Soccer tying to bludge off the Australian Taxpayer again!

[RedV3x]

Where were you at when Optus Stadium was bult, with the stadium and environs costing 1.2 billion Where were you when Adelaide Oval was rebuilt at taxpayer expense for half a billion dollars .

Well, I was in the minority campaigning for the Perth Super stadium to built for half the cost (half the cost was infrastructure due to location.)
If you analyse the situation, which you're supposed to have some experience with then you'd realise that these were really good builds.
Basically you have large crowds every week at the stadium.
Compare this to the scattergun approach of NSW where they have tiny crowds playing at large stadiums.

AND the taxpayer will be pay the WAFC 11 million a year for the next 2 decades.

W.A. footy was happy financially to stay at Subiaco. The government built the stadium before arranging tenure.
W.A. footy does not have tenure of the new stadium like it did with Subiaco.

Where were you including paying off SACA's debt .

Again it was a government decision for cricket not footy.

handing management and the profits of the stadium over to the SANFL and WAFL for the next 40 years. The public gets almost no return on their money here.

Well I know for fact, that the new stadium has a management company and charge through the roof (it was a major stumbling block).
That arrangement sees the best mitigation of costs possible. Footy takes a huge loss compared to the situation before at Subiaco.
One wonders if other sports are charged the $500,000 per game rent that the AFL reportedly has to pay.
I doubt it, because that equates to a crowd of 30,000.

 

[RedV3x]

It is also built for Australian Football as well being the right shape!

Few people know that the SCG was offered to the NSWFL but they declined because of the excessive rent.

 

[RedV3x]

Contractually obligated to play at the SFS, and with the SFS gone that contract moved to the other property held by the SCG Trust....the SCG.

Come on, you know as well as I do that I was referring to the period when he SFS existed.
The NRL staged games at the SCG intertwined with Sydney Swans games.
You know very well that here are many other grounds that the NRL could use as a temporary replacement for the SCG.

Just because they played there didnt mean they liked it.

Oh come on, the players ? The spectators ? The NRL ?
The NSWRL held all their finals there before SFS and you didn't hear people complain.

 

[The_Wookie]

Come on, you know as well as I do that I was referring to the period when he SFS existed.
The NRL staged games at the SCG intertwined with Sydney Swans games.
You know very well that here are many other grounds that the NRL could use as a temporary replacement for the SCG.

You know very well, that it doesnt make these other grounds ideal from either an amenities or location standpoint.

Oh come on, the players ? The spectators ? The NRL ?

All of the above.

The NSWRL held all their finals there before SFS and you didn't hear people complain.

SFS was built in 1988. SCG was the only real major venue in town before that

 

[RedV3x]

You previously were dismissive of my references to the UNESCO 2003 Convention of Protecting "Intangible Cultural Property"( ie I said AF should be afforded similar respect & protections)- why?

Do you believe that Australian Culture:-
. is important?
. should be celebrated, & encouraged?
. should be protected, & favoured, by the policies of Local, State, & Federal govts. & their policies, including their spending priorities?
(Particularly if elements of Australian culture can be defined, or accorded the status of, of Australia's "Intangible Cultural Property").

I liked the rest of your post but this brings about new conversation.

Most people simply do not know the importance of Australian Football and where it fits in history.
The people of the Australian colonies were the richest in the world due to the wealth of the land.
This wealth was the catalyst of many social and working reforms one of which was the freeing of Saturday afternoon as a work day.
The advent of this new leisure time led to formation of modern football.
For the first time in history football was played by community clubs in regular competition to produce a premier.
Because this colonial game was so immediately popular, grounds were enclosed and entrance fees charged.
This economic benefit of Australian Football has driven Australian sport ever since underwriting the construction of large stadia.
It has been a perfect fit with Olympic stadiums and Commonwealth Games stadiums being used and not left to be white elephants.
The history of each state league and their clubs is fascinating and one that should have more exposure.

 

[RedV3x]

You know very well, that it doesnt make these other grounds ideal from either an amenities or location standpoint.

Is there an ideal stadium ? I think not. There is always a range in viewing and everything thing is a compromise.
The SFS was a simply stupid decision from all standpoints.
It was found ultimately too small for Grand Finals and it was too close to the SCG.
The SCG trust could have done what it ultimately did and developed the SCG - a lot cheaper option.

It's all about compromise and rl fans don't seem to want to compromise on cost, size, location, design and especially shape.

 

[The_Wookie]

Is there an ideal stadium ? I think not. There is always a range in viewing and everything thing is a compromise.
The SFS was a simply stupid decision from all standpoints.
It was found ultimately too small for Grand Finals and it was too close to the SCG.
The SCG trust could have done what it ultimately did and developed the SCG - a lot cheaper option.

It's all about compromise and rl fans don't seem to want to compromise on cost, size, location, design and especially shape.

Nor should they have to.

Stadiums and sporting events are all about the fan experience. Especially these days. Again, I point to Bankwest Stadium.

 

[RedV3x]

[QUOTE="The_Wookie, post: 69629461, member: 102372"Stadiums and sporting events are all about the fan experience.[/QUOTE]

Well , "fan experience" is now an important part of the overall package, the overall compromise and the cost/benefit/demand scenario.

So you have this W.S. stadium. OK.
Then this should make other stadiums redundant for rectangular codes does it not.
Wouldn't it have been better to have one big stadium in the W.S. that delivers to all codes ?
To me, it smacks of arrogance - give the W.S. a little stadium just to shut those westies up.
One of the great disappointments with Sydney is that Paramatta became just another suburb of Sydney.

 

[The_Wookie]

[QUOTE="The_Wookie, post: 69629461, member: 102372"Stadiums and sporting events are all about the fan experience.

Well , "fan experience" is now an important part of the overall package, the overall compromise and the cost/benefit/demand scenario.[/quote]

its certainly part of your scenario. despite governments rarely if, ever requiring a stadium turn a profit for it. If the fans dont like the experience, they dont go. See ANZ Stadium. Spectators of rectangular sports overwhelming prefer rectangular stadiums. Playing on an oval is not a preference they make willingly.

So you have this W.S. stadium. OK.
Then this should make other stadiums redundant for rectangular codes does it not.

Not in sydney. Any more than having the MCG made every other oval stadium redundant in Victoria. theres 12 professional sporting teams in Sydney that use a rectangular field - just mens teams.

Wouldn't it have been better to have one big stadium in the W.S. that delivers to all codes ?

Financially, maybe. Aesthetically, no. Where we you at when the showgrounds was upgraded...literally next door to an existing oval stadium.

To me, it smacks of arrogance - give the W.S. a little stadium just to shut those westies up.

Well that and the fact that its a hugely populated area.

 

[Rob]

I sort of understand what RedV3x is saying, even if I'm not sure that I entirely agree with it.

Sydney is a fickle sports city. 20k is a big crowd there, and outside of the rare special events, they don't need a stadium that holds more than about 30k. But they need one for the rare special events. But really, a 70k capacity rectangular venue is, in the main, a big white elephant. It'll host the grand final, an origin game, a bledisloe cup game and maybe 1 or 2 NRL finals and the very occasional Socceroos game that will push even half the capacity. Making it multipurpose to host AFL and cricket will increase the potential of hosting big crowds. The MCG works not because any tenant is capable of drawing full houses regularly - far from it - but because it hosts regular footy that at least half fills it. Any big Sydney stadium will not have the same economics.

But the reality is that there's a political element here that's not measurable in dollar terms. Optus Stadium is like that, although granted it gets greater than 50% capacity far more often than a large Sydney stadium.

 

[RedV3x]

Sydney is a fickle sports city. 20k is a big crowd there, and outside of the rare special events, they don't need a stadium that holds more than about 30k. But they need one for the rare special events. But really, a 70k capacity rectangular venue is, in the main, a big white elephant. It'll host the grand final, an origin game, a bledisloe cup game and maybe 1 or 2 NRL finals and the very occasional Socceroos game that will push even half the capacity. Making it multipurpose to host AFL and cricket will increase the potential of hosting big crowds. The MCG works not because any tenant is capable of drawing full houses regularly - far from it - but because it hosts regular footy that at least half fills it. Any big Sydney stadium will not have the same economics.

The MCG has cricket over summer. I don't think soccer over summer provides the same return.

But the reality is that there's a political element here that's not measurable in dollar terms. Optus Stadium is like that, although granted it gets greater than 50% capacity far more often than a large Sydney stadium.

Perth Stadium works because Perth has a population 0f 2 million split between two AFL teams and can host cricket over summer etc.
A large rectangular Sydney stadium doesn't work because you have a population of 5 million split between 9 inconveniently separated NRL teams and RU.

 

[RedV3x]

See ANZ Stadium. Spectators of rectangular sports overwhelming prefer rectangular stadiums.

Are you saying NRL fans like or dislike ANZ stadium because it has shyte crowds in rectangular configuration.

Any more than having the MCG made every other oval stadium redundant in Victoria.

Err, The MCG (and Docklands) has made every other Melbourne stadium redundant for staging AFL games. Isn't that so woookie.

Financially, maybe. Aesthetically, no.

I think you mean viewing experience again, because Aesthetically, oval stadiums look "complete".

Where we you at when the showgrounds was upgraded...literally next door to an existing oval stadium.

Yes. Stupid, but we all know why they developed the showgrounds, at the cost of $30 million only, because somebody wanted ANZ for themselves.

 

[The_Wookie]

Are you saying NRL fans like or dislike ANZ stadium because it has sh*te crowds in rectangular configuration.

Thatd be true if it had been in proper rectangle configuration. It hasnt been since it was modifed for AFL work in 2001. And regardless, nrl fans hate the place.

Err, The MCG (and Docklands) has made every other Melbourne stadium redundant for staging AFL games. Isn't that so woookie.

Which is why Governments are spending a hundred million on punt road, ikon park, victoria park, casey fields, moorabin and others for AFLW matches. I mean these can go to the G and Docklands too right? Taxpayer bucks and all

I think you mean viewing experience again, because Aesthetically, oval stadiums look "complete".

Not if you're a fan of rectangular sport. The ****ing playing surface is half empty.

Yes. Stupid, but we all know why they developed the showgrounds, at the cost of $30 million only, because somebody wanted ANZ for themselves.

try $65m with $12m from the AFL. The Swans didnt leave until 2016 either.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[RedV3x]

nrl fans hate the place.

There is just no pleasing NRL fans. They make ANZ rectangular and hate the place.
I guess that is because of all the vacant stands.

Which is why Governments are spending a hundred million on punt road, ikon park, victoria park, casey fields, moorabin and others for AFLW matches.

Fact -the AFL get by with two major stadiums in Melbourne for game days.
The AFLW is a completely new organisation ad they are upgrading existing stadiums to suit the demand.
Pretty poor of you woookie to try and use AFLW as an argument.
Don't you believe women's sport needs their own infrastructure especially when it's the world premier women's football sport.
Look at the crowd for the grand final and finals.

Not if you're a fan of rectangular sport. The ******* playing surface is half empty.

Not to mention the stands. Are we still talking about ANZ stadium ?

try $65m with $12m from the AFL. The Swans didnt leave until 2016 either.

You on dig the hole deeper for yourself. $65 million is a PITTANCE to spend on a premier sporting arena.
The Swans were contracted to play at the ANZ. Even though they got some big crowds there Swans fans generally hated the place.
The ANZ stadium when built was lauded for it's design but in fact it was the opposite.
It was simply a "cheap" build with little thought to it's use afterwards with distant seating.
I have no idea why people want to keep it in it's rectangular configuration.

 

[The_Wookie]

There is just no pleasing NRL fans. They make ANZ rectangular and hate the place.
I guess that is because of all the vacant stands.

I guess its because its a crap stadium.

Fact -the AFL get by with two major stadiums in Melbourne for game days.

For AFL matches.

The AFLW is a completely new organisation ad they are upgrading existing stadiums to suit the demand.

But they can, have and do fit into regular and pre-existing oval stadiums.

Pretty poor of you woookie to try and use AFLW as an argument.

Its laughable that you didnt consider this in yours.

Don't you believe women's sport needs their own infrastructure especially when it's the world premier women's football sport.
Look at the crowd for the grand final and finals.

Hang on, i thought this was all about the best fit for the taxpayer?

Not to mention the stands. Are we still talking about ANZ stadium ?

lol

You on dig the hole deeper for yourself. $65 million is a PITTANCE to spend on a premier sporting arena.

Its still twice what you said it was. How the hell did i make that hole deeper.

The Swans were contracted to play at the ANZ. Even though they got some big crowds there Swans fans generally hated the place.

Under your argument this should have been good enough for the Giants too.

The ANZ stadium when built was lauded for it's design but in fact it was the opposite.
It was simply a "cheap" build with little thought to it's use afterwards with distant seating.

You understand this makes some of my case for me here.

I have no idea why people want to keep it in it's rectangular configuration.

You see to have little idea what people who follow rectangular sports actually want anyway.

 

[RedV3x]

I guess its because its a crap stadium.

And now it's a crap rectangular stadium. Who is responsible for that ?

For AFL matches..

Yes, Melbourne get away two AFL game day stadiums. Perth and Adelaide share between two clubs.
Why cannot the NRL share ?

But they can, have and do fit into regular and pre-existing oval stadiums.

Why, because it's a women's sport ? That's exactly the attitude that women are trying to overcome.

Hang on, i thought this was all about the best fit for the taxpayer?

Women are slightly more than 50% of the Australian taxpayers. Are you that sexist as well ?

lol

You got that right. NRL crowds at ANZ are absolutely LOL.

How the hell did i make that hole deeper.L

You confirmed the pittance spent on AFL stadiums in Sydney. There is no argument now.

Under your argument this should have been good enough for the Giants too.

Give the man a cigar. I thought it was ridiculous at the time.Trying hard to come up with a sensible reason is the fact that the "moveable" stand wasn't that moveable and Sydney didn't want to gift the Giants total use of ANZ.

You understand this makes some of my case for me here.

Nah. Just another unneeded rectangular stadium.

You see to have little idea what people who follow rectangular sports actually want anyway.

Oh, I understand completely what rectangular sports fans want - they want everything for nothing and are not willing to compromise or recognise that their attendances don't justify the taxpayer spend.
Why doesn't Sydney build a state-of-the-art stadium like Perth - because Sydney doesn't do anything without federal aid,
The rectangular sports just don't contribute.

 

[The_Wookie]

And now it's a crap rectangular stadium. Who is responsible for that ?

That would be the NSW Gov.

Yes, Melbourne get away two AFL game day stadiums. Perth and Adelaide share between two clubs.
Why cannot the NRL share ?

Um they do? And why should they have to?

Why, because it's a women's sport ? That's exactly the attitude that women are trying to overcome.

This is nothing to do with stadium viability or the value for the taxpayer though. Womens sport can be played on exactly the same fields mens are. How the hell you fail to see the irony in this argument is ****ing beyond me.

Women are slightly more than 50% of the Australian taxpayers. Are you that sexist as well ?

spare me the melodramatic attempts at gotcha. Your "taxpayer" argument falls over here.

But lets say you are right/ Did we really need government funding for 6 different local venues in Melbourne for AFLW - if the men are playing off two? Why is the taxpayer argument youy put forward earlier only valid for mens sport? Surely taxation is asexual.

You got that right. NRL crowds at ANZ are absolutely LOL.

And theres a reason for that.

You confirmed the pittance spent on AFL stadiums in Sydney. There is no argument now.

Really didnt. but hey you be you.

Give the man a cigar. I thought it was ridiculous at the time.Trying hard to come up with a sensible reason is the fact that the "moveable" stand wasn't that moveable and Sydney didn't want to gift the Giants total use of ANZ.

Its as moveable as the one at Docklands...that no one wants to move either.

Nah. Just another unneeded rectangular stadium.

Who cares

Oh, I understand completely what rectangular sports fans want - they want everything for nothing and are not willing to compromise or recognise that their attendances don't justify the taxpayer spend.

You dont understand anything here.

Why doesn't Sydney build a state-of-the-art stadium like Perth

You mean like Bankwest?

- because Sydney doesn't do anything without federal aid,

Sure. I mean i bet thats true.

The rectangular sports just don't contribute.

And its never been required of them to. Governments do things to their own ends. And that doesnt necessarily include requiring their stadiums to be profitable as long as they believe the ancillary benefits to be there.

 

[RedV3x]

That would be the NSW Gov..

Yes, pandering to NRL.

Um they do? And why should they have to?

You sound like a petulant child. Why should I have to share. I want, I want I want....

This is nothing to do with stadium viability or the value for the taxpayer though. Womens sport can be played on exactly the same fields mens are. .

Of course this has nothing to do with stadium viability it's to do with lack of facilities full stop.
AFL teams share two major stadiums as that is the best economic arrangement w.r.t. large attendances.
Having AFL teams play at AFL stadiums allows the AFLW to play at AFL training grounds
and has led to their rejuvenation and the least cost to taxpayers..

Did we really need government funding for 6 different local venues in Melbourne for AFLW - if the men are playing off two? .

AFL teams share two major stadiums as that is the best economic arrangement w.r.t. large attendances.
Having AFL teams play at AFL stadiums allows the AFLW to play at AFL training grounds.
Cheaper and more sensible to upgrade VFL grounds that fell into disrepair because of the two AFL stadium policy in Melbourne.

And theres a reason for that..

Yes, NRL attendances don't warrant a large stadium.

Really didnt.

Oh, come on woookie, $65 million for a sports stadium is considered a pittance.

Its as moveable as the one at Docklands...that no one wants to move either.

As I understand it, Dockland only moves the first few rows forward similar to Perth Stadium but Perth simply builds the seating insitu.
As I understand it ANZ stadium moves the whole section forward. You can see it clearly with the disrupted lines.
Because of this ANZ needs concrete tracks to run on and these pose a safety problem especially with a quick turn around.

.Who cares

You dont understand anything here.

You mean like Bankwest?

Sure. I mean i bet thats true.

And its never been required of them to. Governments do things to their own ends. And that doesnt necessarily include requiring their stadiums to be profitable as long as they believe the ancillary benefits to be there.

.Who cares

Obviously NRL fans don't - they think the government is a money pit.

You don't understand anything here.

I understand that NRL fans want the world but cannot justify it.

You mean like Bankwest?.

No, but it is a good stadium. Maybe they should hold the G.F. there - much better experience eh.

Sure. I mean i bet thats true.

Can you table and stadia contributions by NRL or soccer ?

its never been required of them to. Governments do things to their own ends.

Spoken like the true petulant child. I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want.

that doesnt necessarily include requiring their stadiums to be profitable as long as they believe the ancillary benefits to be there.

Stadiums in Australia , the big ones anyway, have never been meant to run at a profit,
but they have always been meant to be cost effective as possible.
The value in large AFL stadiums can be seen in that various state leagues built their own stadiums.
Subiaco Oval ran at a profit.

 

[The_Wookie]

Yes, pandering to NRL.

Well pandering to the IOC anyway. It was built for the Olympics and then modified for the AFL.

You sound like a petulant child. Why should I have to share. I want, I want I want....

Heres the fun thing. Its not about what you or I want.

Of course this has nothing to do with stadium viability it's to do with lack of facilities full stop.

That doesnt prevent them from playing matches at major stadiums per your taxpayer benefits.

AFL teams share two major stadiums as that is the best economic arrangement w.r.t. large attendances.

AFL teams share stadiums because the Government in the 80s declined to fund necessary upgrades and the AFL willfully moved teams away.

Having AFL teams play at AFL stadiums allows the AFLW to play at AFL training grounds
and has led to their rejuvenation and the least cost to taxpayers..

You know how much has been spent on Victorian training grounds in the last 20 years? Lol. Taxpayer benefits though.

Yes, NRL attendances don't warrant a large stadium.

Origin and Finals do. And the stadiums are used for concerts and other things too.

Oh, come on woookie, $65 million for a sports stadium is considered a pittance.

Sure whatever you say,

Obviously NRL fans don't - they think the government is a money pit.

Thats because it is.

I understand that NRL fans want the world but cannot justify it.

Well they certainly cant live up to your lofty standards.

No, but it is a good stadium. Maybe they should hold the G.F. there - much better experience eh.

Sure and we can hold the AFL grand final at GMBHA

Can you table and stadia contributions by NRL or soccer ?

****ing yawn.

Spoken like the true petulant child. I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want.

Spare me. In this case its the NSW Government happily throwing money around, and the NRL being opportunistic. Why the hell wouldnt they

[QUOTE
Stadiums in Australia , the big ones anyway, have never been meant to run at a profit,
but they have always been meant to be cost effective as possible.[/quote]

sure.

The value in large AFL stadiums can be seen in that various state leagues built their own stadiums.

In the 70s. Two leagues did - the SANFL and VFL. Neither of those stadiums exist now, and only one major league owned stadium now exists, and even then they had to rent to own the thing for 16 years, during which time the stadium operators continually lost money.

Subiaco Oval ran at a profit.

Subiaco Oval was never owned by the WAFC and they needed help to pay their construction loans from the WA Government several times. The WAFC paid a peppercorn rent on a 99 year lease.

 

[RedV3x]

Well pandering to the IOC anyway. It was built for the Olympics and then modified for the AFL.

Are you suggesting they built a large moveable section just for the Olympics ? I don't think so.

Heres the fun thing. Its not about what you or I want.

I don't see waste and misuse of public money as funny.

That doesnt prevent them from playing matches at major stadiums per your taxpayer benefits.

What a ridiculous statement It took a lot of scheduling effort to manufacture a stand-alone AFLW G.F.
It would be impractical to schedule AFLW matches at AFL venues during the AFL season.
You don't seem to appreciate the sheer volume of new players and clubs created in the wake of AFLW.
The taxpayers are getting the best bang for buck in AFL states.

AFL teams share stadiums because the Government in the 80s declined to fund necessary

What a ridiculous answer.
State leagues had there own grounds and shared them to make the most of the facility.
Governments had to coax them back with sharing with cricket, because they saw that as the most sensible option.

Origin and Finals do.

You mean Origin and the G.F.

And the stadiums are used for concerts and other things too.

Can, but it's not optimum is it. A bit like watching a rectangular sport at an oval.

Sure whatever you say,

Come on wookie, you know $65 million is a chicken feed spend for an elite sporting stadium.

Thats because it is.

To think that it's acceptable to waste huge amounts of money is deplorable.

Sure and we can hold the AFL grand final at GMBHA

Another childish response. The MCG has the fan experience so why move to a smaller stadium?
You say the ANZ suffers in the fan experience so why not move the NRL G.F. it o your darling Bankwest stadium ?

******* yawn.

No, you cannot table and stadia contributions by NRL or soccer ?[/QUOTE]

 

[Freomaniac]

One of the great lies that does the rounds on soccer forums is that the government gifted the AFL Docklands...just when they were about to gift it to soccer!

really? lol

 

[weewilly]

really? lol

The only thing the Kennett govt "gifted" the AFL was the unused land!
The Stadium was built by investors who a had a BOOT agreement with the AFL not the Victoria government!

 

[NoobPie]

really? lol

Are you contesting that people say that?

 

[Freomaniac]

Are you contesting that people say that?

I want to put this on record..... I am not a representative of that Australian four four two forum