The Game Future NRL Stadiums part II

[Pommy]

Yeah as a Liverpool fan I understand the families point of view, but what is proposed is nothing like the old pens they had.

Would love for The Kop to be changed to safe standing.

I can’t as there’s an accident waiting to happen currently.
If I was in their position I would be determined to see nothing like that happened again.

 

[TheFrog]

One thing it is close to the action a plus.But when the overwhelming majority of people get soaked when it rains ,despite paying premium money, says something.

It's like the trains. The first air conditioned suburban trains in Sydney were introduced in the early '80s. Some made just prior to that were able to be retrofitted and that happened. Over time, the public came to expect trains to be air conditioned. Those built in the early-mid 70's are still running around, now 45 years old and having been used almost every day of it, the Government having decided to continue using them for the term of their natural life rather than bear the expense of replacing them.

That's what needs to happen with publicly owned stadiums as well. If they could make money, you could knock them down every 30 years and start again. They can do this in the US and even Melbourne, but Sydney is different. People don't attend sporting events, especially centralised ones, in nearly the numbers. Stadiums in Sydney lose money, and it is public money. If they made money, you'd have private developers lining up to build them (just like train carriages). You've got to have stadiums, but you've also got to get their full life span from them when they don't make money.

If the standard now is covered stadiums, that means the SCG and ANZ are next.

 

[unforgiven]

It's like the trains. The first air conditioned suburban trains in Sydney were introduced in the early '80s. Some made just prior to that were able to be retrofitted and that happened. Over time, the public came to expect trains to be air conditioned. Those built in the early-mid 70's are still running around, now 45 years old and having been used almost every day of it, the Government having decided to continue using them for the term of their natural life rather than bear the expense of replacing them.

That's what needs to happen with publicly owned stadiums as well. If they could make money, you could knock them down every 30 years and start again. They can do this in the US and even Melbourne, but Sydney is different. People don't attend sporting events, especially centralised ones, in nearly the numbers. Stadiums in Sydney lose money, and it is public money. If they made money, you'd have private developers lining up to build them (just like train carriages). You've got to have stadiums, but you've also got to get their full life span from them when they don't make money.

If the standard now is covered stadiums, that means the SCG and ANZ are next.

What privately owned trains do we have in NSW?

The fact the SFS does not meet compliance standards suggests it has reached the end of its lifespan.

 

[TheFrog]

What privately owned trains do we have in NSW?

They do exist but we're talking about suburban passenger trains here. I did not say they were privately owned although Governments of all colours would love to do it.

The fact the SFS does not meet compliance standards suggests it has reached the end of its lifespan.

But they played a final with 44,000 people and also had a concert after that assessment was made. It's not hard to get a report done that says whatever you want it to say.

 

[unforgiven]

They do exist but we're talking about suburban passenger trains here. I did not say they were privately owned although Governments of all colours would love to do it.

But they played a final with 44,000 people and also had a concert after that assessment was made. It's not hard to get a report done that says whatever you want it to say.

You said private developers were lining up to develop them, they are paid to build the carriages by the government just like lendlease will be paid to build the stadium. Your point makes little sense.

 

[dangerousdave]

What privately owned trains do we have in NSW?

The fact the SFS does not meet compliance standards suggests it has reached the end of its lifespan.

No doubt.

But is a knock down rebuild in the same location the best outcome?

 

[unforgiven]

No doubt.

But is a knock down rebuild in the same location the best outcome?

I believe so, I do think the $750m price tag is too high though.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Why was the Western side chosen for the corporates?

Because they’re the most premium seats I guess.

 

[taipan]

It's like the trains. The first air conditioned suburban trains in Sydney were introduced in the early '80s. Some made just prior to that were able to be retrofitted and that happened. Over time, the public came to expect trains to be air conditioned. Those built in the early-mid 70's are still running around, now 45 years old and having been used almost every day of it, the Government having decided to continue using them for the term of their natural life rather than bear the expense of replacing them.

That's what needs to happen with publicly owned stadiums as well. If they could make money, you could knock them down every 30 years and start again. They can do this in the US and even Melbourne, but Sydney is different. People don't attend sporting events, especially centralised ones, in nearly the numbers. Stadiums in Sydney lose money, and it is public money. If they made money, you'd have private developers lining up to build them (just like train carriages). You've got to have stadiums, but you've also got to get their full life span from them when they don't make money.

If the standard now is covered stadiums, that means the SCG and ANZ are next.

Comparing a train with a stadium ,sorry not quite.
What needs remembering ,is having stadiums that reflect the comfort, and needs of the 21st Century, plus the usage of at least 3 football codes, in addition female aspects of their respective games, in addition to concerts and shows that would use them ,is all intertwined and relative to the demand for such structures.Constant and regular throughput in these new stadiums makes it profitable for the Govt long term,re rent and visitors from out of town.As the new Perth stadium has shown.

I can assure you, if the Sharks had more seating under cover and better facilities,their crowds would be well up.And that may well apply to Penrith.

Having trains as an example,which are just a means , going from point A to point B,
which all have cover from the weather and are not entertainment venues, and as one train is a mere fraction costwise of a stadium, the comparison IMO is flawed.

I can assure as one who has travelled in un A/C trains, people wanted the damn things fixed sooner rather than stretching out of the years.

Sure they are infrastructure costs, but they do not cover a range or diversity of activities.

There are many reasons people do not attend the current Sydney stadiums.Scheduling plays a part, the stadiums themselves( the SFS is past its use by date and has safety issues), the facilities are not conducive for families to really get excited about.On that basis people argue why fight your way through Sydney's deplorable traffic, to spend time in stadiums that are either dated or not code friendly.

And as far as ANZ is concerned, it is not a rectangular stadium.It is better suited to the game they play near the Yarra River, the very reason the AFL threw in some loot to keep it in the Olympic configuration.
It has little cover for the weather, and little atmosphere unless its SOO and G/F.

Ask yourself why the WSW and Bledisloe cup crowds hate going there in numbers now?Watch the crowds when the Bankwest stadium is up and running.
If the State Govt had the gonads, and told the AFL to get knotted, the ANZ would revert to rectangular and more cover would be provided, we wouldn't find the need to refurbish it at such high cost now.And dare I suggest a kings ransom in the future if nothing is done.

If you want to get people off their backsides from Pay Tv or FTA to attend games in numbers, the stadiums need to be up to date ,to induce them to come.

The SCG is all seater has a lot of money spent, and gets crowds.If they had the lack of toilets the SFS has or lack of coverer. lack of decent food and drink facilities their crowds would be affected.Even though their game is better top watch live at the ground.

 

[beave]

Why was the Western side chosen for the corporates?

it’s the broadcast side and where the change rooms are. if you put all your corporate facilities there as well, the rest of the stadium can be now be pretty much simplified design wise thus saving on cost. the NQ stadium is doing it as well from the looks of the design pics.

 

[TheFrog]

Comparing a train with a stadium ,sorry not quite.

Why on Earth not? Both State taxpayer expenditures that lose money (everything else gets sold off). One has to keep going until its stuffed, the other gets replaced mid-life.

 

[TheFrog]

You said private developers were lining up to develop them, they are paid to build the carriages by the government just like lendlease will be paid to build the stadium. Your point makes little sense.

They buy train carriages from China and Korea these last 20 years or so. All the heavy engineering here is long gone. No-one makes a penny.

 

[Coparugby]

If the Parramatta Eels and the Parramatta Wanderers were so desperate to play in a better stadium they surely could have went ten minutes down the road to ANZ stadium.

Old parramatta stadium was better than ANZ.

 

[unforgiven]

Because they’re the most premium seats I guess.

Which is exactly what I was saying, as a Tigers season ticket holder of 20 years, why should I have to sit on the less desirable side of the ground to allow the corporates to have the better seats?

 

[unforgiven]

it’s the broadcast side and where the change rooms are. if you put all your corporate facilities there as well, the rest of the stadium can be now be pretty much simplified design wise thus saving on cost. the NQ stadium is doing it as well from the looks of the design pics.

I know exactly why they do it, doesn't mean that I have to agree with it.

 

[herbert henry1908]

It's like the trains. The first air conditioned suburban trains in Sydney were introduced in the early '80s. Some made just prior to that were able to be retrofitted and that happened. Over time, the public came to expect trains to be air conditioned. Those built in the early-mid 70's are still running around, now 45 years old and having been used almost every day of it, the Government having decided to continue using them for the term of their natural life rather than bear the expense of replacing them.

That's what needs to happen with publicly owned stadiums as well. If they could make money, you could knock them down every 30 years and start again. They can do this in the US and even Melbourne, but Sydney is different. People don't attend sporting events, especially centralised ones, in nearly the numbers. Stadiums in Sydney lose money, and it is public money. If they made money, you'd have private developers lining up to build them (just like train carriages). You've got to have stadiums, but you've also got to get their full life span from them when they don't make money.

If the standard now is covered stadiums, that means the SCG and ANZ are next.

The last of the S-set trains are being phased out now, because we’ve finally got the money to do so.

Few other points;

ANZ stadium is profitable, makes between 10-30m a year. Not enough to interest developers, but enough to pay back a lot of the rebuilding costs.

Stadiums in the USA are just as contentious, teams move city’s because of them, some city’s refuse to build them. In fact the stadiums there are often used less than the ones here. Particularly NFL stadiums.

You always seem to focus on a single issue for why the stadiums shouldn’t be done. The other day it was toilets, today it’s the roof. But as many of us have said, it’s all these things rolled into one.

Allianz stadium either needs rebuilding or a major refurbishment, rebuilding is the better value for money if it’s done right.

 

[unforgiven]

They buy train carriages from China and Korea these last 20 years or so. All the heavy engineering here is long gone. No-one makes a penny.

Wouldn't that be an argument for the stadiums as at least the jobs are going to locals?

 

[herbert henry1908]

Which is exactly what I was saying, as a Tigers season ticket holder of 20 years, why should I have to sit on the less desirable side of the ground to allow the corporates to have the better seats?

Because corporate support is more important to the club. You’re talking about a multi million dollar club these days, they need that corporate support. The stadium needs the money too.

Plus, and I think this is important, most games are at night now, so the eastern side is pretty much just as good.

 

[herbert henry1908]

I know exactly why they do it, doesn't mean that I have to agree with it.

There’s still some seats on the western side, isn’t there?

 

[beave]

I know exactly why they do it, doesn't mean that I have to agree with it.

you asked the question mate.