The city council officially voted through a new demand that AC Milan and Inter will have to comply with in their stadium project. Instead of just shy of 70k, the new stadium now has to have at least 70k capacity.
As a result of the public debate, the ball was once again passed over to the city council and on Thursday, the council voted through a couple of new demands. One of them, as reported by Tuttosport (via MilanNews), is the stadium capacity.
Read SempreMilan ad-free and get access to exclusive news. Click here for a free trial!
Milan and Inter had planned for a stadium with a capacity of just under 70k, justifying this with the fact that adding more will be very costly. Indeed that is the case, as the clubs will have to spend at least €100m to comply with the new demand.
The parties are thus pondering the situation and it remains to be seen what the response of the clubs will be. Should the demands become too many for the project’s sustainability, then Sesto San Giovanni could seriously be considered.
Sesto San Giovanni. PLEASE.
Sesto San Giovanni. PLEASE.
would rather have a big stadium
A few thousands more will cost them 100 million?!
What TF are you talking about?! How’s that even possible?!
I. mean, even if they have to pay for a completely brand new design, how is possible such a. change to. cost over 100 million?!
By the way, I like that proposal, given the fact that both teams currently have an average of 72K
Uhhh, yeah only a dumbass would build a stadium that had to be used for 30-40 years based on not even half a season’s average attendance. The last time we averaged over 60k per season was 04/05 and the last time we averaged over 70k was 92/93. So that’s 30 years ago when Serie A was the best league in the world and Milan had just a couple of scudettos and a couple of champions leagues in the preceding 5 years. Most of the last 20 years we’ve spent in the 50-60k range, with many seasons in the 40s actually. I love the new found enthusiasm, but I’d rather build a slightly smaller stadium and guarantee a packed house than a massive stadium and have it be half empty during a bad spell or against small teams. This is part of the optics problem for Serie A. Even Juventus with their new stadium of just 41k doesn’t sell out as soon as they have a couple of “bad” seasons.
Vero Rossonero i understand your argumentation which certainly isn’t an unreasonable stance to take but on the other hand building a 65000 stadium is also bad for low income workers and in my view lacking a bit of ambition if we actually want to get back to something reminiscent of our former standards as the management has professed to strive for,
We shouldn’t forget either that investments in stadiums or for that matter training grounds and infrastructure doesn’t affect the ffp. In my view if we only build a 65.000 seater then it should at least be build with the option to expand at a later date, In regard of juventus then torino is also a city somewhat smaller than milano.
Martin, I get it, but even in the EPL which is the wealthiest league by far, and has always had sellout crowds, there are only three 60k stadiums, including the newest one built in 2019 (Tottenham), and one of 70k (Old Trafford). Utd fans are some of the most complaining about ticket prices. The idea that more seats equals more lower priced seats is a red herring argument.
Well cutiting a stadium down from 80.000/75.000 to 65000 will make it more difficult to attain tickets + if i remember correctly then executive seats of 10000 will further limit the seats available at the stadium compared to now so i dont agree.
Supply and demand