|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 21, 2015 9:52:53 GMT
just a typical Oatcake knee jerk reaction of "Let's not look at the full story (because that would take too much reading and understanding of the situation) or the big picture and blame who deserves blaming...let's just look at the tabloid headlines and blame West Ham" they have done good business to get it for what they have, if you're not happy with that and the fact the taxpayers are footing the bill then by all means lay the blame at the door of those that should be blamed for it....that most certainly ISN'T West Ham!!!!! if we had done an insanely good piece of business because of other people completely fucking things up then we'd be celebrating like mad on here! it's not West Ham's fault that the developers and the govt. have screwed up massively here, they've just been in the right place at the right time to enable them to reap the benefits of poor planning by the govt. from the outset. Who's blaming west ham For the original mess? its a fuck up but why should they benefit to this extent? They should make a fair contribution since they are deriving benefit. I'm sure agreements have been made that cannot be reneged upon but that club is benefitting from tax payers money that will soon be used to beat us to a couple of signings no doibt. Fuck west ham, leeches You have summed up the situation with your comment that I have underlined. It doesn't matter how many people sign the petition commercial agreements are not going to be overturned once they have been signed. Unless you want to waste more tax payers money in fighting a court case which West Ham will win and the government would lose. An enquiry is needed to lay the blame at the door of the morons (both before the stadium was built and since the games were over) who have got us to this sorry state of affairs where West Ham benefit and the tax payer loses from their mistakes. It would be even better if individuals could be convicted of negligence and a waste of public money but I won't hold my breath!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2015 10:05:11 GMT
It's only 4.50ish each.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2015 10:07:24 GMT
I just want to know what firm is charging 270 odd million to make a stadium that had ample space for a football pitch 'football ready'.
Do they have any jobs going?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2015 10:12:38 GMT
just a typical Oatcake knee jerk reaction of "Let's not look at the full story (because that would take too much reading and understanding of the situation) or the big picture and blame who deserves blaming...let's just look at the tabloid headlines and blame West Ham" they have done good business to get it for what they have, if you're not happy with that and the fact the taxpayers are footing the bill then by all means lay the blame at the door of those that should be blamed for it....that most certainly ISN'T West Ham!!!!! if we had done an insanely good piece of business because of other people completely fucking things up then we'd be celebrating like mad on here! it's not West Ham's fault that the developers and the govt. have screwed up massively here, they've just been in the right place at the right time to enable them to reap the benefits of poor planning by the govt. from the outset. Who's blaming west ham For the original mess? its a fuck up but why should they benefit to this extent? They should make a fair contribution since they are deriving benefit. I'm sureagreements have been made that cannot be reneged upon but that club is benefitting from tax payers money that will soon be used to beat us to a couple of signings no doibt. Fuck west ham, leeches Leeches or good businessmen????? do you honestly think that Coates (and therefore Stoke City) got to where they are financially by only doing things that were morally correct, fair to all and benefitted the whole of society? of course not! Coates (like any businessman of his wealth) has not amassed the fortune he has by being Mr. Nice guy to everyone, refusing to screw anyone over in business or not spotting a good deal because of other's misfortune or mistakes. there are many many people who can't stand and have actively campaigned against seeing gambling websites advertised bloody everywhere on match days in front of little kiddies but strangely enough (as it supplements our football club) i don't see any of our fans being morally outraged by that and signing petitions! amazing how when someone else in business doesn't follow a moral code stringently we're suddenly up in arms though. Lakeland has it spot on. no-one is saying it doesn't irk us all what's happening but it's a simple fact that it ISN'T West Ham's fault!!!! as i said in my original post, feel free to blame the right people for what's happened but what good will blaming West Ham do exactly? do you expect ANY business who is undercharged for something to turn around and say "Sorry mate i think i should be paying more so will happily volunteer that excess"? it's bloody ridiculous and living in cloud cuckoo land. if you were in their shoes you wouldn't volunteer extra cash if you hadn't been told you had to do so and neither would any of the people on here blaming West Ham for this mess. if you went into a shop and they undercharged you for something and said you only had to pay 50p for a can of coke instead of 80p would you force them to take the extra 30p? somehow i doubt it......and do you think that if the shop then had to recoup that lost profit from somewhere else it would be fair if everyone blamed YOU for their mistake???? the ONLY thing that what you're suggesting would accomplish is allowing the people that caused this mess to get away with it scott free. unless you investigate and if necessary punish the people who made the mistakes that led to this mess then punishing those that have benefitted from it accomplishes nothing whatsoever in any, way, shape or form!
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Aug 21, 2015 10:28:13 GMT
So West Ham have just sat back and let some numpty offer them the deal of the century? Yeah OK then.
Someone needs to be held accountable and West Ham should not have an unfair advantage.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 21, 2015 10:35:46 GMT
I've signed. Not because I don't want WH to use the stadium, but because they're not paying nearly enough. The deal seems totally unrealistic so they need to get someone who knows what they're talking about to negotiate a better deal (for the tax payer).
(Not that I pay UK taxes anyway).
Also, I don't like to see a rival get an unfair advantage over us in any way.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Aug 21, 2015 11:55:08 GMT
The problem is that you get shit deals when...
one side has no where else go to (the Government - as WHU seem to be the only realistic option for getting regular crowds at the Olympic Stadium)
...and the...
other side don't really need what's on offer (it doesn't meet their needs, not in the right location and they can build something more appropriate elsewhere).
In that situation, one side gets shafted.
Unfortunately in this instance it's us the tax payer.
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Aug 21, 2015 12:24:56 GMT
Let's have ALL the corners filled in at the Brit on tax payers money and see if other clubs are happy about paying towards it then!!!! Oh FFS - Stoke already had their pile of public money sorting the Brit. As a major employer and key brand for the city it made and makes sense. The same of WHU. The difference here is that WHU are RENTING a publicly owned building. WTF they do with the Boleyn is nothing to to do with anybody but THEM.(Regrettably). The whole thing has been a cock up from start to finish. The Olympics were a vanity project and have left no legacy. Letting WHU use the stadium is the most sensible option left. It is not WHU's fault that the original design was so shite that it has cost £270M + to make it fir for purpose, however given that WHU made £70m selling the Boleyn they should have been made to contribute more than £15M towards the conversion. The thing that really angers me is the ridiculous low rent, which once costs are taken into account will see WHU getting use of a huge new ground for next to nothing. If the rent was set at a realistic level I am convinced the howls of protest would be much less. Surely the rent should be at least the wage of the highest paid player at the club? £5M a year would still represent a fantastic deal for WHU.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Aug 21, 2015 12:36:40 GMT
So West Ham have just sat back and let some numpty offer them the deal of the century? Yeah OK then. Someone needs to be held accountable and West Ham should not have an unfair advantage. Lord Coe should be made accountable as his insistance that the stadium should be primarily for Athletics post Olympics when there was no requirement/appetite for a huge athletics stadium in the UK was blindingly obvious. This isn't with the benefit of hindsight either,plenty made that point at the time. The original design was essentialy a temporary large stadium for the games to be reduced to around 25000 as an Athletics venue to replace Crystal Palace (the atheltics stadium), that may have made sense (& certainly would have been cheaper). For me it was obvious that the stadium should have been designed with the intent to be truly multi-purpose. Moveable stands,retractable running tracks e.t.c. all perfectly feasible & a damn sight cheaper if you design it that way in the first place. West Ham had absolutley no input into any of this. For what it's worth I don't think West Ham are gaining an advantage,I think its a huge mistake to move there.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Aug 21, 2015 12:40:09 GMT
If you enjoyed the Olympics being in England, then this is the result.
Just a shame no one wanted to take over the whole Olympic Park and create a sporting/family attraction.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Aug 21, 2015 12:41:16 GMT
I've signed. Not because I don't want WH to use the stadium, but because they're not paying nearly enough. The deal seems totally unrealistic so they need to get someone who knows what they're talking about to negotiate a better deal (for the tax payer). (Not that I pay UK taxes anyway). Also, I don't like to see a rival get an unfair advantage over us in any way. This is my issue with it. WHU are now in effect a state subsidised football team. They are being handed an unfair advantage over other competitors. Not for the first time in this particular case. My other issue are with the way this deal has been struck and the attempts by interested parties to obstruct us from obtaining information that relates to the spending of public money.
|
|
|
Post by symons55 on Aug 21, 2015 12:57:24 GMT
I signed the petition and tweeted it to Rob Flello. Get the local MP on board I say !! @robflellomp
|
|
|
Post by richardparker on Aug 21, 2015 13:14:00 GMT
The 2012 Olympics were bloody good though! I'm already signed up for the 2017 World Championships. Pity not more of you fancy a bit of athletics once in a while.
|
|
|
Post by agingerstokie on Aug 26, 2015 17:47:43 GMT
bump
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Sept 3, 2015 9:37:36 GMT
|
|