Balls in air on stadium future

In May 2007, when the Major Stadia Taskforce chaired by John Langoulant released its report on proposed new sports facilities, it recommended that venues should be governed by a body independent of the sports that might also be hiring it.

That was an explicit rejection of the West Australian Football Commission’s position that it should retain control of governance and management of the new major stadium for at least the remaining term of its lease over the existing facility at Subiaco, which it has until 2090.

That would have been a major blow to football in this state. 

The bulk of WAFC’s financial strength comes from the long-term lease it holds over what is called Patersons Stadium, with about $14 million in direct earnings thanks to rent, advertising, food and beverage rights and naming rights.

While many of the Langoulant recommendations have been jettisoned by Premier Colin Barnett’s government, which came into power in 2008, management of the facility remains up in the air.

Given that Mr Barnett’s planned stadium is far more orientated to football than the taskforce’s recommendation of a true multi-sport venue, hope remains at the WAFC and others in the code that the sport can control this important asset.

However, the new location at Burswood is well removed from the Kitchener Park site, which the taskforce proposed. 

That park in Subiaco adjoins the current stadium and is part of an 8-hectare parcel of land controlled by WAFC since 1991.

WA minister for sport Terry Waldon said the management of the stadium was a detail that would be determined further down the track.

“There are lots of different models,” Mr Waldron said.

“We’ll work with football and other sports to make sure it is the right model.

“It is taxpayers’ money and we want to make sure it is managed in the best interests of the state.”

Many in football believe that, as the primary user of the facility, the sport should control the venue and allow any surpluses generated to flow to the code’s grassroots. 

They also point to the fact the WAFC has decades of experience in such management.

But there are also some who acknowledge that the building of the stadium – at a cost stated by the government to be $700 million – is a big undertaking by the state, which carries enormous risks.

The loss of the contract would be a big blow to the WAFC. However, it has almost 80 years left to run on a lease over the existing Subiaco Oval and adjoining land, part of which has the potential to form a major inner-city property development.

In the interim, the stadium needs significant upkeep. Over the few years until Burswood is completed, Subiaco will require big expenditure to keep it at an operational standard for big football games and ensure the state has a fall back in case the new stadium is delayed.

While the WAFC is pitching for the right to manage the new stadium it acknowledges there are some longer-term challenges that come with such a new facility.

The Burwood facility is being built on the basis of pent-up demand for AFL club memberships and the belief that more people in the future will want to attend a game to spectate. 

But fickle audiences, increasingly consuming sport from their lounge rooms, may not deliver the numbers needed. Who knows how many will attend a game in 2030? 

One of the shorter-term dangers for the clubs is that a new, large stadium may end the shortage in the supply of seats that has created demand for memberships for the West Coast Eagles and Fremantle Dockers. 

If you can easily walk up and buy a ticket the incentive to buy a season’s membership is reduced.

Under such circumstances on-field performance becomes an even more important ingredient in generating crowds, both for atmosphere and revenue, which puts cyclical pressure on the clubs’ financial models given the AFL is structured to stop clubs being consistently dominant.

“How do we move to 60,000 and make sure we fill it?” one club official said.

“With 18 teams in the league you will have your turn at the bottom.”

One high level source suggested that Fremantle, the smaller of the two WA AFL clubs, was especially wary of a 60,000-seat stadium and would have preferred a venue with 50,000 capacity for that reason.

Another business challenge comes with location.

Neighbouring Crown plans a $568 million development of a new 500-room luxury hotel at the Burswood Entertainment Complex and will be aimed, in part, at encouraging sports audiences to attend its facilities, a sensible commercial preference that might put it in conflict with the desire of some in football to have more entertainment and parking at the venue itself.

Already some in football have shown concern about plans to have very limited car parking, reducing the ability for clubs to offer premium packages to corporate customers who like to drive.