- Apr 1, 2005
- 41,363
- 74,893
if WH do get to purchase AND remove the track, exactly WHO is held accountable for reneging on the 50yr clause and how could Sours benefit financially?
Wh would have to pay off athletics.
if WH do get to purchase AND remove the track, exactly WHO is held accountable for reneging on the 50yr clause and how could Sours benefit financially?
I don't know the specifics, but I imagine the stadium freehold is owned by one company. They give a licence to the operating company, who in turn have a contract with the tenant. If the operating company go bust then the licence to operate will be taken by a third party. I would suggest that West ham aren't a tenant in the normal sense, in that they aren't the sole users.... A bit like us with wembley. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out and how it was structured.@BehindEnemyLines WH will say they have a contract so how can the price they pay increase? Is that contract not backed up by the government?!
The conversion cost was £320m according to the guardian, not £120m.The fact is, the only, and by far most effective plan, was that originally proposed by Levy and Spurs - knock the thing down and build a purpose built stadium. The problem was, that didn't fit in with the desired outcome for local politics.......oh, and athletics decided they wanted a legacy that was never originally planned. They have now spent £120m+ on a bodged conversion for football whilst agreeing a lease that will never repay those conversion costs (let alone operating costs) - take into account the Net Present Value of the capital invested and it is a huge bodge up..........enter Levy with his agreement that the track remains for 50 years and the stadium is in a quandary - I am certain that if they reneg on that then Levy will take them to the cleaners (particularly in light of our ever increasing costs at NWHL).
Whilst the operting company might go bust, I'm pretty certain the stadium isn't an asset of that company, and therefore a new operating company will be created, and WH will be forced to negotiate a new rental agreement - a lack of viable alternatives means that WH will have to pay near market rates for their stadium, though a lack of alternative tenants also means that the field is restricted..........though it would be hilarious if a cricket or rugby club got involved - at the rates they are currently paying I could see Orient being very interested too!
I love this fact in particular.And have now lost more home games (15) at the OS than they've won (14)
West Ham...
... have now lost more home games (15) at the OS than they've won (14)
I love this fact in particular.
if WH do get to purchase AND remove the track, exactly WHO is held accountable for reneging on the 50yr clause and how could Sours benefit financially?
how can they remove the track though, they would have to knock it down and rebuild it. even if the track was removed they still can't move the stands any closer.
Where would West Ham find even £200m from. No bank in their right mind would lend a club bottom on 0 pts. I’d imagine whatever happens from here West Ham will be relegation threatened till at least Xmas looking at the fixtures. The daves certainly don’t have £200m laying around. And they’ve just spent £100m on players which was probably their big role of the dice. Actual talk on KUMB that our fixture will be in doubt as they won’t get a safety certificate if can’t pay stewards ?
Hypothetically Chelse a
It’s nit impossible. Dig down, drip the pitch by 10-25m and the track is replaced by new seating
that depends on whats below, but if viable, and won't hit the sewage then I suppose its possible. would still take some doing though as aren't the 1st 2 or 3 rows are the retractable?
Just noticed they've got AFC Wimbledon tomorrow night on the telly.
Be fucking funny if they lose that!
Hypothetically Chelse a
It’s nit impossible. Dig down, drip the pitch by 10-25m and the track is replaced by new seating
Yeah but apart from that it should be easy.Yeah good luck with that especially in London and so close to the Thames. Likewise all the foundations have already been laid as it is now, you simply can’t dig down 10 metres let alone 25 without pretty much having to rebuild the entire thing.
Yeah but apart from that it should be easy.
Toxic schmoxic, couple of days work...tops.I would imagine things would be pretty toxic 10-25 metres deeper than they are now.
I dunno about the Olympic Legacy but there could be an Adolf Hitler legacy there in the shape of a UXB or two.
Quite a few were transported out that way during the blitz to protect London.
Plus 10-25 metres deeper makes the middle 'premium' tiers an additional 10-25 m further away from the action.