Tasmania’s $1 billion stadium doesn’t stack up. Or does it? 

On the face of it, Tasmania’s stadium proposal, which has plunged the state into a snap election, appears economically unsustainable. The smallest state economy in the country will face a cost of $1.13 billion to build the stadium, with the lion’s share of that cost borne by Tasmanian taxpayers. The state announced billion dollars open It will reach the final budget and is expected to have a deficit by 2030 at the earliest.

The AFL has made the construction of a new roofed stadium at Hobart’s Macquarie Point one of the conditions of a license granted to a new AFL team in Tasmania; this proposal was the subject of intense public debate (and even led to a Senate trial). query) since the late 1980s. This is, of course, despite the huge impact on the state and the fact that the AFL will only commit $15 million towards the construction of the stadium, 1.3% of the total cost.

Tasmanian government replied Last week we objected to the Tasmanian Planning Commission’s recommendations that the stadium project should not proceed, arguing that the benefits of the project “cannot be easily quantified”. So where can you measure the benefits of a new stadium? Is there? Why is Australia obsessed with new stadiums?

Optus Stadium in Perth is less than 10 years old and is the most recent major AFL stadium to be built; One only has to go back 17 years for the second most recent: the AFL-owned Docklands Stadium (commercially known as Marvel Stadium). The Sydney Showground (known today commercially as ENGIE Stadium) also opened at the turn of the century.

A sports manager who spoke on condition of anonymity to speak freely said: cricket While the international standard for stadium shelf life is around 20 years, in Australia it was closer to 25-30 years.

“Concrete cancer [the name given to the gradual deterioration of concrete over time] It settles, the facilities begin to wear out. “Other venues are becoming more attractive options,” he said.

The manager modeled it on the original Sydney Football Stadium (SFS) at Moore Park, which was built in 1988 and demolished in 1988. controversial The $828 million rebuilding project before reopening in 2022 was a necessary evil that showed how quickly stadium facilities wear out.

“The old SFS had concrete cancer, a fire hazard, and the stadium actually failed with 30,000 people despite having a capacity of 45,000,” they explained.

There is comprehensive literature In the United States, research is being conducted on how empty the promises of new stadiums and the economic benefits they provide are, full of lies.

The manager says Australia’s smaller economy means “there just aren’t enough random billionaires here to put money into flashy stadiums”, adding: “The US is screwed because billionaires who could pay for new stadiums themselves are instead holding entire jurisdictions to ransom and threatening to move the team to a new city unless taxpayers pay.” [the new stadium].”

“In Australia, stadiums generally won’t be built if the government doesn’t help.”

While all four major American sports leagues are privately owned, none of the major three in Australia are privately owned; This limits the ability of individuals to make the kinds of demands that team owners make in the United States.

“There is a desire in Australia to have a world-class sporting infrastructure to attract international events and delight sports enthusiasts. It probably doesn’t pay off overall due to our small population and strange, fragmented sporting landscape.”

Economic analysis undertaken In 2019 for VenuesNSW and Parramatta City Council found that the redevelopment of CommBank Stadium (on the site of the former Parramatta Stadium) brought almost $1 million in financial benefits to the Parramatta economy each match day, despite having very similar crowds and larger capacity to the previous stadium.

In its last year of operation according to AusStadiums figuresThrough 2025, the old Parramatta Stadium averaged 14,142 attendances (68% capacity) while the new CommBank Stadium averaged 14,057 attendances (47% capacity).

Elsewhere in Sydney, redevelopment has brought economic benefits to the ground in the form of increased attendances; While the old SFS averaged attendances of 15,921 in its final year (35% of capacity), so far this year the new Allianz Stadium has averaged attendances of 20,165 (47% of capacity) and has been widely praised as a class leader in stadium experience.

Despite these economic success stories for new stadiums (noting that the Macquarie Point project is a new build rather than the demolition and rebuild seen in Sydney), the manager notes that “your mileage may vary” and planning factors are critical to the economic success of a new stadium.

CommBank Stadium is located at the heart of Parramatta’s thriving metropolis and is easily accessible by public transport capable of meeting the demands of a large crowd; Allianz, on the other hand, owns the infrastructure of the Moore Park region.

One factor in favor of the Macquarie Point project is its location at Macquarie Point in the middle of Hobart, unlike the existing major stadium Bellerive Oval, which requires a half-hour journey by bus across the Derwent from the Hobart CBD. This is one of the reasons why the Tasmanian government is citing intangible economic benefits for the stadium project. The key to the economic sustainability of the stadium is to maximize its use for non-sporting events in order to maximize patronage of the stadium.

Whether the Tasmanians can achieve this is another matter. Whether all of this is worth the government being held to ransom by the AFL for billions of dollars is another thing entirely.