Anthony G wrote:
The “likely” scenario suggests there will be 221,175 attendees to GCFC games in 2016. 55% are likely to reside locally and 45% (99,628 persons) will be visitors to the Gold Coast.http://goldcoastfc.com.au/the-club/gcfc ... ic-impact/
Found this on the GCFC website. IMO that would be a minimum-reasonable target to aim for (currently I think the Titans are on about 15-18k). 221,175 spread over 11 games would be an average of 20106 per game. Lets say they have 3-4 'blockbusters' per year (Brisbane, Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon) drawing capacity 25k, then arguably they would need 4 low drawing crowds of around 15k to even out the figure of 20k. Would this be enough to sustain a team long term? I know the stadium deal has a lot to do with sustainability, but unlike Geelong who could survive on these crowds the GCFC wont own their stadium...
Geelong don't own their stadium, it's owned by the local council, who give them reportedly a very good deal to play there.
From what I can gather, GCFC will be paying an annual rental bill to the QSL. From my own observation, what will possibly make this new stadium highly lucrative is the corporate boxes. The stadium itself really looks pretty ordinary, but the number and location of the corporate boxes looks brilliant. If they can fill the bulk of them every game then they'll make a shitload. Part of the reason some of the basketcase Melbourne clubs bitch about bad stadium returns is that they have such poor corporate support. an article a couple of years ago suggested the Roos were the lowest with $2 million gross, compared to the highest - West Coast with $13 million. The Bulldogs and Melbourne probably don't do much better than North.
It'll also depend on what they can sell their seats for - big reserved seat premiums, especially for the best seats, are critical. An extra $20 on 10,000 seats every game is worth over $2 million a year. No surprise clubs can't make any money when the bulk of their seats are sold as general admission.