REPORT: KPMG suggests Manly play games at new Allianz stadium

[tookey]

Someone who has access behind the paywall might be able to copy the full article and post it

A REPORT prepared to justify the knockdown and rebuild of Allianz Stadium in Moore Park has suggested NRL games at Brookvale Oval should be moved to the new ground when completed.

https://myaccount.news.com.au/sites...memtype=anonymous&v21=cta-su&v21suffix=cta-su

 

[globaleagle]

A REPORT prepared to justify the knockdown and rebuild of Allianz Stadium in Moore Park has suggested NRL games at Brookvale Oval should be moved to the new ground when completed.

A line in the business case, prepared by KPMG, suggested matches be moved from the Manly-Warringah Sea Eagles’ home ground which would boost crowds at the stadium after its $730 million rebuild.

And the report suggests an approach of deterioration by neglect, possibly putting promised funding for an upgrade in jeopardy.

“In line with the stadia strategy, the government has stated its commitment to not fund non-State owned venues,” said the report, released yesterday.

“As such, these Sydney-based teams will begin to require new venues to host home games as their stadia become unsuitable for hosting national sporting competitions (e.g. Brookvale Oval, Leichhardt Oval).”

The report suggests there would be better financial returns for sporting clubs playing at a bigger stadium.

Sea Eagles CEO Lyall Gorman said he was confident the club would get funding to help with a stadium upgrade despite the KPMG report.

(The Sea Eagles announced their new Number 1 ticket holder as Premier Gladys Berejiklian (centre) last year. Yesterday she did not respond to questions.)

“We are engaged deeply in developing a draft masterplan,” he said. “It is all positive and moving forward.

“There are no ties at all from the government funding commitment to Allianz or ANZ stadium on any club to move content.”

Northern Beaches Council owns Brookvale Oval, which has long been promised upgrade funds by state and federal governments. Mayor Michael Regan said he was still working with the Sea Eagles to improve the venue.

When told of the concept to remove games from the oval (now Lottoland), Cr Regan had a simple message for the State Government: “Good luck”.

“It is just too bloody hard to get to the games, whether it be at Homebush, or Allianz Stadium, from here at anytime,” he said.

“Clearly no one from KPMG lives on the northern beaches and respects or understands the traffic and transport issues.”

A spokesman for Manly MP James Griffin said: “Mr Griffin looks forward to continuing to support the Sea Eagles at Brookvale.

“There is no suggestion that the rebuilding of Allianz Stadium will mean games are moved from Brookvale. In all cases, the Manly Sea Eagles determine where the Manly Sea Eagles play.

“The $10 million Centre of Excellence funding package still remains.”

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/n...m/news-story/39bfc70d3b865ea9ffc7971dd032c63e

 

[niccipops]

The KPMG can TKO itself in the face.

 

[The '47ers]

K - Kill
P - Precious
M - Manly
G - Games

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

This is the cover story of today's "Manly Daily" but it's hardly news, is it? This was always a key part of the state government's stadiums plan, which has been roundly ridiculed since day one. And even the NRL are beginning to see what a dumb idea it is to completely move away from suburban venues.

 

[Spartan Eagle]

Another bullshiet article trying to drag manly in the mud.

 

[MadMarcus]

Anyone notice how the article basically starts with 1 proposiiton and concludes the the direct opposite proposition? How clever. Or actually how stupid. (See what I did there)

 

[jbb/james]

Kpmg had a job to do a report. It could be also interpreted as not worth upgrading unless they get committments from other teams to make it viable for the govt.

Its a stupid idea and does not reflect reality, no matter how much the nrl want it.

 

[NewwyEagle]

Honestly I'm not as against this as I used to be. To be clear, I love brookie and want to stay, but it's a hole and it isn't getting an upgrade. Playing out of a gorgeous new stadium with premium facilities would be great, and Manly has a wide supporter base. We're averaging about 10k at the moment aren't we? I don't see us doing any worse at an upgraded Allianz.

 

[The Who]

Another example of FAKE NEWS.
Anyone who has worked in marketing and PR will tell you how such reports and surveys operate.
1. Client (in this case the NSW Government) decides it needs to justify a decision (in this case the expensive rebuilding of a perfectly good stadium)
2. Client writes the outcomes it needs then commissions a firm (in this case KPMG) to concoct a report
3. KPMG starts with the outcome first, then works through ways that purport to prove the findings
4. State Government and KPMG then engage a PR firm to spread the "findings" of the report throughout the media.
5. Government Ministers then claim "an independent report proves our case . . ."

Delve into the justification for the findings and the best KPMG can concoct is: The more seats you have the bigger the crowd you'd get!
The truth is: The more seats you have during an NRL match played by non-local teams the more empty seats you'll have.

 

[The Who]

Sorry but I completely disagree.
If we play at Allianz our crowd would dwindle by 60% IMO. Manly is not going to pick up any/many new fans by moving to the eastern suburbs. The club would be ruined with two seasons.
If we are to move in order to preserve the club then I believe it has to be via a j-v with Canterbury New Zealand where we become the C_Eagles and play half our matches at Brookie and the other half in NZ.
It's a radical idea butsurely worth considering.

 

[Dan]

this basically says "it worked for the AFL so should work for us" failing to mention that the problem with crowds at the NRL has nothing to do with the venues they are being played at

 

[The Who]

So moving the side to NZ will retain Sydney based Manly supporters but a move to Allianz will not? I would far prefer to remain in Sydney, and gain revenue for playing at Allianz, so that we can still facilitate Brookvale for a game or two.

I'm suggesting we still play six matches at Brookie, and six matches in Christchurch.
Let's compare the two propositions:
1. Allianz. Upside: we get paid to play there. Downside: We lose support
2. Christchurch: We gain an entire South Island of potential support, and members. We gain players from NZ. We gain insights into how to be successful again (The Christchurch Crusaders are a rugby powerhouse). We gain sponsorship opportunities in NZ. We secure our future in the NRL (as we fulfil the NRL's expansion plan). We still play half our matches at Brookie. Downside: We lose part of our identity.

The second scenario is predicated on the belief that the club is currently near broke, the NRL is trying to destroy us, and it is inevitable that Manly Sea Eagles won't survive unless we make significant changes. I think that many of we fans would prefer to think big ie. going international, than going to the Eastern Suburbs.

 

[Class of 96]

this basically says "it worked for the AFL so should work for us" failing to mention that the problem with crowds at the NRL has nothing to do with the venues they are being played at

Absolutely Dan. Also the fact the the MCG and Etihad are a breeze to get to compared to the archaic transportation links in Sydney.

 

[Class of 96]

Another example of FAKE NEWS.
Anyone who has worked in marketing and PR will tell you how such reports and surveys operate.
1. Client (in this case the NSW Government) decides it needs to justify a decision (in this case the expensive rebuilding of a perfectly good stadium)
2. Client writes the outcomes it needs then commissions a firm (in this case KPMG) to concoct a report
3. KPMG starts with the outcome first, then works through ways that purport to prove the findings
4. State Government and KPMG then engage a PR firm to spread the "findings" of the report throughout the media.
5. Government Ministers then claim "an independent report proves our case . . ."

Delve into the justification for the findings and the best KPMG can concoct is: The more seats you have the bigger the crowd you'd get!
The truth is: The more seats you have during an NRL match played by non-local teams the more empty seats you'll have.

This is 100% spot on TW. You beat me to it and have explained it perfectly. I worked for a large corporation, and KPMG was brought in to simply justify a pre-determined outcome. I wasn’t personally affected by the study and in fact worked with the KPMG people in gathering the needed stats. It was startling how much information and how many damning stats were conveniently ommitted that would otherwise had led to a different business case outcome. They are not employed to determine the best business case, they just act on a business brief to reach the pre-determined outcome.

 

[Jigzkiller]

If anyone believes we will be playing at Brookvale past 3 years they are dreaming. The gig is up we have had the PM and Premier from our area and Brookvale still looks like a dump.

 

[Ned]

this basically says "it worked for the AFL so should work for us" failing to mention that the problem with crowds at the NRL has nothing to do with the venues they are being played at

Might have a better chance too if Sydney had the transport infrastructure of Melbourne, light years of difference in that space alone.

 

[Ned]

If anyone believes we will be playing at Brookvale past 3 years they are dreaming. The gig is up we have had the PM and Premier from our area and Brookvale still looks like a dump.

Haha we're on our second premier and number 1 ticket holder and still nada. Sadly I think you might be right.

 

[Budgie]

Another example of FAKE NEWS.
Anyone who has worked in marketing and PR will tell you how such reports and surveys operate.
1. Client (in this case the NSW Government) decides it needs to justify a decision (in this case the expensive rebuilding of a perfectly good stadium)
2. Client writes the outcomes it needs then commissions a firm (in this case KPMG) to concoct a report
3. KPMG starts with the outcome first, then works through ways that purport to prove the findings
4. State Government and KPMG then engage a PR firm to spread the "findings" of the report throughout the media.
5. Government Ministers then claim "an independent report proves our case . . ."

Delve into the justification for the findings and the best KPMG can concoct is: The more seats you have the bigger the crowd you'd get!
The truth is: The more seats you have during an NRL match played by non-local teams the more empty seats you'll have.

Perfectly accurate except you forgot the role of the all powerful SCG trust.

 

[Fluffy]

Truly hate to say it, but it is the right move in order to secure our future. The majority of disgraceful politicians, from both persuasions, ignore the public asset which is Brookvale Oval. We would not only be paid to play at the SFS, it would enable us to stay in Sydney, cease the need to move games to Brisbane and enable us to get Brookvale to a suitable standard, so that we can still have a game or two a year there. We could also insist that on making the move, all our home games are Saturday and Sunday exclusively. What Greenberg refuses to acknowledge is the difficulty for Northern Beaches fans to travel, not easy. At least weekend matches help alleviate that somewhat. Agree with a number of my fellow supporters here, this move will not increase crowd numbers, in fact it will initially at least, probably reduce them. It will however increase our revenue substantially through the usual sponsorship and tv avenues.

how would it enable Brookvale to get to standard?

If they cannot find a way when there are 10 games a year then surely only 2 games a year is far less likely/