Western Bulldogs and their partnership with Ballarat a success

[mackem]

I have been to every Ballarat game and except for the first game (when my wife came with me) I travel by V Line.

I have loved the country atmosphere at the game.

I have a n add on Ballarat membership. It only costs me an extra $77 with an excellent seat.

 

[LondonBulldog]

Our 9 game memberships are cheaper than 11 game memberships of similar clubs. We charge $210 for adult GA 9 games memberships and of course there are regular deals like the dirt cheap SEN one ($99) that the club makes available.

St Kilda, North and Melbourne charge $244-$250 for equivalent 11 game memberships. Given most people do not attend all 11, I think our offerings are fair in not providing replacement games and that the club does not have to pay for their admission at these away games.

Your really missing the point here. Pre-covid we got two replacements games, essentially an 11 game melbourne membership. I am ground level reserve seat. After covid my 9 game membership stayed the same price (actually small increase) yet I lost 2 away games. It was poor management by the club, after people like me still paying multiple reserve seat memberships knowing we couldn't go to any games during covid to then take 2 games away from us. Considering my reserve seat price stayed the same when I lost 2 games to ballarat years earlier. Other clubs still have replacement games such as Hawthorn which has 5 games. So unless our membership is $60 cheaper we are getting ripped off.
Now I love the club and will pay whatever, yet you should never treat fans with content, and they never published the fact that we would be losing our 2 away games, just slipped it in.

 

[Prince Imperial]

Your really missing the point here. Pre-covid we got two replacements games, essentially an 11 game melbourne membership. I am ground level reserve seat. After covid my 9 game membership stayed the same price (actually small increase) yet I lost 2 away games. It was poor management by the club, after people like me still paying multiple reserve seat memberships knowing we couldn't go to any games during covid to then take 2 games away from us. Considering my reserve seat price stayed the same when I lost 2 games to ballarat years earlier. Other clubs still have replacement games such as Hawthorn which has 5 games. So unless our membership is $60 cheaper we are getting ripped off.
Now I love the club and will pay whatever, yet you should never treat fans with content, and they never published the fact that we would be losing our 2 away games, just slipped it in.

I am also a Level 1 fixed reserved seat member.

I agree that the club should probably have been more upfront with fixed reserved seat holders. It removed the two replacement games for 2021 (when only cheaper flex seating was available due to Covid) and this continued when fixed reserved seating returned in 2022. They did send me and other Silver members an email in October 2020 explaining the changes for the following year and of their decision to remove the replacement games or Ballarat access using the cheaper flex seating prices as a justification. The cheaper flex options are still available.

I think though that the decision needs to be seen in the light that the club has likely kept prices increases below the rate of inflation over the last 5 or so years. I can't recall exactly what I was paying for my Silver Level 1 membership in 2019, but checking ABS data, CPI has increased 21% from the December quarter of 2018 to the December quarter of 2023 and I'd be pretty certain the price increases have been less than that. I may be wrong about this of course, so if anyone has a record of what they paid, I'd be happy to know and adjust my view if I'm wrong.

I think it's also reasonable to compare our prices with clubs in the same situation. North don't have the same equivalent of a Silver Level 1 (their only similar option includes social club and GF (lol) access) but the Saints do and they charge $527 for 11 game, reserved seat Level 1 memberships. Per game, this is a bit better value than our $460 for 9 but all businesses, including footy clubs, usually charge less per unit when more units of a product are bought.

Have your raised the issue with the club and if so, what was their response?

 

[LondonBulldog]

I am also a Level 1 fixed reserved seat member.

I agree that the club should probably have been more upfront with fixed reserved seat holders. It removed the two replacement games for 2021 (when only cheaper flex seating was available due to Covid) and this continued when fixed reserved seating returned in 2022. They did send me and other Silver members an email in October 2020 explaining the changes for the following year and of their decision to remove the replacement games or Ballarat access using the cheaper flex seating prices as a justification. The cheaper flex options are still available.

I think though that the decision needs to be seen in the light that the club has likely kept prices increases below the rate of inflation over the last 5 or so years. I can't recall exactly what I was paying for my Silver Level 1 membership in 2019, but checking ABS data, CPI has increased 21% from the December quarter of 2018 to the December quarter of 2023 and I'd be pretty certain the price increases have been less than that. I may be wrong about this of course, so if anyone has a record of what they paid, I'd be happy to know and adjust my view if I'm wrong.

I think it's also reasonable to compare our prices with clubs in the same situation. North don't have the same equivalent of a Silver Level 1 (their only similar option includes social club and GF (lol) access) but the Saints do and they charge $527 for 11 game, reserved seat Level 1 memberships. Per game, this is a bit better value than our $460 for 9 but all businesses, including footy clubs, usually charge less per unit when more units of a product are bought.

Have your raised the issue with the club and if so, what was their response?

Hi Prince, that's a good comparison with St. Kilda. I'm going to pay for our seats each year no matter what, so they have got me. I may have missed the email from the club, sometimes goes to junk folder.

I called the club when we lost the "two away" games as I think it was a mistake for a few reasons. 1. Having two away games encourages more bulldogs fans to games (I go most away anyhow). 2. Make it a marque game like Dees at the G round 1 or another Marvel tenant and we could sell out the place. These sorts of things are a positive for the club. So to me its a missed opportunity to create something special with a rival.

All I got from the guy on the phone was its 9 games and its always been 9 since Ballarat. Had to argue with him that it was not true. They are just AFL employee's those not specific to the bulldogs and generally don't know much.

Its the only way Hawthorn keep their crowd numbers up. Play the small clubs in Tassie, replacement games against the big clubs at the "G", inflates their crowd numbers. I would argue they are one of the lowest supporter bases in the AFL, yet they play the crowd numbers game.

 

[Prince Imperial]

Hi Prince, that's a good comparison with St. Kilda. I'm going to pay for our seats each year no matter what, so they have got me. I may have missed the email from the club, sometimes goes to junk folder.

I called the club when we lost the "two away" games as I think it was a mistake for a few reasons. 1. Having two away games encourages more bulldogs fans to games (I go most away anyhow). 2. Make it a marque game like Dees at the G round 1 or another Marvel tenant and we could sell out the place. These sorts of things are a positive for the club. So to me its a missed opportunity to create something special with a rival.

All I got from the guy on the phone was its 9 games and its always been 9 since Ballarat. Had to argue with him that it was not true. They are just AFL employee's those not specific to the bulldogs and generally don't know much.

Its the only way Hawthorn keep their crowd numbers up. Play the small clubs in Tassie, replacement games against the big clubs at the "G", inflates their crowd numbers. I would argue they are one of the lowest supporter bases in the AFL, yet they play the crowd numbers game.

Good post LB. I certainly appreciate that cost and value for members in your position who pay for multiple seats is a much greater concern than for people like me who just pay for one.

Your point about trying to create a marquee game against a rival club using a replacement game is a good one. I probably wouldn't select it to be Melbourne as their largely MCC members won't show up in big numbers at Marvel which is what we would want. I'd like us to get one home game at the MCG every year against a big club (which St Kilda are now getting) but I doubt the AFL will go for it.

Perhaps send your thoughts by email/letter to the CEO. By all reports, he does answer them.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Good post LB. I certainly appreciate that cost and value for members in your position who pay for multiple seats is a much greater concern than for people like me who just pay for one.

Your point about trying to create a marquee game against a rival club using a replacement game is a good one. I probably wouldn't select it to be Melbourne as their largely MCC members won't show up in big numbers at Marvel which is what we would want. I'd like us to get one home game at the MCG every year against a big club (which St Kilda are now getting) but I doubt the AFL will go for it.

Perhaps send your thoughts by email/letter to the CEO. By all reports, he does answer them.

The only way this will get some traction is by a mass number of members saying the same thing. He may need this to take to the AFL as a proposal.

 

[Roogal]

The Roos hitched their skirt to Hobart with all the dollars that were on offer which was understandable in their circumstances. However, having done so, they have no reason to gripe (which I've seen their supporters regularly do) that the State Government and the City of Ballarat sought an alternative partner.

The truth is that back in 2014 the Tasmanian Government weren't offering North Melbourne anything and assumed that North would continue playing in Tassie. That is until the re-development of Eureka Stadium came back into play during the 2014 Victorian State Election. At that stage North were still committed to Ballarat and its Reserves playing with North Ballarat FC in the VFL and had publicly expressed their desire and preference to play 3 senior H&A games per-season there if the Victorian government would sponsor the redevelopment of Eureka Stadium. At that time North were not prepared to re-commit to Tassie (pendinf a Vic Govt decision) and the Tasmanian government were getting very nervous about North Melbourne. North didn't finally commit to extending their contract in Hobart which was due to expire at the end of 2015 until the Victorian Government finally confirmed in early 2015 that they were sponsoring the Western Bulldogs to play in Ballarat. The Ballarat City Council didn't renew their $300,000 per-year sponsorship with North and that's when North Melbourne finally read the tea leaves that there was no future for them with Ballarat and they then committed to Hobart for four years at the time. So in truth it was forced upon them and not their preference. Let's keep the history behind this accurate.

 

[Bulldog in Kiev]

SA born and bred, I can honestly say growing up in the 80’s was a very lonely time to be a Bulldog over here. I honestly did not know of any back then!

Compare that now, there were 3 in Auskick with my son and always kids in dogs colours when their are groups of footy kids in a group. No doubt due to years of stability, marketable players and a premiership. But I guess it does highlight that kids can be swayed and the benefits of Ballarat may not be fully evident for another 10 or so years. I think it’s worth pursuing seeing Melbourne is such a saturated market for teams already.

 

[Roogal]

Okay folks .... Western Bulldogs supporters are the first to see these. Nothing like what I was expecting as previously said, but it seems to me to be more than 5000 extra seats. If they replace the lesser bright metal halide lights with LEDs and fill out the light towers with LEDs then it will easily become AFL standard. For my mind, a lot hinges on lighting improvement. I do like how they have worked the athletics track and new pavilions to compliment the existing stadium. The new stands definitely appear to be considerably higher than the existing stand and have more seating rows. Thoughts?

Double click on the images below to get the high resolution images:

 

[Freshwater]

Great to have more stands in the plans. I’m surprised it’s not a continuation from the larger existing stand around the southern goal end to block some wind. With all these stands slightly separated wind still gets in. I was always apprehensive that toilet block was built too close. Love to see things happening though, being in the building game for 35 years I’m less confident in modern design wisdom generally.

 

[Prince Imperial]

The truth is that back in 2014 the Tasmanian Government weren't offering North Melbourne anything and assumed that North would continue playing in Tassie. That is until the re-development of Eureka Stadium came back into play during the 2014 Victorian State Election. At that stage North were still committed to Ballarat and its Reserves playing with North Ballarat FC in the VFL and had publicly expressed their desire and preference to play 3 senior H&A games per-season there if the Victorian government would sponsor the redevelopment of Eureka Stadium. At that time North were not prepared to re-commit to Tassie (pendinf a Vic Govt decision) and the Tasmanian government were getting very nervous about North Melbourne. North didn't finally commit to extending their contract in Hobart which was due to expire at the end of 2015 until the Victorian Government finally confirmed in early 2015 that they were sponsoring the Western Bulldogs to play in Ballarat. The Ballarat City Council didn't renew their $300,000 per-year sponsorship with North and that's when North Melbourne finally read the tea leaves that there was no future for them with Ballarat and they then committed to Hobart for four years at the time. So in truth it was forced upon them and not their preference. Let's keep the history behind this accurate.

Actually, in August 2014, the Kangaroos finalised a deal to play three matches per year during 2015-2016 with the Hobart Council after the month before TT-Line had agreed to continue their sponsorship for two years.

Apple Isle payday brings a smile to Roos

New Hobart deal will earn North about $1.8 million over two years

www.afl.com.au

In April of that year, North's CEO Carl Dilena had said that the club hoped to achieve a long term deal at Blundstone. The AFL only wanted them to sign a two year deal so it would align with the end of Hawthorn's Tasmanian deal.

North Melbourne pushes for three games in Hobart

North Melbourne has confirmed it will push to play three home games in Hobart next year as the AFL appears to have drawn the battle lines over the future of home-and-away football in Tasmania.

www.theage.com.au

It was not until the end of October/start of November that the Dogs' partnership with the City of Ballarat and the then Labor Opposition was announced.

Dogs keen to play AFL games in Ballarat

AFL club Western Bulldogs want to make Ballarat its second home, with plans to play regular-season games there if Labor wins the upcoming state election.

www.sbs.com.au

It's hardly surprising that Ballarat and Labor approached the Dogs given this history and I very much doubt that North were completely blindsided.

FWIW, I think there's a fair chance that North will join us in Ballarat for two matches per year post Hobart given the upgrades planned for the stadium. This probably wouldn't include branding sponsorship or funding for community programs but might have an attractive payment from government attached and be good for all parties: the two clubs, Ballarat and taxpayers.

 

[Freshwater]

Also taking away the hill will change the atmosphere up there. Hope they build up behind goals higher?

 

[Prince Imperial]

I have mixed feelings about the location of the new stands. On one hand, wind will still be a big factor and seated spectators will be more looking into the sun (I expect we will only play day games there as its too cold and more difficult for day trippers from Melbourne at night). On the other hand, wing seating is much better for spectators and the club will be able to charge a more premium price.

On balance, I think it's the right spot.

 

[Roogal]

Actually, in August 2014, the Kangaroos finalised a deal to play three matches per year during 2015-2016 with the Hobart Council after the month before TT-Line had agreed to continue their sponsorship for two years.

Apple Isle payday brings a smile to Roos

New Hobart deal will earn North about $1.8 million over two years

www.afl.com.au

In April of that year, North's CEO Carl Dilena had said that the club hoped to achieve a long term deal at Blundstone. The AFL only wanted them to sign a two year deal so it would align with the end of Hawthorn's Tasmanian deal.

North Melbourne pushes for three games in Hobart

North Melbourne has confirmed it will push to play three home games in Hobart next year as the AFL appears to have drawn the battle lines over the future of home-and-away football in Tasmania.

www.theage.com.au

It was not until the end of October/start of November that the Dogs' partnership with the City of Ballarat and the then Labor Opposition was announced.

Dogs keen to play AFL games in Ballarat

AFL club Western Bulldogs want to make Ballarat its second home, with plans to play regular-season games there if Labor wins the upcoming state election.

www.sbs.com.au

It's hardly surprising that Ballarat and Labor approached the Dogs given this history and I very much doubt that North were completely blindsided.

FWIW, I think there's a fair chance that North will join us in Ballarat for two matches per year post Hobart given the upgrades planned for the stadium. This probably wouldn't include branding sponsorship or funding for community programs but might have an attractive payment from government attached and be good for all parties: the two clubs, Ballarat and taxpayers.

It's all cool, IMO North were blind sided. I remember the message sent out to members from the club at the time. They were blind-sided. The senior management of the club were livid. But it's all now history. I have always been supportive of the Bulldogs having a go at Ballarat and have never said anything to the contrary. I hope that the Bulldogs do build a long-term strong relationship with not only Ballarat but also the greater Western Victoria and ultimately a better relationship with the GWV Rebels.

 

[Roogal]

Also taking away the hill will change the atmosphere up there. Hope they build up behind goals higher?

Looking at the artwork, it seems like that will broadly be the plan. If you look closely at the bottom right corner of each drawing there is a disclaimer, "Based on early schematic designs, subject to change".

So we can expect some things in the final delivery to be different but ultimately more practical for spectators. I think that there is a lot to like with this although I am still concerned about lighting upgrades and the winds. These stands would not effectively block winds that plague the ground. It's not going to be a GMHBA Stadium but it definitely will become one of Victoria's leading stadiums after the big three ... the "G", Marvel and GMHBA.

 

[Prince Imperial]

So we can expect some things in the final delivery to be different but ultimately more practical for spectators. I think that there is a lot to like with this although I am still concerned about lighting upgrades and the winds. These stands would not effectively block winds that plague the ground.

Trying to think creatively, maybe large advertising hoarding behind the goals might be a cost effective and partial solution to those nasty winds coming from the west.

It could be similar to those used at many of the old VFL grounds and could be used as part of the ground's naming right sponsorship to help recoup construction costs.

 

[Roogal]

Trying to think creatively, maybe large advertising hoarding behind the goals might be a cost effective and partial solution to those nasty winds coming from the west.

It could be similar to those used at many of the old VFL grounds and could be used as part of the ground's naming right sponsorship to help recoup construction costs.

View attachment 1956694

Or even just a denser planting of trees around that end of the ground must help. At least they don't look like demolishing the old scoreboard. At least the old can bar will get a reprieve

One might hope that they give the Southern end similar treatment as they've given the Southern end of the VUWO. With a mixture of hard and grass standing areas. I do think that the lighting is also important because even if they don't schedule too many night fixtures, having a full lighting capability would certainly help to brighten the field and enhance viewing on heavily overcast days or when it rains.

It looks as if the concepts of the stands look like the final version, but for my mind the details will be in how they develop the Southern boundary, the pedestrian access zones, what amenities will be built under the new stands and any possible lighting improvements. If they get the details right, it could be really good.

 

[Sentinel]

It's all cool, IMO North were blind sided. I remember the message sent out to members from the club at the time. They were blind-sided. The senior management of the club were livid. But it's all now history. I have always been supportive of the Bulldogs having a go at Ballarat and have never said anything to the contrary. I hope that the Bulldogs do build a long-term strong relationship with not only Ballarat but also the greater Western Victoria and ultimately a better relationship with the GWV Rebels.

I don't know the full story and could be wrong, but it always appeared to me like North were hedging their bets with eggs in both the Ballarat and Hobart baskets, which ended up costing them Ballarat since the Bulldogs were happy to go all in. That's not to say North weren't blindsided with the announcement.

Whatever the reason, Ballarat is clearly the stronger long term option following the Tassie team announcement. I do wonder what North are planning to make up for the eventual loss of games down there which must be a significant financial hit for a club which probably can't afford to absorb one of that size. Is there room for 2 teams to play in Ballarat, or is it exclusively Bulldogs? If not, where do they go?

 

[Roogal]

I don't know the full story and could be wrong, but it always appeared to me like North were hedging their bets with eggs in both the Ballarat and Hobart baskets, which ended up costing them Ballarat since the Bulldogs were happy to go all in. That's not to say North weren't blindsided with the announcement.

Whatever the reason, Ballarat is clearly the stronger long term option following the Tassie team announcement. I do wonder what North are planning to make up for the eventual loss of games down there which must be a significant financial hit for a club which probably can't afford to absorb one of that size. Is there room for 2 teams to play in Ballarat, or is it exclusively Bulldogs? If not, where do they go?

What happens with North once Tassie gets up and running as a stand alone team is anybody's guess. A lot can change over the next four years. Time will reveal all. I'm reckoning that they might make a play for Bendigo in a similar way to Ballarat.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

Designs revealed for Mars Stadium upgrade

New renders have been revealed for the next stage of the Mars Stadium upgrade in Ballarat, with works set to continue despite the cancellation of the 2026 Commonwealth Games.

www.austadiums.com

 

[Pocket Terrace]

I go to Ballarat to stand on the outer, as do thousands of others.
Replace that wing with seating and I guarantee that each seat will be charged at a higher price than GA entry, meaning people will be better off buying the farcical 2-game Ballarat membership.
I won’t be one of them. I’ll just stop going.

 

[Roogal]

That sounds good, but I’d like to hear afterwards if it was successful.

You'll know if it was successful later this year if the same offer is on the table during round 24. It would be good if certain venues in the city offered all year round deals to members. That would be something.

 

[Roogal]

For Ballarat Bulldogs Members. You have an opportunity to learn more about the major works about to be undertaken at Mars Stadium and at the Showgrounds as well as give your inputs to officials from Development Victoria and the Council at two public drop-in sessions at the North Ballarat Sports Club (Eureka Stadium) on Wednesday, June 26, 6-7.30pm and Saturday, June 29, 11am-1pm.

This is an opportunity for interested persons and stakeholders to give input about public transport access, car parking and/or lighting if these issues are of particular concern. I'm reckoning that car parking and rail access will top the list. I've heard many in Ballarat express a view that a multi-level carpark ought to be sited close by. An article in the Ballarat Courier this afternoon indicated that more information about the development would be available than what has currently been released. I am going to try to go to see if there are more details.

 

[geoffjennings79]

View attachment 2029382

For Ballarat Bulldogs Members. You have an opportunity to learn more about the major works about to be undertaken at Mars Stadium and at the Showgrounds as well as give your inputs to officials from Development Victoria and the Council at two public drop-in sessions at Eureka Stadium on this Wednesday, June 26, 6-7.30pm and Saturday, June 29, 11am-1pm.

This is an opportunity to raise concerns that you may have about public transport access, car parking and/or lighting if these issues are of concern to you. An article in the Ballarat Courier this afternoon indicated that more information about the development would be available than what has currently been released.

I'm concerned they're going to paint everything else in the area white so Eureka/Mars stands out more when viewed from the moon... or, um, Mars?

Or is that a snowy day here, and Eureka/Mars has some sort of snow-repellant covering?

 

[Roogal]

This is the latest that I gleaned from the Development Victoria and Ballarat Council reps at Eureka Stadium on Wednesday. The first thing that I noticed is that they are not mucking about, demolition of the old showgrounds is well underway. They want the Athletics facility completely finished by April 2026.

I asked all of the questions that I thought that you folks would ask:

Q. Looking at the old Showgrounds, there are some heritage WW2 pavilions and huts that originated at the old Ballarat RAAF Base, is there any plan to preserve or relocate those?
A. We considered them and the general consensus was that they had no historical value. ... Yes, I nearly fell off my broomstick with discust!

Q. You have a small carpark planned adjacent to Howitt Street, is there any other plan to expand carparking in the vicinity of the stadium beyond that?
A. That is not within our scope in this stage of the development.

Q. The stadium's lighting I consider to be its Achilles Heal. I was here during that horror July 18 game where the lighting and supplementary lights were virtually ineffective. Is an upgrade to be included as part of this development?
A. That is not within our scope in this stage of the development. The Council are examining their options for this.

In July 2018 after the horror game against Port Adelaide when Ballarat's weather unleashed its best Winter blast, the media lambasted Ballarat and the Mayor Samantha McIntosh said at that time that "Lighting improvements will be part of any Council conditions for future stadium upgrades", so what happened? Wouldn't it be easier to relocate the existing light towers to the new athletics centre and install new higher output LED fitted light towers similar to those at Ikon Park and the VUWO for a piddling sum of $4 million? Crickets!!!!

You do realise that as long as the existing lighting situation remains that Ballarat will never get prime time free-to-air TV exposure, or have a shot at hosting BBL cricket in Summer like Launceston, Canberra, Cairns and even Albury currently do? It does seem to be almost anti "Development Victoria" doesn't it? An awkward laugh was the response.

Q. You are effectively removing a 4000-capacity standing hill and replacing with two stands of 5000 seating, does this mean that capacity will increase?
A. The Council think that 11,000 is a good number in consideration of prevailing parking and transport access limitations. My response - That probably makes sense given that the State Government have indicated that they are not interested in building a train platform or railway station in the vicinity this side of 2030. I noticed on the drive in tonight that the old MB Johns site is now being carved up and will soon be covered with small commercial and industrial businesses. That was perfect for development of sports fields and carparking, it seems like an opportunity lost.

Q. Okay, so what about the South-Western boundary between the existing video scoreboard and the South-Western standing hill. Is there a plan to increase standing elevated capacity in that part of the ground?
A. That part of the ground will be modified, including shifting the scoreboard around the boundary toward the goals and there will be elevated pathways constructed so there will be some increased elevated standing area in that zone. Our aim is to enhance total accessibility around the stadium. That there will be no stairs or ramps, just gradiented pathways. We will even modify the whole Gate 2 entrance to remove steps and the existing ramp

Q. Why did the designers create two stands and propose to place them where they have? Wouldn't it have been better to extend the existing main stand southward to block the southerly winds that have significant impact on the on field play?
A. The Ballarat Council insisted that they didn't want a big stand or a Kardinia Park clone, that they wanted the stadium to retain a regional vibe. So the two stands were made smaller and strategically positioned to frame the historic Selkirk Chimney from the main TV camera angle. ... You mean the expensive pay-to-view Kayo TV camera angle? ... A polite awkward laugh was the response.

Q. You are no doubt aware that the original architects (Peddle Thorp) future proofed the begezzus out of this stadium as part of the first stage design and build?
A. What do you mean? ... For instance, the existing stands were designed for expansion with minimal cost and effort. Look across at the Eastern Stand. The roof is designed to be removed easily and up to 20 rows added rearward to extend that stand's capacity by a further 2000. I can see how easy it would be to remove the existing roof and more or less create a new 3000 capacity stand that matches the design of two new stands that are about to be built. Eventually you would have three stands identical around the eastern boundary of the stadium comprising 8000 seats?

At this point, they realised that my husband and I knew a fair bit about the stadium's development and their answers became more on point

A. (The Ballarat Council representative looking at me surprised interjected to respond) You are exactly right! We did examine that as one of our first options for this stage but presently the boundary for the stadium's fence line along Creswick Road is too close to make those changes, but we are now seeking to extend the fence boundary out by several metres toward Creswick road to allow for the next stage of seating expansion to occur on the Eastern Stand as part of any future expansion works.

They did ask us at this point what our interest was in this, and I explained that I was an interested former North Ballarat Sports Club worker and we are both North Melbourne Tragics. The guy who I spoke to said "Quote ... North Melbourne could be playing two games a year on this ground along with the Bulldogs in the future". I responded ... "Not likely, the Western Bulldogs fought tooth and nail to get North Melbourne the Hell out of Ballarat in 2014 striking a deal with Dan Andrews. Yes, North had a fantastic relationship here with the Roosters and it supported both clubs wonderfully. North even built up a big support base here locally by 2014, but the Bulldogs have invested a lot of time and resources to establish their roots here in the community and to build a strong support base among the kids in the schools since 2015. They definitely would NOT welcome or want any other club sharing territory here ... Seriously, that isn't going to happen. I would consider Bendigo and the development of the Queen Elizabeth Oval as a serious alternative consideration for North Melbourne, but they need to get on the front foot now with that and not lob back into Victoria four years from now scratching their heads. If they want funding for that, they have to start now.

Q. You have allocated a generous recreational parkland on the Western side of the old Showgrounds, why not expand carparking there?
A. The Council indicated that they wanted that space reserved for future recreational use. They indicated that the area should be big enough to accommodate a future soccer pitch.

Q. These are going to be reasonably large stands by regional standards, how much bigger a higher will they each be relative to the existing Western Stand as a reference point?
A. The new stands will occupy a bigger footprint because the existing Western Stand currently seats 3200. The new stands will be a bit higher because they will have up to 30 rows of seating, but he seating pitch will be identical to the Western Stand. The roofline will be about 25 metres at their highest point relative to the oval, whereas the Western Stand is 17 metres above the boundary.

Q. How will the space underneath the new stands be used?
A. These areas will accommodate toilets, dedicated mother's rooms for baby changing and feeding etc. Additional change rooms and official areas for first aid, plus we will have under cover dedicated zones for food vans. ... That's fair enough, it would be a waste of resource to build dedicated kitchens and bars particularly when a lot of the charm of coming to a game here involves the range of food choices that come from the local food vans and the simple fact that the prices are cheaper and you can have a full-strength bevvy from a can. On a personal note, I am glad that you've kept the old scoreboard. Back in the day I served cans from the old "Can Bar"

Q. On a different subject ... The athletics facility. A blue athletics track?
A. We have decided that the track will be a unique blue to match the blue of the original Eureka Flag. We have worked closely with the Ballarat Athletics Association to deliver what we believe will be the very best facility outside a capital city in Australia. The new athletics complex will feature a very modern clubhouse with three rows of covered seating along its frontage and new light towers.

There was more general discussion after that over tea and scones, but it was of a more general nature. I hope that I have shed some light on this for you all. There are some plusses (increased seating with better elevated viewing and better amenities), but I also personally think ... Not enoug (capacity will only moderately increase by about 1000, carparking and lights remain as the two issues that hamstring the potential of this stadium), my feelings on this upgrade are mixed but overall still positive.