as a devout Australian Footrball fan and a West Australian you would well know that neither the WAFC or the WACA own their land but have long term leases on their land. It is their land untill the expiry of their leases.
The WACA has 999 year lease so they have virtual freehold of their land. The WACA has actually "sold" off some of it's land for a development to finance cricket and the WACA. The WAFC could enter into an agreement an relinquish control of Subiaco Oval in return for some measure of control of the new stadium. The government could then do with Subiaco Oval as it thought fit. (In fact in can do that by legislation without regard to anyone). This is what happened with VFL Park. the Vic government and the AFL entered into an arrangment to cease using VFL Park in return for winter control of the MCG.
Dear lackofquality of explained this so many times. It's not rocket science. In a simple usage comparison the new Perth Stadium will have well over a million visitors just to watch AFL alone. That is fantasically good for a 60k stadium. The MCG and Docklands have better usage, the new AO will have about the same overall. Then the other cricket grounds have only half the number of AFL games. Then you have rectangular grounds that aren't used for cricket, aren't used that often and have low crowd drawing events. If you need further explanation I'll pm you because I think everyone else has got the picture.
- Banned
- #1,154
Now as a devout Australian Footrball fan and a West Australian you would remember when the ANZ as owner of the old markets site proposed a land swap for Subiaco so they could sell off Subiaco as residential and a new stadium could be built on the old market site. Remember that ? Technically a land swap but basically the same thing.
Now, the government could/could have easily done a similar deal with Subiaco Oval or the WACA. Now as a devout Australian Footrball fan and a West Australian you would well know that neither the WAFC or the WACA own their land but have long term leases on their land. It is their land untill the expiry of their leases.
The WACA has 999 year lease so they have virtual freehold of their land. The WACA has actually "sold" off some of it's land for a development to finance cricket and the WACA. The WAFC could enter into an agreement an relinquish control of Subiaco Oval in return for some measure of control of the new stadium. The government could then do with Subiaco Oval as it thought fit. (In fact in can do that by legislation without regard to anyone). This is what happened with VFL Park. the Vic government and the AFL entered into an arrangment to cease using VFL Park in return for winter control of the MCG.
OK. I'll pm you.
So you do think the WAFC can sell Subi?
Not sure what the WACA has to do with the discussion but ...
Not sure what the WACA has to do with the discussion but ...
- Banned
- #1,156
As to not clog up this board with repeated explanations to the same person I've pm'd you OK.
gazzathegreat
Club Legend
- Jul 14, 2013
- 1,055
- 1,097
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Banned
- #1,158
youre not clogging up this thread are you? hrmmm. Say "nothing could be further from the truth" again.
i dont think the new stadium will average 55,000 per game for West Coast. We got less than 30k in the last game of the season this year. A slightly wet night with no chance of playing finals saw the fair weathers drop off, with no sign of the 10k waiting list looking to snap up the seats.
- Banned
- #1,159
A lot of other people have a differing opinion based on a season not one game.
- Banned
- #1,160
What test ? I've been watching football finals.
& you want the new stadium to stage WAFL games: what sort of crowd went to Claremont today?
Bacon Warrior
D10
Quite healthy actually. About 4,000 at that dung heap Claremont Oval.
- Banned
- #1,163
Claremont was confortably full today.
I stated that the WAFL GF would probably use then new stadium since the WAFL GF is staged at Subiaco.
- Jul 9, 2010
- 24,163
- 26,548
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
What's the status of Subiaco? In fact, there never is one. I don't know it and every time I ask it's just something vague. If the Eagles indeed end up going to Lathlain Park, which has more than enough room for carparks and full AFL facilities, then I think Subiaco will probably be sold off. Prime land.
But I'd prefer to see it maintained as a Vic Park, or to an uglier extent Western Oval, space. Keep the oval there for public use. Then fill in the parkland either side, y'know, where the gazebo and skate park are eastwards and where the cars park toward the city. Some can encroach on the boundary, which is the situation at Waverley Park now, and you could fill out the wings with embankments or a rejig of the stands.
Play WAFL Grand Finals and have the WAFC or Eagles permanently there. It'd still be a shrine to the old days as well. Because as shit and archaic as the place is, it's seen a lot of Western Australian football history. Plus the Subi yuppies would like walking their dogs around there, much like the Abbotsford, Clifton Hill, and Collingwood residents like going for a run at Vic Park.
- Banned
- #1,165
The simple answer is - in limbo.
At present the oval and some infrastructure will be maintained, but IMO there is little that would stand alone as a feasable structure or would not look ridiculously unbalanced.
The WAFL GF would probably be at the new stadium, deffinitely not Subiaco.
The are Eagles are moving to Lathlain with an injection of $50 million but I don't know how much goes towards upgrading spectator facilities if at all.
- Banned
- #1,166
Yes it is you poor excuse for a waste of time.
Stop being utterly rediculous.
Subiaco can be entered into any number of financial arrangements by the stakeholders.
Bacon Warrior
D10
You two are ridiculous. Can't you just agree to disagree?
p.57 of the 2012 WAFC Annual Report - make up your own mind
http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafc/annual-reports
- Banned
- #1,169
WTF exactly is your point that you are trying to make?
I and just about anybody with any knowledge of WA football knows the WAFC leases Subiaco.
Didn't you know that?
PM me your exact problem and I'l put you out of your misery in the mean time your clogging up the board with rubbish that concerns nobody except you.
Couldn't the two of you do something more constructive like set your routers on fire?
- Banned
- #1,171
Quite simply.
Subiaco Stadium can be sold and thus contribnute to the new Perth Stadium.
There have been numerous articles to this effect.
The WACA could have chosen to come on board as well.
I see now that the WACA is considering doing a deal whereby football will use WACA amenities and the WACA will contribute something towards the new stadium and play test matches there.
NOW, if you know of any impediment as to the sale of Subiaco Stadium so it can be sold and thus contribnute to the new Perth Stadium - state it - or forever hold your piece.
The City of Subi owns the place, the good ratepayers of Subi.
http://www.yoursubi.com.au/subiaco-oval-subiaco/
They put people in gaol for selling things they dont own BUT thats in the real world not cosworld. Does cosworld run to a gaol or is it simply jail?
The only way around that is if the WA Govt legislates to take the real estate of Subi.
Maybe the new stadium could do a deal with the ratepayers giving them free seating & a hot dog.
http://www.yoursubi.com.au/subiaco-oval-subiaco/
They put people in gaol for selling things they dont own BUT thats in the real world not cosworld. Does cosworld run to a gaol or is it simply jail?
The only way around that is if the WA Govt legislates to take the real estate of Subi.
Maybe the new stadium could do a deal with the ratepayers giving them free seating & a hot dog.
- Banned
- #1,173
And the WAFC has a longterm lease.
The government is building a new stadium at Burswood.
FFS, tell us something we don't kow.
Where is the conflict with my previous statements. WHERE ????????????????????????
- Jun 18, 2010
- 4,140
- 5,595
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- FFC Quay Club
There will be 650 seats in two restaurants at the stadium. How did they arrive at the ratio of 1.08% of the capacity?
Etihad Stadium has 4040 restaurant seats, so a ratio of 7.34%... plus its various bars.
Why are they so confident that the stadium should have such a bizarrely low figure that is totally out of kilter with the capacity and the likely demand?
Etihad Stadium has 4040 restaurant seats, so a ratio of 7.34%... plus its various bars.
Why are they so confident that the stadium should have such a bizarrely low figure that is totally out of kilter with the capacity and the likely demand?
- Banned
- #1,175
Are talking restaurants or restaurants?
Anyway, I would have thought that including as much business within the stadium would faciliate the best returns considering there is little competition atm.
