full-frontal-nudity
Banned
- Jan 6, 2006
- 866
- 0
:stupid:
Open letter from Daniel levy
- Thread starter seany
- Start date
DEFchenkOE
Well-Known Member
- Feb 13, 2006
- 10,527
- 8,052
I didn't understand this either, how far is the current whl front rows from the pitch?? No more than 3m in some cases surely.
Levy puts forward some good points, a few weeks ago I was all for moving to the OS and then about a week ago I changed my mind and now im not sure again.
Yes we will have the stadium and transport etc but it's clear part of the club will die. Even though the NDP stadium would have some generic company name like AEG Stadium or whichever company it was, at least it would be still on the same site as whl. We would still be "super Tottenham from the lane".
Where as moving to Stratford, East London into a generic named stadium would mean we're a bit lost. I know we need to move with the times etc but something just doesn't seem right.
I'm not from Tottenham but from Enfield a few miles up so I can't claim to have been brought up a stones throw away from the ground but things would just seem a bit soulless if this went through. We may as well just get a sheikh or Russian billionaire and be done with it. We would no longer be the Tottenham as we know it so we might as well follow Man C and Chelsk and try buy our way to the title.
I guess football really is just a business these days.
michaelden
Knight of the Fat Fanny
- Aug 13, 2004
- 26,413
- 21,745
45m is correct. The curve of the track behind the goal pushes the stands very far from the action.
Still hasnt addressed the actual concerns about what leaving Tottenham will really mean to the fans and the club.
Only outlined that the NDP will be more costly, which we know.
The point is some things are worth more money, your soul and identity being the main one!
At no point does it say that the NDP will lead us into ruin as suggested by a large amount of feeble minded posters here.
I actually cant believe how many of you have been swayed by a bit of polished PR.
Beggars belief, I really hope that this board is not representative of Tottenham fans in real life.
Only outlined that the NDP will be more costly, which we know.
The point is some things are worth more money, your soul and identity being the main one!
At no point does it say that the NDP will lead us into ruin as suggested by a large amount of feeble minded posters here.
I actually cant believe how many of you have been swayed by a bit of polished PR.
Beggars belief, I really hope that this board is not representative of Tottenham fans in real life.
roosh
aka tottenham_til_i_die
- Sep 21, 2006
- 4,627
- 573
I think if we moved to stratford and were to build a museum of some sort, as part of the development of the White Hart Lane area, then we could retain our connection and identity with the area.
Regardless of where we move to, we will always be "Tottenham from the Lane"
anyone know if "White Hart Lane" is a registered trademark of the club, with respect to footballing issues? Just wondering if we could call the stadium in Stratford (if it goes ahead) the AEG White Hart Lane?
Regardless of where we move to, we will always be "Tottenham from the Lane"
anyone know if "White Hart Lane" is a registered trademark of the club, with respect to footballing issues? Just wondering if we could call the stadium in Stratford (if it goes ahead) the AEG White Hart Lane?
ThorntonSpur
every away game is a home game
- Jan 21, 2011
- 2,440
- 645
I always find it odd that people go on about 60000 people getting out of the lane.
in the 70 and 80s we regularly got 50000 and no-one complained.
i think it shows that today more people do not live in the area
go north rather than east a new stadium in Enfield thats whats needed and the hammers in Billericay with the orient in the OS.
in the 70 and 80s we regularly got 50000 and no-one complained.
i think it shows that today more people do not live in the area
go north rather than east a new stadium in Enfield thats whats needed and the hammers in Billericay with the orient in the OS.
- Aug 18, 2005
- 6,527
- 267
Even if that is the case, it's more money that we don't have and would have to attempt to borrow at a massive increased risk to the club. It's not like we've got X million to spend on a new stadium and we can choose either and pocket the change.
KingKay
Well-Known Member
- Apr 16, 2004
- 7,263
- 19,095
Ive been unsure what to make of this for a while now but i think im coming round to the idea of moving to the olympic site. Tradition and nostalgia are all well and good but we shouldn't let it hold us back. Surely as supporters we all want, first and foremost, what is best for the club? If the Stratford option leaves the club in better health financially, then so be it. We can't afford another 20 years in the shadows.
tRiKS
Ledley's No.1 fan
- Jun 6, 2005
- 6,854
- 142
No chance Tottenham is in the doomsday book and is totally unrelated to the area now called Tottenham. They can't copyright Tottenham and more than they can David.
Well until very recently we were going ahead with the NDP as the only plan, so it was obviously decided that we could afford it.
A cheaper option does not change that fact.
tRiKS
Ledley's No.1 fan
- Jun 6, 2005
- 6,854
- 142
max 8m / max 45m.. the end on stands with a running track would be about 45m in an olympic venue. Old wembly was near that with a narrower dog track
- Aug 18, 2005
- 6,527
- 267
The costs for that still aren't finalised, and neither is the timeframe. Levy says as much in the letter. I think it's a bad assumption to say the NDP will certainly happen if we lose out on the OS. If we go ahead with either stadium, the risk is a massive consideration when shouldering ourselves with massive debts. We can't just go borrowing more and more money.
roosh
aka tottenham_til_i_die
- Sep 21, 2006
- 4,627
- 573
he says in the letter though, that fans will be consulted, if Stratford becomes a possibility.
nothing is a foregone conclusion yet, and even if we are named as preferred bidder, it doesn't mean that Stratford is a foregone conclusion.
You are right of course in saying that there are some things that money can't buy, but the issue is, that those things will give rise to a financial cost, and that fincncial cost could have a huge impact on another central part of the clubs identity and history- its success.
This idea that the club will lose its identity, and its soul are completely over the top. It's a bit like growing up, we change our identity but we that doesn't mean we lose our history.
EastLondonYid
Well-Known Member
- Jan 26, 2010
- 7,837
- 16,145
If enic can't afford to redevelop the lane, and they really do have the clubs interest at heart,they should sell up to a richest buyer who will gaurentee to, if thats the only option left...i would rather be in tottenham with a new foriegn owner... rather than in a foreign area with an old tottenham owner.
But there is where the story may begin, If levy was to sell us to a rich buyer after we move to Stratford, that IMO, would be the ultimate stab in the back, it would however make Enic a tidy tidy profit,which i hope i'm wrong, what this is all leading to.
sloth
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2005
- 9,018
- 6,900
Most of it was planned to be knocked down anyway, check this out to see the tiny bit that's left which is the only additional that Levy proposes to get rid of too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/davidbond/2011/01/original_stadium_plan_not_an_o.html
Little Squatman
Well-Known Member
- Dec 31, 2003
- 291
- 337
I may have missed something here, because admittedly I am not completely familiar with the circumstances surrounding the land around WHL. However, this is the key paragraph regarding staying at WHL:
No progress has been made with the remaining land owners and this is a potentially costly issue. As such, we have yet to conclude the site assembly. Compulsory Purchase Orders are of course one route to resolving this, but that process is uncertain and can take years to conclude.
Will this land not be worth considerably less if Spurs were to move away from the area, and so would those land owners not be wise to look at how seriously Spurs are looking at moving away and be more willing to sell up? Maybe there is a chance there will be some changes in that situation before its too late. Or am I barking up the wrong tree?
No progress has been made with the remaining land owners and this is a potentially costly issue. As such, we have yet to conclude the site assembly. Compulsory Purchase Orders are of course one route to resolving this, but that process is uncertain and can take years to conclude.
Will this land not be worth considerably less if Spurs were to move away from the area, and so would those land owners not be wise to look at how seriously Spurs are looking at moving away and be more willing to sell up? Maybe there is a chance there will be some changes in that situation before its too late. Or am I barking up the wrong tree?
roosh
aka tottenham_til_i_die
- Sep 21, 2006
- 4,627
- 573
I think the letter outlines that we were trying to proceed with it, but that we we still had/have a long way to go, and some of the complications, such as the as of yet unacquired land, have brought it's viability into question.
roosh
aka tottenham_til_i_die
- Sep 21, 2006
- 4,627
- 573
They could take a gamble that spurs won't be the preferred bidder, or that they won't actually move.
jonnyrotten
SC Supporter
- Aug 16, 2006
- 2,114
- 3,721
Some of it is clever spin. Some outright lies. It's like Cameron telling the country that the private sector will 'soak up' all the public sector job losses before coming to power.
What is clear is that a decision has been made and if we are preferred bidder then it's bye bye Tottenham (don't believe the term: consultation).
What is clear is that a decision has been made and if we are preferred bidder then it's bye bye Tottenham (don't believe the term: consultation).
