How much (little) will SVT spend on the contest?

[lilka]

I don't really care for the size of the stage and for the budget at all. Every country simply has its own ideas on how to host, and I liked 2013. If the organization works perfectly and if the interval acts are entertaining and interesting, I'll be happy.

 

[GermanBango]

So Sweden puts a lot of effort into winning every year but when they win, they just want it to be cheap, even after their smaller neighbor Denmark was able to afford a much better stage and venue? ORF didn't spend that much, did it? I think Sweden should be able to afford a decent stage without a huge budget.

Yeah it's kind of funny considering that Sweden is actually the 3rd "richest" country within the EU
What I find weird is the fact that they stage their NF in a venue with capacity of 60.000 while they want to held the main event in a hall with something like 10.000 seats. It should be possible to have a bigger venue without letting the budget explode ... we managed to do so back in 2011. I mean, I don't expect a capacity of 35.000 or something but with the actual demand of tickets it should be an ease to fill a big venue on 3 evenings (especially in a Eurovision-obsessed country like Sweden)

 

[Swedenvision]

Yeah it's kind of funny considering that Sweden is actually the 3rd "richest" country within the EU
What I find weird is the fact that they stage their NF in a venue with capacity of 60.000 while they want to held the main event in a hall with something like 10.000 seats. It should be possible to have a bigger venue without letting the budget explode ... we managed to do so back in 2011. I mean, I don't expect a capacity of 35.000 or something but with the actual demand of tickets it should be an ease to fill a big venue on 3 evenings (especially in a Eurovision-obsessed country like Sweden)

Yeah Sweden might be rich but keep in mind that it is not Sweden (the country) that pay for this it´s SVT. Of course SVT is owned by the Swedish state and also financed by tax-payers....
SVT is rich i guess with revenue of 4 Billion SEK, so the problem is not that. It was more a decision to keep it smaller last time we host the competition and also show that you can present a great show whitout spend too much.

However, i do think it will be bigger this time, Stockholm is the favorite to host and Tele 2 Arena has been mentioned, which is a huge arena.

 

[tuorem]

If the contest has become too expensive, what about letting Russia host it?

Seriously, I don't want a 2013 again. Could we have the same standards used for the Melodifestivalen? Something fresher and low budget-looking. This year may have been dreadful for various reasons but the stage was really nice and modern.

 

[FilipFromSweden]

Since rumors says that SVT's first wish/pick is to get the Tele2 arena, with seats for 30.000-40.000 people I'm suspecting they will spend slightly more than in 2013. However I think they are going to make it a bit cheap like in 2013, because they know they can do a good show without tons of money and that is true. The stage might've been a bit small but it did every song justice, Petra was fantastic, and it was all very well-executed.

I just think the seperate green room was a bit embarassing. Keep in mind that the Swedish government rarely likes to pay/give money to these kinds of event, not even hosting the olympics so SVT will pay for everything.

 

[GermanBango]

Since rumors says that SVT's first wish/pick is to get the Tele2 arena, with seats for 30.000-40.000 people I'm suspecting they will spend slightly more than in 2013. However I think they are going to make it a bit cheap like in 2013, because they know they can do a good show without tons of money and that is true. The stage might've been a bit small but it did every song justice, Petra was fantastic, and it was all very well-executed.

I just think the seperate green room was a bit embarassing. Keep in mind that the Swedish government rarely likes to pay/give money to these kinds of event, not even hosting the olympics so SVT will pay for everything.

If they will really chose Tele2 (still doubt it) then they will most likely only use half or even only a quarter of it's capacity.
Björkman said something like "The contest goes in a wrong direction .... too big, too expensive...." ... That's why I expect something small and boring tbh.
Don't get me wrong, I really liked the stage(but please don't go without at least some LED's) and the production back in 2013 but I think it's highly unfair towards fans to only use those small venues. It's just frustrating for a big majority because they will never be able to get tickets.

 

[ElRuso]

I just wonder, why is only loves big and expensive from all Scandinavia?

 

[Uvaro]

i really liked how they hosted in 2013, to be honest. if they do the same in 2016 i won't be complaining.

 

[Stargazer]

I don't get why big and expensive means better, or that smaller and less expensive means worse. This should be about the songs, the atmosphere and how well it looks on TV. I thought 2012 looked horrible on TV as the arena was far too large and the atmosphere was completely gone. The recent Melodifestivalen finals at Friends Arena look worse than the Globen finals.

I'd rather they spend money on the script, direction, stage design and construction, hosts, interval acts, postcards and graphics/art, than splurging on the biggest arena possible. It's my TV license money they're doing it with. But maybe that is just me.

 

[GermanBango]

I don't get why big and expensive means better, or that smaller and less expensive means worse. This should be about the songs, the atmosphere and how well it looks on TV. I thought 2012 looked horrible on TV as the arena was far too large and the atmosphere was completely gone. The recent Melodifestivalen finals at Friends Arena look worse than the Globen finals.

I'd rather they spend money on the script, direction, stage design and construction, hosts, interval acts, postcards and graphics/art, than splurging on the biggest arena possible. It's my TV license money they're doing it with. But maybe that is just me.

Yes 2012 was pretty damn bad but that was more because of the audience in the hall who actually only cheered for Azerbaijan and Turkey

 

[Stargazer]

Yes 2012 was pretty damn bad but that was more because of the audience in the hall who actually only cheered for Azerbaijan and Turkey

Yes, that was a big factor as well, but the large arena didn't help since the audience was far too spread out.

 

[CPV4931]

[...]
I'd rather they spend money on the script, direction, stage design and construction, hosts, interval acts, postcards and graphics/art, than splurging on the biggest arena possible. It's my TV license money they're doing it with. But maybe that is just me.

But on the other hand a huge arena would mean a better income from ticketing.

 

[Stargazer]

But on the other hand a huge arena would mean a better income from ticketing.

Yes, but not sure how much they would actually make from that, since the tickets would probably cost the same as for a smaller arena, but the cost of renting a stadium like Friends for 6 weeks would be astronomical.

 

[Nikkita]

The worst thing about 2013 was the stage for me, and i can't believe Sweden, one of the most Europe's richest countries, can't build a good old LED stage. Why you want a cheap Eurovision when you built a Melodifestivalen stage in 4-5 cities every year?

 

[lavieenrose]

I know I'm in a minority but I quite enjoyed the the scaled-back 2013 show. Yes, the stage was relatively basic, particularly in comparison to Copenhagen and Vienna, but it also allowed meant that the acts didn't get lost in a wall of LED. Equally, the interval acts, particularly in the final, were actually enjoyable. The Swedish smorgasbord, whilst a little self-congratulatory, was really imaginative, and SDF's cover of The Winner Takes It All was inspired. Finally, Petra Mede was an excellent presenter, having the right mixture of professionalism and well-executed humour, all made possible by her flawless English (and French).

Basically, I think 2013 really showed that a well-executed, professional Eurovision doesn't require a huge budget, and I hope SVT continues this tradition for 2016.

Agreed wholeheartedly. A lot of it came down to the exceptional choices (the interval act, the host, the Lynda Woodruff, [this one's a bit unpopular but] the stage, etc.) they made with their limited budget; I see no reason why they couldn't make great choices again.

 

[lowyby]

The only good thing about a scaled-down stage is that it's a bit more 'fair' for the participating songs.
With enormous LED stages like 2014 & 2015 the LED backdrop can really make or break your song (Macedonia 2014 & Netherlands 2015 IMO as examples)

 

[Stargazer]

The 2013 stage is my favorite stage of all time. And I do mean out of ALL Eurovision stages there ever were 1956-2015. I love the design of it, I love how it looked on TV.

 

[some1]

The 2013 stage is my favorite stage of all time. And I do mean out of ALL Eurovision stages there ever were 1956-2015. I love the design of it, I love how it looked on TV.

That obviously has nothing to do with your nationality
The best stage ever was either the Moscow one in 2009 or the 2014 one in Copenhagen. I personally prefer the 2014 one.

 

[Stargazer]

That obviously has nothing to do with your nationality
The best stage ever was either the Moscow one in 2009 or the 2014 one in Copenhagen. I personally prefer the 2014 one.

Actually it doesn't. Had 2013 had a stage like 2009 or 2011, I wouldn't have liked it at all. I didn't like our 2000 stage, our 1985 stage or our 1975 stage.

 

[anselm]

I really liked the 2013 stage as well (although it did look a bit pale in comparison to the brilliant 2014 stage). Some fans are just LED and size queens anyway...