One home ground

[gallagher]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

We doubled it in one year. Unless there was dodgy counting going on....

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership and game attendance then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small boutique club.

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

We doubled it in one year. Unless there was dodgy counting going on....

We have never doubled our crowd average in one year?

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.

What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.

 

[happy_tiger]

All nonsense talk unless this footy sides starts performing

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.

That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

 

[gallagher]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

We doubled it in one year. Unless there was dodgy counting going on....

We have never doubled our crowd average in one year?

2 years. 9k in 2015 to 18k in 2017.

https://leagueunlimited.com/news/31031-2018-nrl-club-membership-tracker/

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

We doubled it in one year. Unless there was dodgy counting going on....

We have never doubled our crowd average in one year?

2 years. 9k in 2015 to 18k in 2017.

https://leagueunlimited.com/news/31031-2018-nrl-club-membership-tracker/

I said crowd average not memberships, to be honest how many people sign up for non ticketed membership, while beneficial to the club is irrelevant to a new stadium thread. Our crowd average grew by 2k during that same period.

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

We doubled it in one year. Unless there was dodgy counting going on....

We have never doubled our crowd average in one year?

2 years. 9k in 2015 to 18k in 2017.

https://leagueunlimited.com/news/31031-2018-nrl-club-membership-tracker/

I said crowd average not memberships, to be honest how many people sign up for non ticketed membership, while beneficial to the club is irrelevant to a new stadium thread. Our crowd average grew by 2k during that same period.

That's because LO & CSS are well below standard. You will never grow attendance or membership whilst these grounds are in the mix.

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

We doubled it in one year. Unless there was dodgy counting going on....

We have never doubled our crowd average in one year?

2 years. 9k in 2015 to 18k in 2017.

https://leagueunlimited.com/news/31031-2018-nrl-club-membership-tracker/

I said crowd average not memberships, to be honest how many people sign up for non ticketed membership, while beneficial to the club is irrelevant to a new stadium thread. Our crowd average grew by 2k during that same period.

That's because LO & CSS are well below standard. You will never grow attendance or membership whilst these grounds are in the mix.

Fair point we average 22k at ANZ, so we are now playing in a half full stadium at the SFS. In saying that we only averaged 18k when played at the SFS previously and it was one of the best viewing stadiums in the world. So maybe distance from our traditional areas was an issue?

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed as attendance grows.

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.

You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

 

[cochise]

Yep, one home ground indeed. Make it Perth and end all this parochial, blinkered, self-serving rubbish that fills these posts.

lol