|
Post by GrahamHyde on Apr 15, 2016 0:33:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gonk on Apr 15, 2016 12:46:54 GMT
As we have paid through the nose for WHUs new ground do we all get in for free? No, you'll have to pay just like me. You haven't paid for WHU's ground you and me have paid for successive Government f--k ups, poor planning, commercial ignorance and ego. The deal is an absolute fucking disgrace. WHU almost certainly got more for the sale of The Boleyn than they paid to improve the Olympic stadium. They will make more at their new much bigger ground on match days than they made at the old ground. Correct in every sense and Coates for Stoke given the same opportunity would do the same. This deal will probably lead to the end of Orient as a professional football club. Absolute f--king shite. Orient will stand or fall on their own merit. They're already surrounded by Hammers, Spurs and Arsenal - all less than a three mile radius with much of their support made up of fans from these clubs anyway. Hearne (the chancer) raped the place before he left selling off lots of real estate they owned and banked it if you want to get your facts correct. Seb Coe, Boris Johnson etc have shown incompetency beyond belief. Correct - but don't forget the Labour Government that approved the original planning and legacy.Blatter/FIFA style corruption would be the obvious explanation if the total buffoonery of Coe and Boris and their cretinous tory chums wasn't so clear to entire population. Corruption no chance. This process has been vetted at every legal level including the mugs in Westminster, Brussels and Strasbourg. Coe, LLDC and Labour Government correct and to a lesser extent Boris having to dispose of a white elephant not of his making. The major concept decisions on this were made long before. Well done WHU; you have shafted the entire tax paying population, and elevated yourself to the elite level of European football in one fell swoop. Well done WHU. Correct. They've actually saved the day from a potentially bigger failure. Anyone that's been down our way know's that the area where the OS is built was a toxic industrial wasteland and its re-development has created jobs, industry, housing and public sporting resource with these other facilities much easier to manage. If the centre piece (The Stadium) wasn't properly looked after it'd turn into an Athens or Barcelona!! The Dave's are cute business people but don't confuse taking advantage of a business opportunity with shafting anyone. The mugs that have shafted everyone sit in our Governments upper chamber, UK Athletics and London City Hall. The fact this whole farce derives from monumental incompetence from people that handle the public purse isn't lost on me - but West Ham have only done what any other commercial business would do given the opportunity.You're also failing to note WE WON A TENDER TO BUY THE FUCKING THING but got fucked over by others who had other agendas. As David Dein ex Arsenal said in 2006, West Ham in the Olympic stadium frightens him to death. www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/west-ham-want-olympic-stadium-425709.html" www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Raising-cash-eyebrows-Glittering-1-500-head-T... Wonder if this helped getting the new stadium . Ms Gold and her father, David Gold, who made a fortune selling pornography, are prominent donors to the Conservative Party. She appeared alongside George Osborne at a pre-election Conservative press conference.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Apr 15, 2016 13:24:09 GMT
Well done WHU. Correct. They've actually saved the day from a potentially bigger failure. Anyone that's been down our way know's that the area where the OS is built was a toxic industrial wasteland and its re-development has created jobs, industry, housing and public sporting resource with these other facilities much easier to manage. If the centre piece (The Stadium) wasn't properly looked after it'd turn into an Athens or Barcelona!! The Dave's are cute business people but don't confuse taking advantage of a business opportunity with shafting anyone. The mugs that have shafted everyone sit in our Governments upper chamber, UK Athletics and London City Hall. The fact this whole farce derives from monumental incompetence from people that handle the public purse isn't lost on me - but West Ham have only done what any other commercial business would do given the opportunity.You're also failing to note WE WON A TENDER TO BUY THE FUCKING THING but got fucked over by others who had other agendas. As David Dein ex Arsenal said in 2006, West Ham in the Olympic stadium frightens him to death. www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/west-ham-want-olympic-stadium-425709.html" www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Raising-cash-eyebrows-Glittering-1-500-head-T... Wonder if this helped getting the new stadium . Ms Gold and her father, David Gold, who made a fortune selling pornography, are prominent donors to the Conservative Party. She appeared alongside George Osborne at a pre-election Conservative press conference. I think the biggest issue is how the figures for rent etc were decided as they appear way too low. Who made these decisions and were they done with a WHUFC hat on.
|
|
|
Post by Sergeant Muttley on Apr 15, 2016 13:27:39 GMT
Sullivan rang into Goldstein and Cundy late last night and gave a very good passionate response to the criticism West Ham have been getting n the matter,worth a listen.
|
|
|
Post by hammered on Apr 15, 2016 13:53:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Apr 15, 2016 14:52:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Apr 15, 2016 15:37:37 GMT
The difference between West Ham & Man City is basically planning. The Manchester 1 was always built with a conversion to football in mind. The London 1 they insisted wasn't going to be used for football, hence the huge costs to convert when they realised all their other plans for it were fairytale. West Ham have basically prevented London from having a dormant stadium that would have had to be paid for just to keep it secure. It's a complete fuck up from the State, and West Ham have taken advantage. I didn't like the 25 days a year comment myself, but then if the state are insisting on keeping control of Catering Income and want a piece of Advertising too I'm not too surprised now with the deal West Ham have struck.
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Apr 15, 2016 15:42:50 GMT
As we have paid through the nose for WHUs new ground do we all get in for free? No, you'll have to pay just like me. You haven't paid for WHU's ground you and me have paid for successive Government f--k ups, poor planning, commercial ignorance and ego. The deal is an absolute fucking disgrace. WHU almost certainly got more for the sale of The Boleyn than they paid to improve the Olympic stadium. They will make more at their new much bigger ground on match days than they made at the old ground. Correct in every sense and Coates for Stoke given the same opportunity would do the same. This deal will probably lead to the end of Orient as a professional football club. Absolute f--king shite. Orient will stand or fall on their own merit. They're already surrounded by Hammers, Spurs and Arsenal - all less than a three mile radius with much of their support made up of fans from these clubs anyway. Hearne (the chancer) raped the place before he left selling off lots of real estate they owned and banked it if you want to get your facts correct. Seb Coe, Boris Johnson etc have shown incompetency beyond belief. Correct - but don't forget the Labour Government that approved the original planning and legacy.Blatter/FIFA style corruption would be the obvious explanation if the total buffoonery of Coe and Boris and their cretinous tory chums wasn't so clear to entire population. Corruption no chance. This process has been vetted at every legal level including the mugs in Westminster, Brussels and Strasbourg. Coe, LLDC and Labour Government correct and to a lesser extent Boris having to dispose of a white elephant not of his making. The major concept decisions on this were made long before. Well done WHU; you have shafted the entire tax paying population, and elevated yourself to the elite level of European football in one fell swoop. Well done WHU. Correct. They've actually saved the day from a potentially bigger failure. Anyone that's been down our way know's that the area where the OS is built was a toxic industrial wasteland and its re-development has created jobs, industry, housing and public sporting resource with these other facilities much easier to manage. If the centre piece (The Stadium) wasn't properly looked after it'd turn into an Athens or Barcelona!! The Dave's are cute business people but don't confuse taking advantage of a business opportunity with shafting anyone. The mugs that have shafted everyone sit in our Governments upper chamber, UK Athletics and London City Hall. The fact this whole farce derives from monumental incompetence from people that handle the public purse isn't lost on me - but West Ham have only done what any other commercial business would do given the opportunity.You're also failing to note WE WON A TENDER TO BUY THE FUCKING THING but got fucked over by others who had other agendas. As David Dein ex Arsenal said in 2006, West Ham in the Olympic stadium frightens him to death. www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/west-ham-want-olympic-stadium-425709.html" Hats off to you guys for doing such a great deal...but it still stinks the place out and no-one outside WHU will ever accept that you didn't shaft the taxpayers. Right or wrong you will always have that levelled against you, especially when so many clubs suffered financially when implementing the Taylor Report...not least of all SCFC who ended up having a player "fire sale" and slipping down to the third tier due to lack of funds. Jealous, you bet your sweet life!
|
|
|
Post by hammered on Apr 15, 2016 16:54:46 GMT
I'm sorry but he's not sold it to me I just don't trust the guy. The bit I don't get is this "25 days a year." rubbish. Well Cobham it would have been 365 days a year if Levy and Hearn hadn't fucked it for everyone!! If that's the case don't have it decked out in claret and blue for 365 days a year. If that's what Sullivan going with it should be a generic stadium for 340 days a year and any West Ham colouring / branding used on those 25 days should be removed. We'll have to wait and see but the outside wrap is a video wall and only some of the seats are C&B which I understand can be changed efficiently.
Goldstein made him look a bit of a fool and his answers just come across as shallow and not genuine. Disagree - I think he elegantly mugged Goldstein and put his point about the bigger picture rather well. West Ham in this stadium will generate revenues for Gov far beyond the rent and attract a huge stadium sponsor (in the £100's of millions)- again something that is being overlooked with a sizeable % going to the public purse. If UK Athletics or Orient etc...were in there, it'd be sponsored by Matchroom or Barry's second hand car's!!
I don't believe anyone other than West Ham fans will think it's a fair deal. It's fair based on the other alternatives and the need to meet the covenant/maintain credibility British Athletics/UK Gov made to the IOC to get the games in the first place. People don't seem to have a problem with the fact a stadium and ancillary venues was built with public money in excess of £1 billion to be used for four weeks!!I think this articles quite a good one. The comparison between the costs Man C and West Ham have paid is mind blowing. But a big difference in concept and the Etihad's (£400m sponsors name) design was made with the sole intention of it becoming a football venue afterwards. Likewise City having a free run didn't have to contend with a Levy or Hearn that made this deal in isolation what it is. West Ham were excluded despite interest in the project from 2006 and after the original tender to purchase was overturned but still won the second round I don't blame them for bending Boris over. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3540933/West-Ham-chairman-David-Sullivan-hits-jealousy-envy-Olympic-Stadium-insisting-2-5m-year-agreement-good-deal-everybody.html
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Apr 15, 2016 18:34:44 GMT
I'm sorry but he's not sold it to me I just don't trust the guy. The bit I don't get is this "25 days a year." rubbish. Well Cobham it would have been 365 days a year if Levy and Hearn hadn't fucked it for everyone!! If that's the case don't have it decked out in claret and blue for 365 days a year. If that's what Sullivan going with it should be a generic stadium for 340 days a year and any West Ham colouring / branding used on those 25 days should be removed. We'll have to wait and see but the outside wrap is a video wall and only some of the seats are C&B which I understand can be changed efficiently.
Goldstein made him look a bit of a fool and his answers just come across as shallow and not genuine. Disagree - I think he elegantly mugged Goldstein and put his point about the bigger picture rather well. West Ham in this stadium will generate revenues for Gov far beyond the rent and attract a huge stadium sponsor (in the £100's of millions)- again something that is being overlooked with a sizeable % going to the public purse. If UK Athletics or Orient etc...were in there, it'd be sponsored by Matchroom or Barry's second hand car's!!
I don't believe anyone other than West Ham fans will think it's a fair deal. It's fair based on the other alternatives and the need to meet the covenant/maintain credibility British Athletics/UK Gov made to the IOC to get the games in the first place. People don't seem to have a problem with the fact a stadium and ancillary venues was built with public money in excess of £1 billion to be used for four weeks!!I think this articles quite a good one. The comparison between the costs Man C and West Ham have paid is mind blowing. But a big difference in concept and the Etihad's (£400m sponsors name) design was made with the sole intention of it becoming a football venue afterwards. Likewise City having a free run didn't have to contend with a Levy or Hearn that made this deal in isolation what it is. West Ham were excluded despite interest in the project from 2006 and after the original tender to purchase was overturned but still won the second round I don't blame them for bending Boris over. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3540933/West-Ham-chairman-David-Sullivan-hits-jealousy-envy-Olympic-Stadium-insisting-2-5m-year-agreement-good-deal-everybody.htmlAs always very eloquently put. I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm sure if it was Stoke who had the deal I'd be defending the OS deal in the same way.
|
|
|
Post by basingstokie on Apr 15, 2016 18:48:12 GMT
Gold and Sullivan must be absolutely f****** laughing. But in a situation where you are the only viable option and do nothing isn't an option for the other party then who can blame them.
They took advantage of a monster balls up in Stadium design and future plans and who can blame them. If this was Stoke and we didn't absolutely shaft LLDC then I'd be pretty disappointed
|
|
|
Post by hammered on Apr 15, 2016 18:57:43 GMT
[/quote]As always very eloquently put. I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm sure if it was Stoke who had the deal I'd be defending the OS deal in the same way. [/quote]
Fair play Cobham - believe me I can see both sides of this debate. I just happen to think that the horse bolted the moment the original tender was overturned and the Gov had to go down the leasing route with only one player on the pitch. If Hearn first time round had sided with WHU rather than Levy he might have got the ground share or concessions he was after ironically.
In truth shameful incompetence, masterly manipulation by the chairmen of two London PL club's (Levy getting Tottenham renovated and Sullivan getting the stadium on his terms) knowing the need to keep the stadium legacy exceeded the cost to do it.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Apr 15, 2016 19:09:48 GMT
As always very eloquently put. I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm sure if it was Stoke who had the deal I'd be defending the OS deal in the same way. [/quote] Fair play Cobham - believe me I can see both sides of this debate. I just happen to think that the horse bolted the moment the original tender was overturned and the Gov had to go down the leasing route with only one player on the pitch. If Hearn first time round had sided with WHU rather than Levy he might have got the ground share or concessions he was after ironically. In truth shameful incompetence, masterly manipulation by the chairmen of two London PL club's (Levy getting Tottenham renovated and Sullivan getting the stadium on his terms) knowing the need to keep the stadium legacy exceeded the cost to do it.[/quote] You guys had any news re transfer targets yet, still in for Zlatan? Think Carroll will go? He looks like he's doing the business at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by hammered on Apr 15, 2016 21:09:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Apr 15, 2016 23:03:02 GMT
Interesting times. For what it's worth I'd take Sakho and Song in a heartbeat. Would love Moses back too but his injuries / fitness are definitely an issue but as cover he'd be great quality.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Apr 16, 2016 2:03:56 GMT
The long term use of large stadia is often a problem after games and even the world cup ( e.g South Africa) but we didn't learn the lessons and despite the assurances given at the time didn't have a viable strategy for the post games use of the stadium. As a result it was eventually a buyers market and Gold, Sullivan and the Baroness Brady were given a very easy hand to play which they did to full effect. Is it a good deal for the public purse ? Certainly not in simple economic terms but its the price taxpayers have to pay to avoid a national embarrassment.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 3:15:31 GMT
its the price taxpayers have to pay to avoid a national embarrassment. Embarrassment has not been avoided, the entire thing is a disgrace and an embarrassment.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Apr 16, 2016 7:50:25 GMT
I can see it now, West Ham.....the peoples club. Funded by the people, for the people. West Ham...the people's club. Funded by the taxpayer...for West Ham's owners. Gold Sullivan & Brady.
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Apr 16, 2016 9:07:12 GMT
The long term use of large stadia is often a problem after games and even the world cup ( e.g South Africa) but we didn't learn the lessons and despite the assurances given at the time didn't have a viable strategy for the post games use of the stadium. As a result it was eventually a buyers market and Gold, Sullivan and the Baroness Brady were given a very easy hand to play which they did to full effect. Is it a good deal for the public purse ? Certainly not in simple economic terms but its the price taxpayers have to pay to avoid a national embarrassment. This. The blame lies firmly at the door of Coe and Johnson and those who gave out brown envelopes. Jealousy? Not at all. I can see a situation where the stadium will be half empty and those who really run our game, like Sky and others, will be well and truly pissed off when televised games from there are almost silent, especially if West Ham cannot create a team worthy of playing there. Despite our stadium being not of the best quality, when packed, it's a damned good place to advertise the 'product'. It could turn out to be a massive banana skin still. OS.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 16, 2016 9:27:43 GMT
When you have the London Legacy Development Corporation desperately trying to cover up the terms of the deal under the facade of ‘commerciality’, you just the know the whole thing stinks of shit.
Our friend Hammered rightly won’t give a monkeys but any West Ham achievements, certainly in the short term will be tarnished by this tawdry business.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Apr 21, 2016 11:54:24 GMT
its the price taxpayers have to pay to avoid a national embarrassment. Embarrassment has not been avoided, the entire thing is a disgrace and an embarrassment. I don't disagree. Maybe I should have said "reduce" national embarrassment rather than avoid it - just less of an embarrassment than an unused stadium would have been.
|
|
|
Post by liathroid on Apr 21, 2016 12:15:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Apr 21, 2016 13:31:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on May 7, 2016 11:43:21 GMT
52,000 season tickets sold. Impressive.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jul 18, 2016 17:13:43 GMT
I wouldn't fancy going too 'mental' when we score when we play against them. The 'state-of-the-art' retractable seating is held together with cable ties & proped up on breeze blocks! 45 second video27 second video
|
|
|
Post by LDE76 on Jul 18, 2016 17:22:32 GMT
I wouldn't fancy going too 'mental' when we score when we play against them. The 'state-of-the-art' retractable seating is held together with cable ties & proped up on breeze blocks! 45 second video27 second videoHang your heads in shame, tax-dodgers.
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Jul 18, 2016 23:51:46 GMT
. But a big difference in concept and the Etihad's (£400m sponsors name) design was made with the sole intention of it becoming a football venue afterwards.
Pretty sure this figure includes shirt sponsorship too, which is usually a similar fee to naming rights, so we're looking at something around about £200m for 10 years of ground naming rights.
Man City do have a fantastic sponsorship deal, but it is funded by a commercial entity who are happy to pay what appears to be in the region of £20M a year to name the ground.
There is nothing to stop WHU getting a similar deal for an iconic stadium in the capital city. If they can get such a deal (£20M a year) they would be able to keep £8M a year. All for selling something they don't own and for which they contribute nothing towards running costs.
To claim that the deal WHU have won is fair to the tax payer, or to WHU's rivals is nonsense.
The advantage that quangos are giving to WHU is quite simply a disgrace.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jul 19, 2016 8:16:07 GMT
plenty of room on the concourses, unless there are 1000's of people packed in
|
|
|
Post by skip on Jul 19, 2016 8:51:13 GMT
"Newham council has provided £40m, West Ham £15m, almost £40m comes from the original £9.3bn budget for the Olympics, and a further £25m from the government."
How can it be right that a local council pay substantially more towards the conversion than a multi million pound football club?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2016 13:18:34 GMT
|
|