daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas

Stadiums and Sport Arenas » Completed | Under Construction | Proposed | Demolished



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old June 16th, 2008, 02:51 PM   #321
www.sercan.de
Galatasaray SK
 
www.sercan.de's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 27,950
Likes (Received): 2718

PSV should expand our built a new one
50-60k would be good
__________________
International titles of Galatasaray SK
UEFA Europa League (1): 2000
UEFA Super Cup (1): 2000

ULEB Eurocup (1): 2016

FIBA EuroLeague Women (1): 2014
FIBA EuroCup Women (1): 2009

IWBF Champions Cup (5): 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2014
IWBF André Vergauwen Cup (1): 2017
IWBF Intercontinental Cup (4): 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012

EJU Golden League (1): 2014
www.sercan.de no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old June 16th, 2008, 03:01 PM   #322
EPA001
Registered User
 
EPA001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rotterdam metropolitan area
Posts: 28,733
Likes (Received): 5605

For now they are thinking about expanding from 35.700 tot about 43.000. This of course for a possible WC-2018 in Belgium and The Netherlands. That is the best they can do on that location. There are no plans yet to build a new one. PSV is actually very happy being where they are since 1913 or so.

Of course they will monitor what will happen in Amsterdam when the ArenA is expanded for Ajax to about 70.000+. And they will monitor which progress Feyenoord will make whe they build their 80.000+ - 106.000 seats stadium. That one should be finished at the latest in 2016! If both these clubs grow commercially way beyond PSV, that might change their minds. But a new stadium would not be built before 2020 or so.

And it has something special to be almost in the middle of the city. It is comparable to many English grounds. Being situated on the outskirts of the city has advantages, but also some disadvantages. And I would not know where there could be a possible site free to develop as a new stadium around Eindhoven.

The railway connection is very important, so that limits the options severely. Now they have a perfect railway connection. Since 10 years or so they even have their own dedicated trainstation which is only used when concerts or games are held in the stadium.

The first stadium in the Netherlands to have its own dedicated train station was and is the present De Kuip of Feyenoord. I think the station is as old as the stadium, so it exists since 1937! Talk about being an advanced design!!!
__________________
.
"Atheism is more than just the knowledge that Gods do not exist, and that religion is either a mistake or a fraud. Atheism is an attitude, a frame of mind that looks at the world objectively, fearlessly, always trying to understand all things as a part of nature" - Carl Sagan
EPA001 está en línea ahora  
Old June 16th, 2008, 03:14 PM   #323
Quintana
Registered Abuser
 
Quintana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 美好的码头
Posts: 4,316
Likes (Received): 1158

It is almost impossible for PSV to expand beyond the 42,000-45,000 mark. I think the best option is indeed building a new one. However, this is not likely to happen for a number of reasons:

- The club has been playing at the place where the Philips Stadion stands since they were founded in 1913 (and their unofficial predecessor Philips Elftal since its foundation in 1911). The club therefore prefers to pay millions for a few thousand extra seats than to build a new stadium for a few millions more.

- The stadium is located in down town Eindhoven and if they were to build a new stadium they would most likely have to move to the outskirts of town.

- The last expansion of the stadium (which added about 6,500 seats) costed € 95 million. This almost bankrupted the club and they have to pay about 5 million a year in mortgage costs until 2017. Obviously, the club is not likely to do anything huge until they paid of this mortgage. If they fail to qualify for the Champions League once they would be in deep shit.
Quintana no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2008, 08:01 PM   #324
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by EPA001 View Post
So they are planning ahead and that is wise. They also want to prevent scenario's like Old Trafford, Emirates, the Veltins Arena Auf Schalke or the Allianz Arena which are sold out every week. Because these clubs all build too small. I think Schalke and Bayern could easily have an 80.000+ crowd every week. As could Borussia Dortmund if they were at the top of the Bundesliga again. As could Manchester United if they could expand Old Trafford to 90.000+. I think they would still sell out every week. And Arsenal could also fill a 70.000+ Emirates in my opinion. So better safe than sorry is the credo of the current management. A wise decision in my opinion!
Sometimes more profit doesn't equate to the best profit margin. Both Arsenal and Bayern chose their capacities very carefully to avoid the very scenario you painted elsewhere in your post, wherein a team averages X for regular matches but then sells out for the big games. The modern business practice for any upper echelon club is to secure sell-outs (or very, very near) for EVERY game, thus driving up the price of tickets and ensuring the most efficient mix of revenue versus costs. Their current models may not provide the most return, but they likely provide the best value of returns on their money spent.

Feyenoord may be able to sell-out for the big games, but if those tickets are not part of a season-ticket package their cost is far lower than what they could be. Plus the value of the other tickets would be much, much lower as well because everyone would know thy could be had on a moment's notice, even gameday. Further, from the business standpoint, it's far easier for the club to work with a near-certain budget rather than hoping for Y number of sell-outs to balance the books. Bottom line: Sell-outs have a multiplier effect on the value of match-day revenue and I'm guessing most clubs would choose a right-sized stadium over one built for just big games. That's why Juventus is planning for a new stadium in the 40k's, why Bayern didn't build 90k and so on...

Bayern and Arsenal (and many others) could sell 100k for easy for big matches, but it's not worth it to manage that size facility for such purposes. Hiring part time employees to handle concessions can be a legal hassle and often be impractical. And in the event of a downturn that sees fewer and fewer sell-outs the maintenance of the facility isn't worth the costs. Then there's the atmosphere thing, wherein most people I know would prefer to play in front of a packed house of 50k than to play in front of 65k in a 80k seat stadium.

I agree that there's a practicality to planning for future expansion (and multiple press articles suggest Arsenal are planning for such now), but sometimes building bigger isn't the right approach. Especially if it's just an issue of pride that in reality is just hubris.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."

Last edited by GunnerJacket; June 16th, 2008 at 08:06 PM.
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2008, 08:55 PM   #325
EPA001
Registered User
 
EPA001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rotterdam metropolitan area
Posts: 28,733
Likes (Received): 5605

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnerJacket View Post
That's why Juventus is planning for a new stadium in the 40k's, why Bayern didn't build 90k and so on...

Bayern and Arsenal (and many others) could sell 100k for easy for big matches, but it's not worth it to manage that size facility for such purposes. Hiring part time employees to handle concessions can be a legal hassle and often be impractical. And in the event of a downturn that sees fewer and fewer sell-outs the maintenance of the facility isn't worth the costs. Then there's the atmosphere thing, wherein most people I know would prefer to play in front of a packed house of 50k than to play in front of 65k in a 80k seat stadium.
Well I do not know about Arsenal and their beautiful Emirates stadium (which is one of the examples for the new Feyenoord Stadium btw), but in Munich the situation was different.

Bayern München wanted an 80.000 seater, but co-owner of the Allianz Arena, 1860 München (now playing in the second Bundesliga) feared what you described; playing in a stadium with a bad atmosphere. So they compromised on 66.000 seats.

But 1860 got into trouble and sold their part of the ownership of the stadium to Bayern München. And Bayern are now sorry that they did not pushed harder for the 80.000 seater. Maybe the fact that the old Olympiastadion was also not always sold out, kept them back from pushing for this harder.

Another club that build too small is of course Schalke '04. Every match is always sold out at 62.000 or so. They could easily fill it up to 80.000+ every week also.

But regarding empty seats; if you arrange the seating and coordinate the ticket sales smart, you can make sure that the lower tiers are filled up first. In that way the atmosphere does not really need to suffer from having tickets unsold. And you can cover up the upper tiers with curtains or something like that which could even enhance the look and feel of the stadium from the pitch. That way you have the capacity available that you sometimes(?) need, but can take away parts of the downside when playing in the stadium when it is not sold out.

But for Feyenoord the hugely expanded business facilities in the new stadium will generate significantly more money than the normal tickets which are not very expensive imho. Right now, for € 200,- you have a season ticket for a covered seat. It might be more expensive in the UK, I am not aware of the ticket prices there. But the new Business facilities will enable Feyenoord to grow her income substantially! The added seats for the other fans are a big bonus!
__________________
.
"Atheism is more than just the knowledge that Gods do not exist, and that religion is either a mistake or a fraud. Atheism is an attitude, a frame of mind that looks at the world objectively, fearlessly, always trying to understand all things as a part of nature" - Carl Sagan
EPA001 está en línea ahora  
Old June 16th, 2008, 10:46 PM   #326
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by EPA001 View Post
Well I do not know about Arsenal and their beautiful Emirates stadium (which is one of the examples for the new Feyenoord Stadium btw),
Having not actually been there (I'm in the States) it appears from most accounts Emirates has it's drawbacks. Much of this is due to the, IMO, stupid commitment to the highest of FIFA's requirements for safety and advertising areas around the pitch. That vast wasteland between the goal and the endline seating is abysmal and appears unnecessary. I also wish the lowest tier featured a steeper angle (though it'd mean fewer seats) and less of a cantilever, and at least one end devoid of suites and such (a true kop, as it were). On the whole though it's a superb application for the given site, I simply wish it had even more of a traditionally tight space for the audience.

Quote:
but in Munich the situation was different.

Bayern München wanted an 80.000 seater, but co-owner of the Allianz Arena, 1860 München (now playing in the second Bundesliga) feared what you described; playing in a stadium with a bad atmosphere. So they compromised on 66.000 seats.

But 1860 got into trouble and sold their part of the ownership of the stadium to Bayern München. And Bayern are now sorry that they did not pushed harder for the 80.000 seater. Maybe the fact that the old Olympiastadion was also not always sold out, kept them back from pushing for this harder.
IIRC, part of Bayern's push was a move to dissolve the stadium partnership with 1860 and didn't reflect as many suites. Part of the early concepts even were based on simple renovations of their existing ground. Once the costs of new construction were fully realized, as well as the prevailing impact of new suites and new ticket prices, Bayern were content with something less than the original figures of 78k that I remember. Especially considering that in the years leading up to the construction of Allianz, Bayern were averaging some 51k in attendance for a facility slightly larger than they have now. The club have since come to appreciate their new position that, while it doesn't put them at the top of the Bundesliga attendance charts, it does show them having attendance at 99.9% capacity for all matches, with higher ticket prices to boot. Ticket prices BECAUSE demand outweighs capacity. That level of profit margin allowed them to spend big last off-season despite missing out on the CL.

Last points:
- Bayern's Bundesliga avg. is 69k, the capacity allowed when they can use the standing room configuration.
- That same policy in Germany is what enables Dortmund's high figures and is what Bayern was considering in their original options. So while they sacrificed on the total it was only by about 9k of the cheapest seating available.
- I agree the design does not lend itself to easy expansion and that the club may be regretting that. But the design is also now a trademark image associated with the Bayern brand that has arguably increased their publicity and appeal. Sometimes better doesn't require being bigger.

Quote:
But regarding empty seats; if you arrange the seating and coordinate the ticket sales smart, you can make sure that the lower tiers are filled up first. In that way the atmosphere does not really need to suffer from having tickets unsold.
True, but it impacts the price you can charge for those seats. If you're not putting a cap on capacity and simply filling lower bowls first, that still doesn't compel the consumer to pay a premium or buy season's tickets because they'll know there will always be seats available except on rare occasions. And if you do put an artificial cap on capacity (Like 1860 and some MLS clubs) your both advocating the value of sell-outs (the principal I'm espousing) and/or still not likely to get the same value per ticket for a right-sized facility, because the fan will recognize the scheme. 1860 may not be as bad off seeing as they're the second tenant, but even your own observations support the notion that if they had to build their own facility they certainly wouldn't have built one with a near 70k capacity, even if they could fill it 2-4 times a year.

Bottom line is, of the big clubs financially capable of making their own choice, I've yet to see any team choose to play in a bigger facility than they need to for their average game. And most every case I know of in the States, they owners emphasize the desire for sell-outs and premium seat pricing.

I'll refrain from taking us further off topic. Cheers.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea  
Old July 3rd, 2008, 01:40 AM   #327
EPA001
Registered User
 
EPA001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rotterdam metropolitan area
Posts: 28,733
Likes (Received): 5605

The Netherlands and Belgium are pushing ahead their proposed bid for the WC-2018. And this might help a bit:

In several Dutch newspapers and football magazines it has been reported that UEFA and FIFA were very much impressed with the number of Dutch fans that went to Switzerland. They were also very much impressed with the overall very, very good behavior.

The City of Bern even posted full-page adds in the leading Dutch newspapers thanking the Dutch fans for an unforgettable experience! And they opened up a special website to host many official and fan pictures and blogs about their experiences. Also the city of Basel, which hosted more than 100,000 Dutch fans for the match against Russia, was very pleased with that experience!

All these facts were seen by UEFA, but especially by FIFA representatives, as strong points for a possible Netherlands-Belgium WC-2018 bid. Their chances have certainly been strengthened by it. If it will be enough to win the bid remains doubtfull to me (I think "we" are still outsiders to win) but it has made the competition for England (and probably Spain) a bit tougher!
__________________
.
"Atheism is more than just the knowledge that Gods do not exist, and that religion is either a mistake or a fraud. Atheism is an attitude, a frame of mind that looks at the world objectively, fearlessly, always trying to understand all things as a part of nature" - Carl Sagan

Last edited by EPA001; July 3rd, 2008 at 01:48 AM.
EPA001 está en línea ahora  
Old July 5th, 2008, 10:15 PM   #328
skaP187
Registered User
 
skaP187's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alicante
Posts: 2,207
Likes (Received): 503

Quote:
Originally Posted by www.sercan.de View Post
PSV should expand our built a new one
50-60k would be good
PSV should go for 50 000. WC or no WC. The competition is closing in on PSV. Twente, Groningen and AZ have ´ambitions´ to build bigger stadiums then PSV has now.
60 000 Would be to big I guess.

I am wondering by the way if there is any news from our Belgium friends about stadiums. Specialy Brugge and Anderlecht and maybe Standard.
skaP187 está en línea ahora  
Old July 6th, 2008, 02:53 AM   #329
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

Didn't FIFA deny Libya's/Tunisia's joint bid for the 2010 World Cup, saying no-more joint bids?

Why would they change their minds now?
hngcm no está en línea  
Old July 6th, 2008, 05:25 AM   #330
theespecialone
Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 309
Likes (Received): 0

fifa will adjust their standards if they want to.
theespecialone no está en línea  
Old July 6th, 2008, 11:10 AM   #331
Quintana
Registered Abuser
 
Quintana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 美好的码头
Posts: 4,316
Likes (Received): 1158

FIFA don't want to have two organizing committees any more like they had in Japan and Korea because it creates two mini-World Cups instead of one big one. A Dutch-Belgian bid would have one organizing committee, open borders, small distances and one currency.

Having said that, this bid has no chance in hell seeing that Belgium is in no way suited to host (all talk, no action). It might not even exist by the time 2018 arrives.
Quintana no está en línea  
Old July 6th, 2008, 08:48 PM   #332
skaP187
Registered User
 
skaP187's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alicante
Posts: 2,207
Likes (Received): 503

Quote:
Originally Posted by hngcm View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

Didn't FIFA deny Libya's/Tunisia's joint bid for the 2010 World Cup, saying no-more joint bids?

Why would they change their minds now?
Fifa says a lot of things. Comparing The Netherlands and Belgium with Tunisia and Libya well. I doubt, specialy from Libyas side that it was a serious bid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quintana View Post
Having said that, this bid has no chance in hell seeing that Belgium is in no way suited to host (all talk, no action). It might not even exist by the time 2018 arrives.
I am worried about the Belgium part also. There is not alot of action there.
skaP187 está en línea ahora  
Old July 7th, 2008, 08:30 PM   #333
Chimaera
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bruges
Posts: 2,707
Likes (Received): 172

Quote:
Originally Posted by skaP187 View Post
PSV should go for 50 000. WC or no WC. The competition is closing in on PSV. Twente, Groningen and AZ have ´ambitions´ to build bigger stadiums then PSV has now.
60 000 Would be to big I guess.

I am wondering by the way if there is any news from our Belgium friends about stadiums. Specialy Brugge and Anderlecht and maybe Standard.
Belgian politics promised a decision on the Bruges stadium by July 18th. It will be a choice between the privately funded stadium project Club Brugge presented 18 months ago, or an alternative project on another location. Major issue for possible alternative plans is that the politicians supporting it don't have the slightest idea on how it will be financed...
__________________
My websites:
Belstadions Belgian stadiums and arenas
Arch4MC Sketchup designs
Chimaera no está en línea  
Old July 8th, 2008, 02:21 AM   #334
Wuppeltje
Registered User
 
Wuppeltje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 5,839
Likes (Received): 965

I am not concerned about the Belgium part, they will build new stadiums if it is needed for a WC, even if they can't make their own stadiums a commercial success. For the quantity I am not worried, for the quality a little bit.
__________________
Volg de Noord/Zuidlijn op Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, Instagram en Flickr
Wuppeltje no está en línea  
Old July 9th, 2008, 02:45 PM   #335
genkie456
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 169
Likes (Received): 0

belgian football is in the lift:

TV rights are rising: 35 mio to 44 mio now

attendances:

Anderlecht : 23500 subscribers for the next season (maximum capacity subscriptions)
Standard : 20800 subscribers for the next season (maximum capactity for subscriptions)
Club Brugge: 10% more subsciptions for next season (~= 24000)
Germinal beerschot: already 1000 subscribers more in next season
KV mechelen: already 60 subscribers more in next season
gent, cercle brugge: more subscibers
genk; status-quo after a bad season. Already 15500 subscribers for next season


new stadiums are really needed. You don't have to be concerned.

Sint-truiden is already demolishing old stands, to build 2 multifunctional tribunes (cost 32.5 million)
Gent is starting to build the 31 of august

we are not 2018 yet. Stadiums like wembley will be old and overused in 2018. They have no chance.

organisation: is much more professional than euro 2000.

www.beltomundial.org

Can you give any information about the dutch part. An organisation is not only stadiums.

Last edited by genkie456; July 9th, 2008 at 03:03 PM.
genkie456 no está en línea  
Old July 9th, 2008, 03:07 PM   #336
genkie456
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 169
Likes (Received): 0

Genk will expand its stadium to 45000. It has confirmed its candidature yesterday.










B-pitch:



business sections:








Brugge will build a new stadium of 40000-45000 (price 125 mio; UEFA 4star)




Brussels will build a new 60000 seater (price 250 mio in a complex of 1 000 mio euro's; with a press center, conference rooms, ...)

Antwerp will build a new 40000 seater

Luik will build a new 45000 seater (UEFA 4star)


trainingscomplexes:

Tubeke :













Academy Louis-dreyfus (Luik):
















Gent (20000 seats):







charleroi : new 40 000 seater

Sint-truiden: 15000 seats + hotel



Bergen/Mons: 12000 seats

genkie456 no está en línea  
Old July 11th, 2008, 12:45 AM   #337
Fir
Registered User
 
Fir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enschede
Posts: 664
Likes (Received): 20

The stadium of Genk looks a little bit old fashiond. Using of cheap materials.
Fir no está en línea  
Old July 11th, 2008, 01:23 AM   #338
Wuppeltje
Registered User
 
Wuppeltje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 5,839
Likes (Received): 965

Quote:
Originally Posted by genkie456 View Post

www.beltomundial.org

Can you give any information about the dutch part. An organisation is not only stadiums.
Are you involved with the organisation, or is it just that you would like to know the dutch part more (which might be a little bit more difficult, because there are probably more stadiums available than needed for a WC)?
__________________
Volg de Noord/Zuidlijn op Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, Instagram en Flickr
Wuppeltje no está en línea  
Old July 11th, 2008, 09:38 PM   #339
Quintana
Registered Abuser
 
Quintana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 美好的码头
Posts: 4,316
Likes (Received): 1158

Quote:
Originally Posted by genkie456 View Post
we are not 2018 yet. Stadiums like wembley will be old and overused in 2018. They have no chance.
Indeed, it is no match for the mighty Genk...
Quintana no está en línea  
Old July 12th, 2008, 08:58 PM   #340
genkie456
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 169
Likes (Received): 0

indeed
genkie456 no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu