Western Force push for Members Equity Staduim - We Got Corners!

[TOCC]

The Welsh Rugby Union have on two separate occasions raised money to partly fund major stadium upgrades by offering "debentures" whereby individuals and corporations "lend" the WRU money for a specified period in return for the right to purchase seats for every game. A sort of season ticket membership but for an extended period of time. It has been oversubscribed on both occasions. The first was the redevelopment of "Cardiff Arms Park" some forty years ago, the second was "Millenium Stadium".

A less grand version is the "Wallaby First" membership whereby for an upfront fee of a few grand one is a member for the next twenty years and guaranteed tickets for Wobblie matches in Australia (and get opportunities to buy tickets for overseas matches as well - eg Hong Kong ). An annual fee of a couple of hundred dollars to maintain membership. The membership is oversubscribed with a waiting list to join (it took me four years from joining the waiting list to becoming a member).

Both instances demonstrate that such schemes work with demand outstripping supply.

Now this is just a thought ...............

Take 1,000 diamond members and ask for $10k each to be repaid in ten years.
Take 5,000 gold members and ask for $7.5k
Take 10,000 silver/nickel/iron members and ask for $5k

Unless the IQ's gone walkabout, that's $97.5 million.

Corporate debentures would of course be more expensive and raise quite a sum of money in itself.

Then consider Perth Glory organising the same arrangement for their supporters to attend the soccer. Not the same support base but it could be another contributor.

The essence of debentures is that the holders accept that when they are repaid, the value of their loan has reduced substantially and they are in effect providing an interest free loan. It's also not a substitute for annual membership renewal so that there is an ongoing base of financial support. (The membership fee might be reduced if annual running costs are lower ??)

The numbers above are just indicative and I'm not sugesting that everyone that is currently a member would be interested or have the financial capacity. Divide the above calculation by two and it's still a significant sum of money.

The point being that whilst such a scheme might not in itself be sufficient to fund a significant stadium redevelopment it could provide the impetus to make a step change in ambitions.

It's also the case that ME is not a dedicated sporting venture that is directly linked with a major sporting organisation. Hence there are issues that would need to be resolved for such a scheme to be sufficiently attractive to get the support it would require.

Now I'll get back below the parapet ............

cant really compare the WRU to the situation that RWA is in at the moment. the WRU own Millenium stadium, and in essennce they were forced into the debentures because of the incredible debt that they are in(50million pounds).

The other major factor is that Millenium Stadium is used for quite a few differnt teams, the international Wales rugby and football sides, Magners Leage etc. All of which dramatically increase the value and interest for debentures.

Where as the MES will only be 6/7 S14 mathes a year and the Perth Glory, possibly a Rugby Union test thrown in as well.

At the end of the day, there is no reason why RugbyWA should be the ones to fund and organise redevelop this stadium, it is 100% a state government issue, its the same in all the other states and no different in WA.

[Blackswan]

At the end of the day, there is no reason why RugbyWA should be the ones to fund and organise redevelop this stadium, it is 100% a state government issue, its the same in all the other states and no different in WA.

so we just say it's an sep and do nothing to try to get the best outcome ??

SEP = someone else's problem. No it's not. It's ours.

I sense that there's a view that "we've got corners" and there's nothing else to do when the reality is that it's right now that we need to be making waves. Petitions did nothing, jumping up and down for two years did nothing. The proposal to move to MES is a financial imperative that resulted in a change of mind by the Rugby WA board to accept that MES was the venue to be at. It had nothing to do with the previous campaigns but merely reflected an awareness of reality that any blind freddy would have understood.

It's not a matter of "RugbyWA should be the ones to fund and organise redevelop this stadium" but a strategy to influence the outcome to give Rugby WA what is required for the Force to survive in WA. Because, make no mistake, that is what is at stake.

[laura]

So I might be being a bit precious, but I actually find it a tad insulting to hear someone say that the petition did nothing. We trapsed around Perth before and after Union, League and Soccer games collecting the signatures of fans and raising awareness to the fact that we wanted a rectangular stadium and we were going to try and do something about it.

Saying that it did nothing is dismissing the fact that 8832 signed up in agreement that they too wanted a rectangular stadium. Also dismissing the point that it was handed to a politician and presented to parliament, articles written in the papers about it and follow-up media statements to attempt to keep the issue in the mind of the media & various sporting codes, who utilise a rectangular playing field. Not to mention the fact that the 8832 signatures represent just over 1/2 the number of memberships in 2008 and almost the equivalent number of 2009 memberships sold as of Christmas Eve. There is no doubt that the signatures of all those people would have had some influence over RugbyWA's decision and the fact that they could not afford to lose that many spectators/members/fans. WHilst the decision definatley wasn't based on the petition alone, it surely had some influence on the decision to move.

The point of WNC was/is not soley to get RugbyWA to move to MES or to make them pay for its refurbishment. The point is to show our support for the move and to demonstrate that if the government does fund a refurbishment then there will be atleast 8832 people who will be occupying the seats, using the facilities and contributing to the ecnomy in that area, as well as holding 8832 votes that could possibly determine an election (if people were voting solely on who would get us a stadium). By no means is this the end of it either, while we are greatful that RugbyWA have agreed to a move and to stop paying WAFC however many millions,we still need the WA government, Perth Glory, Western Reds and Town of Vincent to support the refurbishment or it won't just be Western Force fans who are in the blue (no pun intended) but Soccer & League fans too.

[Blackswan]

It is always hard when so much effort, energy and emotional capital has been invested to find that it was to little avail. I know, I've done it all myself in both personal and professional circumstances. In fact I quit my job and went to work overseas about 6 years back because I couldn't handle it at the time.

Let me try to clarify the way I see it.

A lot of effort was expended by a lot of people in gathering signatures. As you say, almost nine thousand of them. That is to the credit of all concerned. Did it have an impact on the decision by Rugby WA to change it's stance on the capacity of stadium it thought it wanted ?

I'd suggest that at best it was a passing reference to support a decision that was taken for other overwhelming reasons.

Rugby WA maintained for three years that it needed a stadium capacity of 35,000. It's only in the last quarter of last year that it has changed it's position on this. Now you may choose to argue that this was after the petition was compiled. I will argue that it has a lot more to do with declining memberships and attendances and that the groundswell view of needing a rectangular stadium was obvious from year 1 to any blind freddy. As was the financial imperative in the last quarter of last year.

Almost 9000 is a good number but within the context of what politicians may decide or the impact on the economy, do we really think it's significant ? Decisons at state cabinet level are not determined by some small majority in the electorate of southern lancelin but by more impending political drivers.

I can understand your reaction to my suggestion, but the reality is that the Force will not survive unless it gets a sounder financial foundation.

[GIGS20]

Rugby WA maintained for three years that it needed a stadium capacity of 35,000. It's only in the last quarter of last year that it has changed it's position on this.

Coinciding with the appointment of Greg Harris as CEO.....coincidence?

BS, I recognise your passion on this point, and I accept that you have a strong opinion regading stadium upgrades and all, but the fact is you know jack shit about the petition, it's history or any affect it might have had.

Did you realise that We Need Corners was the first group met by the new minister of Sport and Recreation on this issue? did you realise that we have been in pretty constant contact with the media and various stakeholders in this issue? are you aware of the governance and business case for this stadium.....no, of course not....if you were, you would be calling Allia to release debentures, not rugbyWA. Allia are the proprietors of MES not RugbyWA, RugbyWA will simply be tenants of a facility, sharing tenancy with WARL and Perth Glory....but of course you would suggest that RugbyWA is responsible for raising the funds to give to Allia resources to fund the upgrade, since RugbyWA require said upgrade.

I believe (but am open for correction on this point) that Allia lease the grounds from the crown, if this is the case, they probably have very limited interest or ability in funding the upgrade themselves....There is a minefield to adding a Fifth party (Individual members of the public) to the ownership jigsaw which is MES.....Let's face it I count Allia, Member's Equity Bank, Town of Vincent and WA Government already.

Sorry to appear precious, but to demean the effect of the petition and we need corners is to demean a lot of hard work by a lot of dedicated people.....as well as the views of 8832 West Australians who believe, like we do, that the State Government should keep their promises and upgrade MES!

[laura]

As an after-thought (but still part of what WNC is about) we acknowledge that the previous government had agreed to an upgrade (as can be read in Hansard documents & TOV minutes) and had compteted stage 1 of said upgrade but failed to meet their agreement in full. Since the election, it shouldn't mean that the upgrade is forgotten and no longer applicable just because there has been a change in government...after all the Fiona Stanley Hospital and that poxy ferris wheel still get the go ahead despite the change. Obviously an upgrade to a rectangular stadium is incomparable in importance to a hospital but it doesn't mean that something that was budgeted for, and approved, should now be forgotten about and dismissed. This is not the only circumstance where the government has agreed to financially support rectangular field-based sports and failed to come up with the goods. So in an attempt to actually get somewhere with the issue and get the government to honour their agreements, if the least we can do is raise public awareness, then the government will (hopefully) be more inclined to stick to their promises.

[TOCC]

so we just say it's an sep and do nothing to try to get the best outcome ??

SEP = someone else's problem. No it's not. It's ours.

I sense that there's a view that "we've got corners" and there's nothing else to do when the reality is that it's right now that we need to be making waves. Petitions did nothing, jumping up and down for two years did nothing. The proposal to move to MES is a financial imperative that resulted in a change of mind by the Rugby WA board to accept that MES was the venue to be at. It had nothing to do with the previous campaigns but merely reflected an awareness of reality that any blind freddy would have understood.

It's not a matter of "RugbyWA should be the ones to fund and organise redevelop this stadium" but a strategy to influence the outcome to give Rugby WA what is required for the Force to survive in WA. Because, make no mistake, that is what is at stake.

how about you read what i said again, i said its that state governments issue to fund and redvelop the stadium... at what point did i say do nothing? dont go twisting my words just because i didnt agree with your idea.

Now you have confused me, you seemed to have changed your argument from RugbyWA funding the upgrade through debt to now saying that it should just be a strategy to influence the outcome. This is where it gets confusing, who is the strategy trying to influence? the state goverment?..

So your saying that RugbyWA should prove they are capable of funding the stadium themself so that the WA Government takes the challenge and funds it themself? um ok.... Thats kind of what Telstra thought they were doing when they put in a half assed plan for the new National Broadband Network..ask the share holders how that one went!

I also think you are been quite naieve if you think the campaign work people on this forum have done has achieved nothing, IMO it has achieved a crap load. Its the reason the WA Government was looking at a multi-purpose stadium and not another oval which would have being a lot cheaper.

So the new multi-purpose stadium seems to have fallen through for various reasons, but the main reason nothing more has being said or mentioned about the retangular stadium or MES upgrade is because the WA Government thought they were producing a stadium which would have made everyone happy. Now if the new stadium is well and truly dead then i would not be suprised at all if the government announces a decent upgrade of MES.

[GIGS20]

So the new multi-purpose stadium seems to have fallen through for various reasons, but the main reason nothing more has being said or mentioned about the retangular stadium or MES upgrade is because the WA Government thought they were producing a stadium which would have made everyone happy. Now if the new stadium is well and truly dead then i would not be suprised at all if the government announces a decent upgrade of MES.

True TOCC, the danger is that the MPS was really not supported by all stakeholders......It actually wasn't supported by any stakeholder until the labour govt paid off the WAFC and they turned coat.

My concern is that the AFL lobby have seen some value in the stadium if indeed it's populated by rugby (and possibly football in the future) and that means it's hard to call it truly dead.

Ron Alexander and John Langoulant still seem to have the hearts of the WA media and that means the MPS will never be completely out of the picture.

[jargan83]

and had compteted stage 1 of said upgrade but failed to meet their agreement in full.

I believe the stage 1 redevelopment was done in 2003 for the Glory. They havent met what they promised Rugby AT ALL

I wonder what guranatees the State Governement at the time gave to the ARU regarding the stadium upgrade?

[Blackswan]

how about you read what i said again, i said its that state governments issue to fund and redvelop the stadium... at what point did i say do nothing? dont go twisting my words just because i didnt agree with your idea.

Fair comment in part, so I'll address what you said -

cant really compare the WRU to the situation that RWA is in at the moment. the WRU own Millenium stadium, and in essennce they were forced into the debentures because of the incredible debt that they are in(50million pounds).

The other major factor is that Millenium Stadium is used for quite a few differnt teams, the international Wales rugby and football sides, Magners Leage etc. All of which dramatically increase the value and interest for debentures.

The WRU's most recent debenture scheme involved 18,500 holders at a fee of 6,000 pounds sterling. That's over one billion pounds sterling. Plus the fees from all 245 member clubs. The first important point is that it was over-subscribed. The WRU were not 'forced' into the scheme because of a debt. This was the second time they successfully used a debenture scheme to fund a major stadium development programme. It is true that another debenture offering was later made (in 2006) with the release of additional debenture 'seats' to raise more money (to cover the debt ?). But this was not the purpose of the original offering.

The reason the initial debenture scheme is over-subscribed is because of the interest in the rugby. The rest is just fluff. In the words of Max Boyce "I know 'cos I was there".

Yes, the Millennium Stadium is owned by the WRU Ltd. Telstra/ANZ Stadium in Sydney is not owned by the ARU. But they nevertheless raise large sums of money with their "Wallaby First" club (WFc). Which is one reason why I used the Wallaby First membership as the second example of how money can be raised either as revenue or as capital. It does not depend upon whether the organisation raising the "debentures" owns the stadium - I'll address this in more detail in my response to Giggs.

Over the 21 year life of the WFc membership I will have paid about $10,000 for the entitlement to buy tickets for the Wallaby matches - (I still have to pay for the tickets, just like the debenture holders at the Millennium Stadium). The point again being that the WFc is over-subscribed. The second point being that idiots like me are prepared to fork out to ensure we get good seats to watch the rugby. Plus the air fares, hotels ............

Where as the MES will only be 6/7 S14 mathes a year and the Perth Glory, possibly a Rugby Union test thrown in as well.

Up to and including this 2009 season, Diamond club members will have paid $9,000 for the 6 or 7 games per season at Subiaco. Gold members about $1,800 for a single seat ($3,600 for a pair of seats). Amortise $10,000 over ten years and we get ........... amortise $7,500 over ten years for two seats ......................

At the end of the day, there is no reason why RugbyWA should be the ones to fund and organise redevelop this stadium, it is 100% a state government issue, its the same in all the other states and no different in WA.

I have not suggested that RWA should be funding the development in full nor that the state government be allowed to renege on its promise of $25million made in 2005. Some $5 million was spent in the first phase of the redevelopment that was completed in 2004. Politicians may choose to argue that the $25million includes the $5million already spent ...........

I'll clarify what I am suggesting in more detail in my response to Giggs.

I also think you are been quite naieve if you think the campaign work people on this forum have done has achieved nothing, IMO it has achieved a crap load. Its the reason the WA Government was looking at a multi-purpose stadium and not another oval which would have being a lot cheaper.

I suspect that even those most intimately involved with WNC would not claim to have been the reason the task force was set up nor why the outcome was a multi-purpose stadium.

The primary reason a task force was established was because Subiaco Oval was at the end of it's useful life and required a lot of money to make it compliant with modern day standards - not my words, that reason is given in the task force report. It also coincided with the establishment of the Force with demands for a 35,000 seat stadium. The report also states -

The rationale for the development of major stadia in Perth is to provide a venue for staging major sporting and entertainment events accommodating the local teams participating in national and international competitions. This strategy will enable Western Australia to compete effectively for a “fair share” of major national and international events which have the potential to generate significant economic benefit for the State and to generate a sense of civic pride.

It also recomends -

That Members Equity Stadium is retained as the State’s rectangular stadium at its current capacity with some minor improvements. my 'bolding' of the words

So the new multi-purpose stadium seems to have fallen through for various reasons, but the main reason nothing more has being said or mentioned about the retangular stadium or MES upgrade is because the WA Government thought they were producing a stadium which would have made everyone happy. Now if the new stadium is well and truly dead then i would not be suprised at all if the government announces a decent upgrade of MES.

I hope you are right with your last sentence. As for the rest, the billion dollar stadium was dead once Barnett was elected. The Libs had and have no intention of spending that sum of money on a sports stadium.That was the first significant difference to arise in the last quarter of last year. So there is imnsho every chance that a cheaper option like upgrade of MES will be an attractive and politically face-saving opportunity.

The second huge difference was the U-turn performed by Rugby WA in adopting MES as the preferred future venue with a capacity less than 35,000 - driven by financial imperatives (and maybe a new CEO at the Force). These two changes are the key to the current position whereby Rugby WA are negotiating to move to MES. Without Rugby WA's change of heart, this wouldn't be happening.

[Blackswan]

Let's separate the debate on what I suggested as a means of improving Rugby WA's position wrt MES upgrades and the responses to my statement regarding the impact of petitions and campaign effort.

are you aware of the governance and business case for this stadium.....no, of course not....if you were, you would be calling Allia to release debentures, not rugbyWA. Allia are the proprietors of MES not RugbyWA, RugbyWA will simply be tenants of a facility, sharing tenancy with WARL and Perth Glory....

I believe (but am open for correction on this point) that Allia lease the grounds from the crown, if this is the case, they probably have very limited interest or ability in funding the upgrade themselves....There is a minefield to adding a Fifth party (Individual members of the public) to the ownership jigsaw which is MES.....Let's face it I count Allia, Member's Equity Bank, Town of Vincent and WA Government already.

Allia are event managers appointed by the Town of Vincent to look after MES on their behalf. As stated on their web site -

Allia Venue Management currently manages Perth's largest and most prestigious rectangular Stadium, Members Equity Stadium, on behalf of the Town of Vincent. We ensure that the Stadium meets all relevant Australian standards and are responsible for:
Building Maintenance
Stadium Security
Health and Safety
Stadium Cleaning
Risk Management
Stadium Catering
Turf Maintenance

but of course you would suggest that RugbyWA is responsible for raising the funds to give to Allia resources to fund the upgrade, since RugbyWA require said upgrade.

I've not put forward such an argument. Rugby WA is not "responsible" but it may be a business opportunity.

At this time, Rugby WA are negotiating with ToV and Allia to try and get an arrangement that closes the gap between what is on offer and what RugbyWA wants at a venue. Would Rugby WA's negotiating position be improved if thay had some capital to offer to support the re-development, either in terms of the ultimate development plan or the timeframe in which the development was completed ?

I am not suggesting that the state government be allowed to renege on its promise of $25 million or that Rugby WA replace the state government's promised cash. What I am suggesting is that there is a business advantage for Rugby WA. I recogised in my initial post that the ownership issues would need careful attention

It's also the case that ME is not a dedicated sporting venture that is directly linked with a major sporting organisation. Hence there are issues that would need to be resolved for such a scheme to be sufficiently attractive to get the support it would require

However, the second example I quoted was the Wallaby First membership whereby the ARU raise significant monies for ticketing at a Stadium they do not own. I was careful in my initial post to suggest that the debenture schemes be operated by the various sports entities (Force, Glory, Reds) rather than by some other party. That way it optimises the leverage available in negotiations on leasing etc to reflect the capital contribution provided by the sporting bodies. A scheme that is a hybrid between the WRU debenture model and the ARU 'Wallaby First' model is an opportuinty that should be developed. What both models demonstrate is that demand is greater than supply with both schemes over-subscribed and there is no reason to think that a hybrid scheme designed to suit the specific circumstances would be any different. If you want another example of over-subscription, look at the Diamond membership at the Force.

Sorry to appear precious, but to demean the effect of the petition and we need corners is to demean a lot of hard work by a lot of dedicated people.....as well as the views of 8832 West Australians who believe, like we do, that the State Government should keep their promises and upgrade MES!

I concur with the fact that the state government should honour its promise made in 2005. As for 'demeaning' the hard work people have devoted, I think I addressed this in my reply to Laura.

It is always hard when so much effort, energy and emotional capital has been invested to find that it was to little avail.

A lot of effort was expended by a lot of people in gathering signatures. As you say, almost nine thousand of them. That is to the credit of all concerned. Did it have an impact on the decision by Rugby WA to change it's stance on the capacity of stadium it thought it wanted ?

I'd suggest that at best it was a passing reference to support a decision that was taken for other overwhelming reasons.

The election of the Libs and the U-turn by Rugby WA are the two key reasons why there has been a change of direction. As you may recall from our discourse in mid-November, the signs were already flashing in bright neon that changes were in the air. Rugby WA's announcement in late December was the piece of the jigsaw that had to be in place for this change of direction to materialise. We probably need to agree to disagree on what impact the campaign efforts had on the change. But that is not the same as demeaning the efforts expended.

[Swee_82]

The election of the Libs and the U-turn by Rugby WA are the two key reasons why there has been a change of direction. As you may recall from our discourse in mid-November, the signs were already flashing in bright neon that changes were in the air. Rugby WA's announcement in late December was the piece of the jigsaw that had to be in place for this change of direction to materialise. We probably need to agree to disagree on what impact the campaign efforts had on the change. But that is not the same as demeaning the efforts expended.

True, those things are not related to a petition campaign (well, not the election result anyway). But as a result of our work with the then opposition before the election, we already had a foot in the door with a new government that had declared that everything was back on the table (as Gigs has already mentioned).
RWA may well have needed and decided to move to MES regardless of what we bleated about. Perhaps Greg Harris' arrival and the fresh set of eyes he brought made it seem an obvious decision to him that the previous adminitration had missed when they were caught up in the hayclon days of 20k+ memberships. Even with the move on the agenda now, the fact remains that there is a document, tabled in parliament, with 8832 signatures calling for the same upgrades that RWA are now going to be looking for.

The immediate focus of "We Need Corners" has necessarily changed as developments have come about (especially in the time since the election), though of course, the over-riding goal has been a dedicated rectangular stadium for all codes that require it, in Perth. Perhaps the suggestion that all concerned were sitting back, putting the feet up since we 'got corners' rightfully upset a few people, since nothing is further from the truth. $$ still need to be allocated to upgrades and sure as hell, WNC will be there, being the voice from the community arguing for them.

[Blackswan]

The immediate focus of "We Need Corners" has necessarily changed as developments have come about (especially in the time since the election), though of course, the over-riding goal has been a dedicated rectangular stadium for all codes that require it, in Perth. Perhaps the suggestion that all concerned were sitting back, putting the feet up since we 'got corners' rightfully upset a few people, since nothing is further from the truth. $$ still need to be allocated to upgrades and sure as hell, WNC will be there, being the voice from the community arguing for them.

Glad to hear that I was wrong about the 'sitting back, putting the feet up'. Also that the focus has changed since the election. I wouldn't argue with either of those being essential to achieving the desired outcome.

[TOCC]

while i see some merit in what you are saying, i really dont see it being feasible for the Force. The WRU have a much more attrative and in demand product to sell, the first sale was prior to the 1999 RWC which would have made it a big ticket item.

More recently they were sold also under the understanding that Millenium Stadium not only hosts Wales matches, they host mangers league matches and the Welsh Football side.

To put it bluntly, you only have to look at the other cashed up rugby clubs around Europe which own there respective stadium, the average stadium in the Guiness Premiership is only 15'000.

[Blackswan]

while i see some merit in what you are saying, i really dont see it being feasible for the Force. The WRU have a much more attrative and in demand product to sell, the first sale was prior to the 1999 RWC which would have made it a big ticket item.

More recently they were sold also under the understanding that Millenium Stadium not only hosts Wales matches, they host mangers league matches and the Welsh Football side.

To put it bluntly, you only have to look at the other cashed up rugby clubs around Europe which own there respective stadium, the average stadium in the Guiness Premiership is only 15'000.

The feasability is something I believe I have addressed in earlier posts today. If you just take 5000 "debentures" at $5k each that's $25 million - which is what the state government promised in 2005. The Force could achieve that with no problem whatsoever.

The "cashed up" rugby clubs in Europe are getting their money from tv rights and sponsorship (I posted some details on this a few weeks back based on some research and analysis - I'll try to find it and post again) the bums on seats is pitifull compared to Super14 but many of the teams competing in the comps in Europe have very limited capacity at their grounds. Apart from a few clubs in France and a couple in Ireland the average is indeed about 15k.

But I don't see how your input negates the case I am making ??