Discussion in 'NRL' started by insert.pause, May 8, 2015.
That's a $10k car park. That's a long bow, even for Paddo.
Good stuff! Cant wait to see it full of Cowboys fans. Should get them back towards the 20k they enjoyed early days.
Just Canberra now and that's the non Sydney teams sorted.
I'd say most would be Waratahs fans. But a fair few are Roosters fans.
Looked about 1/2 full for the roosters v Broncos final.
To be fair, most of the people who have the gold membership have it for the cricket, with the AFL a distant second.
Most of them see the SFS as a bonus.
True, which is why I think a reduced capacity SFS could work.
It would be a very rare event where all members turn up. Perhaps a wallabies test or ANZAC day?
35k would be a great number.
Wallabies tests, and when the Waratahs are having a strong season. But yeah, league is the last sport for the bulk of gold members I'd say.
Even when the Waratahs are having a strong season 35k would be enough.
I actually think Aleague would be down lower than NRL for members.
Is the logic for a reduced capacity SFS just to save coin in the upgrade?
Well it is tax payers money, if a 35k stadium is adequate for need then saving the taxpayer $100mill is enough in itself surely?
Maybe the idea by them is to create an aami park like stadium? Maybe its for the vibe of the place?
Saves money is an advantage but it helps grow crowds for club matches. Better atmosphere & more people are likely to come.
So whilst you might lose 10k people a few times a year, you'll more than make up for it by growing crowds for smaller games. Even if a better atmosphere only grew crowds by 1-2k a game the overall aggregate for the year would be higher.
The current SFS is well liked for its atmosphere and the much larger Lang Park is even moreso.
I don't think a vaguely maybe better atmosphere by being smaller will grow crowds in itself, any growth would be due to a new stadium and improved transport links.
There was a post a few pages back that explained this well (post made by a Storm fan)
Basically the concept is when designing a stadium to set the capacity at a level where it would be 2/3 full, 2/3 of the time. This would provide the best atmosphere & likely also the best ROI. It's not the size of the stadium, it's the percentage of seats you can fill.
Look at it this way,
Would 20k people in a 35k seat stadium be a better atmosphere than 20k in a 45k stadium? Of course.
Now after attending that event, particularly if you're a newcomer, wouldn't you be more likely to return having enjoyed the atmosphere? The more you enjoy it, the more likely you are to return.
Obviously a new stadium is going to be the main driver of increased crowds, but you still need to find the sweet spot for size. 45k seems totally unnecessary to me. (And given the link I posted, some behind the scenes feel the same way)
But I like to think Roosters will average 30k by then. We'll be on our 12th premiership in a row by the time it gets built.
Going by the following article from the Sydney Morning Herald's website, it sounds like the NRL are putting up some fight regarding the ANZ Stadium re-build -
Interestingly @adamkungl, looks like it's your Roosters behind the push for the 35k seat stadium. Smart business on their part.
Gladys Berejiklian doesn't know what she's got herself into.
In one corner it's the NRL, Canterbury, Souths, Roosters & FFA
In the other it's SCG trust, minister Ayres & the AFL.
I wonder if Souths would consider going back to an upgraded SFS or will they always be out west now.
100% agree with the NRL on this one.
Renamed to suite;
Eastern Sydney Stadium 30k
Sydney Olympic Stadim 70k
Western Sydney Stadium 30k
Plus with all the improvements with public transport.
That is a no contest.
NRL/FFA have way more pull, without them the whole plan falls over.
AFL have very little say in the matter as per Gill.
Separate names with a comma.