By now, you know that every sports stadium in America is built on the premise of maximizing revenue and capacity while minimizing the cost of construction.
But what does that really mean?
A lot, according to a new study that looked at stadiums that use futuristic designs, and then compared them to similar-sized venues that are built on traditional principles.
In fact, the study found that there is a clear correlation between stadium-design efficiency and stadium-capacity.
In the United States, stadiums that were built using this principle accounted for a whopping 57% of all stadium construction.
That’s a big chunk of the population, and that means it’s likely that the average stadium-builder would be able to build one of these stadiums with much less cost than a similar-size stadium built using traditional design principles.
As such, it’s crucial to think about the economics of stadiums and how to optimize the space for the various activities that they can host.
The study also found that stadiums that used these concepts were much more economical than those that used traditional designs.
For example, in the United Kingdom, which is one of the countries with the most stadiums in the world, the average cost of building a stadium using this approach is less than $300,000.
The average cost for building a comparable stadium with traditional design is $3.5 billion.
The United States has a similar, though not identical, set of costs, but the difference is that it’s the U.S. that uses these principles in place of conventional design.
The cost of these venues can be as low as $2 billion in the U