The stadium operators are taking the piss if they think they can raise the rent x3 for what the Wanderers paid previously. I guess it becomes a big white elephant then. 

3x seems steep. But in return, how much more corporate revenue can they earn in the new stadium? Did Parra even have corporate boxes, besides that glass enclosure on the wing that looked like an 80s hotel swimming pool?

Looks like the seating maps for the World Cup, where media get a fair whack and the FIFA boys junket get the rest of the good seats, and the fans emptying their accounts to support their team get the scraps.

Or Levi's Stadium in the San Fransico Bay Area, or Otkritie Arena in Moscow, but at least they have a healthy row of regular seats in front.

One positive. All mexican wave attempts will fail on the first go.

I'll hold my judgement until I see it. My biggest concern though is how it looks at the stadium and how it affects the acoustics. If there is basically a whole side of the stadium where you can't really see supporters nor hear cheers coming from them, I imagine the atmosphere on the day might be severely diminished. I hope not, but that's my concern.

Does that mean the best view in the Stadium is from a Dining room ?

Not sure which side the cameras would be placed but if shooting from the media/corporate side the TV view wont be compromised. Is it on the east or west side of the stadium?

I would guess that whether its 30k all around or 26k on 3 sides and 4k on one side wouldn't make much difference to the sound, might even bounce the noise around more off the hard surfaces of the media/corp side. 

Not sure which side is East but the Eastern Stand is the camera facing end. The RBB end was North, so if they stick with that, then the corporates are out of sight.

Also, that glass enclosure was the takeaway shop, not a corporate box. There were ~20 corporate boxes at the old stadium or thereabouts.

I agree and my concern is not about television but those attending the stadium. That was the purpose of building a new one after all - not for TV but for live audiences. Anyway, we'll have to wait and see.

Keeps the Prawn Sanga wankers away from the real fans

The new stadium does have a lower seating bowl, so it's more comparable to Subiaco (even if it's an oval)

If this becomes a big enough issue the bulldozers may not be coming 

There would be hell to pay from the tenant clubs if they chose not to go through with it now. Waratahs for example make a tonne of money from selling Boxes and Premium seats to rich corporates who live near at the SFS and if this doesn't go through, they've pretty much thrown away a whole season in match day revenue for nothing. They aren't going to get squat from games played in West Sydney, Brookvale or the SCG.

The NRL is also going to make noise again about moving the Grand Final interstate if Homebush especially gets nothing.


Regardless I don't really give a shit as ANZ should have always been the priority as the National stadium and the SCG trust (and their backers) should have been told to do one. 

Fairly sure contracts would already be signed if demolition is in January. There would be a lot of enabling works currently going on to make sure the SCG and other surrounding facilities can still function during demolition. Key services like power and water need to be rerouted. Not sure that can be planned and actioned in 3 weeks.

They don't have approval for the demolition yet so I'd be surprised if they have signed contracts.

National stadium of what? There is no true national stadium in this country. The closest thing to one in historical context is likely the MCG really.

What a mess this stadium plan has been. So much indecision. One would hope they could get their act together, but as always things like this become more about politics, especially when an election is on the horizon.

Not in a traditional sense but whenever we have a big game on these shores, it is nearly always played at Homebush. MCG is only the national stadium of cricket and ever since Homebush was built, nearly all off Footballs biggest events have been played there.

 Uruguay 05, Iraq 13, Asian Cup final, Honduras 17 and obviously the Olympic Football final. I guarantee you that FIFA will insist on playing the WWC final in 23 there instead of the MCG.

 Same goes for Union's as all of their big ticket items like the 2003 Rugby World Cup Final, the deciding Lions Tour test and the Bledisloe Cup went straight to Homebush.

Only because its the largest "rectangular" stadium in the country by some margin. 

Sure, although I think the suits have a bit of a hard on for playing big games in Sydney to appeal to corporates and latch onto the international brand Sydney has. 

If another city wanted to build a big rectangular stadium as well then I'd be all for killing Homebush's monopoly on these events. I just don't want the MCG (or any other oval) to be seen as a suitable venue anymore (although I'd maybe make an exception if we played Iran in a WCQ again).

The dominance of the AFL rules out the need for a larger rectuangular stadium in Melbourne. It’s just not viable to have a larger venue for us and rugby here, as AAMI Park suits the needs of 80-90% of events, with the remainder taken to the larger oval venues when required.

The corporate dollar is just as large here, but it tends to be directed towards other sports. Just the reality.

Let’s be honest though, as a national stadium, it’s still likely the MCG as Cricket is considered to be a national sport, as much as I despise that sport. Our code is unfortunately largely an also-ran, with only sporadic attention at World Cup time.

New Western Sydney Stadium to be commercially named as Bankwest Stadium.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/a-sneak-peek-at-the-new-home-of-the-parramatta-eels-20181205-p50kga.html

This line from here would have to be a big disappointment for SFC fans, was one of the big selling points.

But initial plans to give the 46,000-seat venue two “modes” — where the top tier could be covered over with an electronic screen to create a sense of intimacy for regular games — were quietly dropped by the NSW Government on grounds of cost.

Was wondering about the Safe Standing, great to see, but only for 1,000 ?

Pathetic. Now they are just building a modern copy of the SFS for no good reason.

Cant say I didnt expect. This gets more and more of a pathetic waste of money

By the state election, a quarter of the roof of Allianz Stadium will already be gone

About a quarter of the roof of the Sydney Football Stadium at Moore Park will have been removed by the state election and demolition will have started on the eastern side of the stands, according to the man responsible for tearing it down.

In a briefing to members of the SCG Trust last Thursday, David Riches, the Infrastructure NSW bureaucrat in charge of building a $729 million facility to replace the football stadium, also known as Allianz, said he expected planning approval for demolition “within the next two or three weeks".

“Almost immediately” after obtaining that planning approval, Mr Riches said, the government would be able to sign a demolition contract. Contractors are expected to take over the stadium from January 2.

The state of the SFS at the time of the March election has emerged as a significant issue, after Labor Leader Michael Daley warned the government not to sign an imminent demolition contract.

Mr Daley has said if Allianz Stadium was demolished before March, an elected Labor government would not rebuild it.

Mr Riches told SCG members that the demolition process would run for 12 months.

“Demolition itself, given it is a noisy, dusty activity will not commence until after the Sydney cricket Test match, 8th or 9th of January,” Mr Riches said.

"I would expect by the end of March maybe 20 to 25 per cent of the steel roof will be gone and demolition of the stands at the eastern side will have commenced," he said.

Much of the questioning at the briefing, audio of which was provided to the Herald, focused on what would happen if Labor, which opposes the new stadium, was elected.

“If we are in a position where we are asked by the government of the day to terminate the contract we have executed, normal contractual provisions will prevail,” Mr Riches said.

“We will be under instruction of the government of the day.”

Mr Daley has also warned the SCG Trust not to sign a demolition contract.

Addressing members at last week’s briefing, the chairman of the SCG Trust, Tony Shepherd, said his organisation would not be signing the contract – Infrastructure NSW would – but that he would sit down with any possible new government to assess its options.

“It will be up to them to make that decision based on the state of demolition at that time,” Mr Shepherd said.

Asked whether, should Labor win the election, one result would be for a smaller and cheaper stadium to be built on the site, Mr Shepherd said: “That’s quite possible … but again I’m not clairvoyant.”

Mr Daley has suggested the SCG Trust could pay for a stadium by itself, either through its own borrowings or a concessional loan from the government.

“Lots of luck,” said Mr Shepherd of the idea that the trust, which had an annual surplus of about $2 million, could fund a replacement stadium.

“I doubt we could borrow – even with the most generous banker in the world - $729 million and pay it back at $2 million a year.”

Mr Shepherd said he would meet with Mr Daley and “repeat to him we are a not-for-profit organisation and we do not have the financial means to service a debt that size, let alone to repay it.”

In his briefing with members, Mr Shepherd provided a fierce defence of the SCG Trust’s actions in advocating for a new stadium. He said the trust, in mid-2016, commissioned safety audits into the state of the 30-year-old stadium.

Those reports showed it had multiple safety deficiencies. "Despite what some fools in the media may say, we take that seriously, and we will always," he said.

The Sports Minister, Stuart Ayres, has said the state government took its stadium policy to the 2015 election – despite the policy at the time little resembling what it is now.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/state-election-allianz-stadium-sfs-demolition-20181205-p50kch.html

SFS demolition and construction contract with Lendlease signed. Labor's bluff called.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/planning-approval-clears-path-for-demolition-of-allianz-stadium-20181207-p50ku2.html

The old Liberal trick of signing the contract before the election then blaming Labor if it goes wrong.

After that it will become a Labor trick who will pay a further $1.3 billion not to built it as they did in Victoria as man example.