"Wembley stadium has a capacity of 90,000, so our datapoints could fill Wembley once and still fill another third of the available capacity."
the way this is written adds to confusion rather than enlightens. "another third of the available capacity" makes it sound like there is space left over in wembley i.e. you haven't fully filled it.
I think people know how big 120.000 is, but if you must, just say its more than wembley
> I think people know how big 120.000 is, but if you must, just say its more than wembley
Agreed. And if you must compare to a stadium, why not just pick a bigger stadium? You can pack at least 115,000 into Michigan Stadium, which would get you a lot closer than Wembley.
(What's that you say? You've never been to Michigan Stadium? That's probably another reason not to rely on this kind of comparison! I, for example have never been to Wembley and have no idea how big it is.)
It says "volume of twelve stadiums" so maybe by treating an entire stadium as a giant bowl up to the top of the seating? But who knows what stadium is the reference stadium - that's not a consistent thing like the size of a football field.
Such meaningless comparisons also often have the opposite of the desired effect. I read it and went "there are >8 billion people all over the planet, and you can fit all the possible viewports into a single football stadium. Neat!"
It’s a terrible thought, and no disrespect is intended, but a large football stadium holds roughly 100,000 people. So a million people is about 10 large football stadiums. That seems like a reasonable way to comprehend the size and the amount of loss.
I'm also a little curious on how to compare capacities. Per wikipedia, it is only 25k for sports. 70+k for teams is common in many of the other stadiums I looked at. That said, I don't exactly know that many stadiums. Very intimidating to see how large many of these places are.
It’s fine, but it means that the revenue generating projections from sports teams are reflecting the amount of diverted entertainment spending, not net new money. And the frame is often the latter, which is both wrong and deceptive.
If teams presented their cases more truthfully - this stadium won’t make any more money than other options, but the people of this city like sports, so please subsidize the rich owners- I would have less of an issue.
(Said from San Diego, where this former chargers fan is ecstatic to see the city didn’t kowtow to the team’s demands for a new stadium. They are now in LA, and I get 16 Sundays per year back into my life. )
(they have 120000 viewpoints):
"Wembley stadium has a capacity of 90,000, so our datapoints could fill Wembley once and still fill another third of the available capacity."
the way this is written adds to confusion rather than enlightens. "another third of the available capacity" makes it sound like there is space left over in wembley i.e. you haven't fully filled it.
I think people know how big 120.000 is, but if you must, just say its more than wembley
reply