New Stadium Details And Discussions

[kishman]

"I am very pleased that we have made the final decision to stay here"



Fucking liar! I can't believe I have defended this man all these years. Feel like a mug right now. As far as I'm concerned he is trying to kill my football club

Wow, few things from that.

-"Many years of hard work to get to this stage. " What they're just going to throw all that hard work away are they?

-"We've always wanted to stay in Haringey, the support we've received from Haringey over the past few years has been tremendous." After all their support they're just going to stab the council in the back.

-"We're very pleased to make the final decision to stay here". Obviously not a final decision is it Daniel?

-Fans Opinion. "Something we're definately going to take into account." I would appreciate it if he does actually consult fans over the OS.

-"We want something that the Spurs fans and the local community will be proud of". I doubt the local community in Haringey being proud of the new stadium in Newham.


Also watch this,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ktwjhe70L58&feature=related

One point from that.

-"We now own approximately 85% of the total site". That video was posted in June 2009, 20 months ago. What has been the hold up with the remaining 15%?

Not just to Spurs fans, moving to Newham will be a huge betrayal to Haringey. He keeps talking about the 'regeneration project' in this part of London but now he's just prepared to abandon that. I absolutely appreciate everything that Daniel Levy has done for the club. But I am really disappointed with him at the moment.

 

[bigturnip]

Just pointing out that...

FSF says 1 in 10 spurs supporters want the move to stratford.

...doesn't actually tell you what question was asked.

Just a technicality, but it is actually 10-1 who don't want to move, so only 1 in 11 want to move.

 

[bigturnip]

From WeAreN17

"The Meeting with Daniel Levy went as well anticipated. I spose the major thing we can take out of it is that IF the club win the bid Levy has given his word that their will be a Full and Independent Consultation/Referendum with which we can show that we arent a small minority like he claims. This would take place BEFORE the club pay the non-refundable £20m Bond so there is reason to believe that it COULD affect the outcome."

A referendum of fans sounds good.

 

[chrissivad]

from WeAeN17

The Meeting with Daniel Levy went as well anticipated. I spose the major thing we can take out of it is that IF the club win the bid Levy has given his word that their will be a Full and Independent Consultation/Referendum with which we can show that we arent a small minority like he claims. This would take place BEFORE the club pay the non-refundable £20m Bond so there is reason to believe that it COULD affect the outcome.

We'll prepare a more detailed write-up over the next couple of days and get it up here ASAP. Thank You for your continued patience

 

[bigturnip]

Just come across a really good blog/video on the BBC about how Tottenham have decimated the area around the ground on the promise of regenerating the area, it's a good read for those who don't think Tottenham have any responsibility to help regenerate the local area. Not sure if it's been posted in the last few days, as I haven't been around much, apologies if it has:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/kurtbarling/2011/01/who_rules_the_roost.html

 

[Samson]

Just come across a really good blog/video on the BBC about how Tottenham have decimated the area around the ground on the promise of regenerating the area, it's a good read for those who don't think Tottenham have any responsibility to help regenerate the local area. Not sure if it's been posted in the last few days, as I haven't been around much, apologies if it has:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/kurtbarling/2011/01/who_rules_the_roost.html

But regeneration of the local area does not mean building a new ground there, does it? It could mean moving out and redeveloping the site for something else.

 

[Hoowl]

There are new articles on sky sports, the guardian and telegraph with Levy interviews.

 

[Hoowl]

From WeAreN17

"The Meeting with Daniel Levy went as well anticipated. I spose the major thing we can take out of it is that IF the club win the bid Levy has given his word that their will be a Full and Independent Consultation/Referendum with which we can show that we arent a small minority like he claims. This would take place BEFORE the club pay the non-refundable £20m Bond so there is reason to believe that it COULD affect the outcome."

A referendum of fans sounds good.

Surely Levy will have to give us more information about the financial aspects of moving or staying in the current stadium as well a evidence to explain why the NDP isn't viable before we can have a constructive input into any discussion? At the moment there is a number who are ok with the nove because levy has said the NDP isn't viable. Conversely, the are a number against the move because they dont believe levy. Without facts, those two groups could be basing their opinions on bad foundations.

At the end of the day, its still levys decision and not a simple vote of fan opinion.

 

[michaelden]

Lies, lies from tiny eyes.

name calling? really mature

Oh, just fuck off.

such eloquence SS57. Don't like the fact you're in a minority in that you live in the area and the rest of us struggle to get to and from games. I'm trying to decide if that makes you thoughtless or heartless or just selfish. On midweek 8pm KOs I have to bolt from the stadium to get the train, then the tube to Victoria, then a train to Selhurst. Its a mission, better links would mean I didn't have to miss those final 2 minutes to ensure I get the train. I'm not alone in this journey as there are a fair few Spurs fans in the Croydon/ Norwood/ Epsom area. But you're okay, so that's fine by me. I'll just suck it up :roll:

But regeneration of the local area does not mean building a new ground there, does it? It could mean moving out and redeveloping the site for something else.

egg-zak-lee

 

[adamthfc]

name calling? really mature



such eloquence SS57. Don't like the fact you're in a minority in that you live in the area and the rest of us struggle to get to and from games. I'm trying to decide if that makes you thoughtless or heartless or just selfish. On midweek 8pm KOs I have to bolt from the stadium to get the train, then the tube to Victoria, then a train to Selhurst. Its a mission, better links would mean I didn't have to miss those final 2 minutes to ensure I get the train. I'm not alone in this journey as there are a fair few Spurs fans in the Croydon/ Norwood/ Epsom area. But you're okay, so that's fine by me. I'll just suck it up :roll:



egg-zak-lee

I don't have to leave 8pms early and I come back to hove.the only time I struggle is if the game goes to extra time and I really don't see it as a struggle to get there either.

 

[kishman]

Just come across a really good blog/video on the BBC about how Tottenham have decimated the area around the ground on the promise of regenerating the area, it's a good read for those who don't think Tottenham have any responsibility to help regenerate the local area. Not sure if it's been posted in the last few days, as I haven't been around much, apologies if it has:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/kurtbarling/2011/01/who_rules_the_roost.html

I haven't seen that BT. It will be a huge let down to the local community.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

Just come across a really good blog/video on the BBC about how Tottenham have decimated the area around the ground on the promise of regenerating the area, it's a good read for those who don't think Tottenham have any responsibility to help regenerate the local area. Not sure if it's been posted in the last few days, as I haven't been around much, apologies if it has:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/kurtbarling/2011/01/who_rules_the_roost.html

i'll watch this when i get home, looks interesting, though i would argue that we made Haringey aware of our plans years ago and, at that point, i would imagine the club didn't foresee the mountain of problems they'd have when it came to actually getting the stadium et al built. Haringey were all for this project a few years ago and were tripping over themselves to be seen to be involved but, as soon as the issue of money or responsibility came up, they vanish and claim poverty and act like their hands are tied.

I still firmly believe that, despite all the posing and sound bites, Haringey have done nothing to encourage or persuade the government to give our application the same sort of treatment as Wembley and the Woolwich' new pile. It's vital to the area, will promote North London in a way nothing has previously and make it attractive for investment and regeneration from other parties, benefitting everyone involved in the long run, yet they just don't seem to want to know anymore.

You can bet that if we announced we were going to forge ahead with the NDP then they'd be straight back on the bandwagon, local MPs saying how wonderful it is to anyone who'll listen.

Except Lammy, who'll still be playing with his cock and whining about it.

 

[Hoowl]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...-to-sue-if-club-lose-Olympic-Stadium-bid.html

By Paul Kelso, Chief Sports Reporter 10:30PM GMT 03 Feb 2011
Predicting that West Ham’s plan to retain the running track is “guaranteed” to render the stadium a white elephant, Levy demanded that the choice be based on financial principles rather than “political forces”.

Tottenham are bidding against West Ham to take on the stadium after the Games, but Levy’s plan to rip out the running track means decision-makers, including Mayor of London Boris Johnson and Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, will face a major backlash if they choose his club.

The Olympic Park Legacy Company, chaired by Baroness Margaret Ford, is due to recommend a preferred bidder, possibly as early as next week, with the final decision resting with the politicians.

Levy is concerned that political expediency may shape that decision, and it is understood Tottenham will consider a judicial review of the process if they lose out.

Several influential figures in sport and politics have come out against Tottenham’s plans, including Kate Hoey, an advisor to Johnson. That could provide grounds for appeal.

London 2012 chairman Sebastian Coe, IAAF president Lamine Diack, Olympic athletes including Jessica Ennis and former Olympics minister Tessa Jowell have also criticised Tottenham’s plans, claiming they will betray the promises made in London's bid.

Public opinion in London is also in favour of West Ham’s plan to retain the track, with a recent poll showing 71 per cent support. Against that background the politically straightforward choice would be West Ham, providing the OPLC declares it financially viable.

Sources close to the bidding process have indicated that there is growing political consensus that West Ham would be the preferable option if their plans stack up financially.

In an attempt to shift the focus on to the financial merits of Tottenham’s bid, Levy warned that would be a mistake. Asked if Tottenham would reserve the right to take legal action and challenge the decision should it go against them, he said they would.

“The process has been fine but I only hope that the decision will be based on sound financial criteria and not by political forces,” he told Telegraph Sport.

He argued that the Spurs bid should be selected because it offered a stronger financial case than West Ham, and was the only bid that could deliver economic viability to the Olympic Park. He added that by contrast West Ham’s bid was doomed to fail.

“It is no different to a shopping centre,” he said. “If you don’t get the right anchor tenant to start with, it is destined to fail. If you get the right business model, the legacy can thrive.

“I guarantee you that if you have a stadium which is athletics and soccer together and, as a consequence it will not be full, it will affect economic viability and end up being a white elephant. It is only a matter of time.
“You only have to look at experience across Europe. It does not work. Why do people go and watch a live football match?

“You go because of atmosphere. The minute you lose that people don’t come.”

 

[Hoowl]

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_6721195,00.html

Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy insists there is no moral obligation to retain a running track in the Olympic Stadium after the 2012 Games and claims a takeover of the venue by Spurs would see money pouring into the public purse.

Spurs are bidding against West Ham - who would keep the track - to take over the stadium and have faced criticism from those who say London should honour the promises made to the International Olympic Committee when they were awarded the Games.

Levy, who added Tottenham fans must put emotions to one side and embrace the proposed move if the club are to find a permanent place among football's elite, said London's original plans for the Olympic Stadium had already been proved unworkable.

"There is no moral argument to retain the running track," he said. "Any bid process sees commitments made and then things change.
"The original plan was to reduce the stadium to a 25,000-seat stadium just for athletics and nobody wanted it. The minute they went away from that commitment then it all changed.

"The commitment to have no white elephants is also relevant. London 2012 also planned to hold certain events in a venue next to the O2 arena and now they are being held in Wembley Arena - circumstances change.
"From the viewpoint of the taxpayer and therefore the Government a lot of money has been spent on the Olympics and it is important the taxpayer is not asked to put more money into it in the future.
"We will actually be providing significant returns to the taxpayer through lease payments."

Myth

Spurs' plan would see the Crystal Palace athletics stadium redeveloped for that sport instead, and Levy insisted the plan to demolish the Olympic Stadium and construct a purpose-built football ground in its place was not a waste of the £500 million public money already spent on it.

"That's a myth," said Levy. "The £500 million is the total investment for the total site and it was always intended for much of the structure to come down after the Games - at a cost of £80 million.

"Under our proposal the vast majority of the stadium will be reutilised in the new stadium or at Crystal Palace.

"The notion that the whole thing is being knocked down and wasted is incorrect."

Levy said he understood fans' concerns at the club uprooting for north London and moving to east London but insisted that was a step that had to be taken.

He said: "I understand that because I have been a Spurs fan all my life. But our fans travel on average 40 miles to each game from all around London and the south east.

"If we have to move five miles down the road for the greater good of the club, then that's what we have to do.

"I believe the vast majority of fans support us if it means progressing and sometimes you have to make bold decisions. If you look across Europe we are the only major club to play in such a small stadium.

"Our capacity is 36,000 and we have a waiting list of 36,000. We know we will

sell the Olympic Stadium out every week, we have substantial financial backers, we have a fantastic partnership with AEG and we know therefore there will be no white elephants and that is so important in what will be the entrance to the Olympic Park."

Incompatible

Levy said that athletics and football in the same stadium did not work for either sport.

He added: "In my opinion we would bring a much bigger contribution to athletics at Crystal Palace, the original home of athletics. The only thing we would not do is have it in the Olympic Park.

"The Olympic Park Legacy Company have to take the emotion out of this and look at the long-term viability of the Olympic Park. If they get this wrong it could impact on the public purse for years to come.''

 

[michaelden]

I don't have to leave 8pms early and I come back to hove.the only time I struggle is if the game goes to extra time and I really don't see it as a struggle to get there either.

really, my last trip I was stuck at WHL until 1030, just made the 1133 train, there are only 2 after that. The time before I was on crutches and ended up busing it to Seven Sisters which was an experience.

Weekends aren't an issue. Driving to the Lane isn't bad if you can get a parking and know some of the back routes out the area. It just seems mad that the travel time is longer than the game time.


If we go back the the point about the redevelopment of the area; the real kick the area needs is better transport links. I can provide you with oodles of research proving that the biggest driver in a local area is its ability to transport products, people & services. The best thing that could happen to Tottenham is the lengthening of the East London & Victoria lines to the area. Even a DLR link would be huge in boosting the area. It makes it easier for businesses and people to move into the area. And for people to work in areas where there are more jobs.

If Lammy wants the area to improve he should be lobbying TFL not slating THFC. I understand that since the cuts & Crossrail there is no money in the pot for the Victoria line extension, but if he wants the govt. to understand the dire nature of the area then he should continue pressing.

Even small changes like keeping transport links open longer, lowering tax on businesses that employ more than 5 youth, encouraging businesses that are time independant (not 9-5) and promoting industries that produce products for export (like growing mushrooms) can help the area.

 

[Hoowl]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/feb/03/tottenham-olympic-stadium-daniel-levy

The Tottenham Hotspur chairman, Daniel Levy, has denied there is any secret plan to sell the club if they move to the site of the Olympic Stadium and has voiced fears about undue political influence on the bidding process.

It is understood Spurs will consider the possibility of a legal challenge if they are not chosen as the preferred bidder by the Olympic Park Legacy Company when it delivers its decision next week.

As both Spurs and West Ham delivered their final batch of clarifications to the OPLC, Levy today voiced "concerns" that emotive interventions by Lord Coe and Tessa Jowell about the removal of the athletics track could give rise to political interference. "If this was being run by an investment bank, I'd be very comfortable that we'd meet all the criteria and the decision would be favourable because it would be based on objective criteria," Levy said. "The OPLC say this will be an objective process and I have to take them at their word. I don't like all the stuff that's around it, all the emotive stuff being said by certain people.

"I have some concerns about whether this is going to influence the decision. They should let the process run its course. There's no point setting up a body that's in charge of the park in its legacy form if you're going to interfere with it. Let them do their job. This shouldn't be a political decision. The criteria set down by the OPLC are not meant to have any political interference and I hope they don't."

Levy underlined the economic strength of the Spurs bid, promising to provide "significant rental streams to the government". He vowed to invest "tens of millions" in rebuilding and maintaining Crystal Palace as well as spending "tens of millions" more on funding seven key Olympic sports and establishing a legacy fund for athletics.

"Our bid is not smoke and mirrors. It's hard fact. It's financially viable and because it's financially viable we can provide the community benefits," he said, insisting the Spurs plan would help regenerate Haringey and Bromley as well as Stratford.

The OPLC has promised to judge the rival bids on five criteria: value for money, ability to deliver, to reopen as rapidly as possible, to ensure the stadium remains "a distinctive physical symbol" and to allow "flexible use of the stadium".

West Ham propose to retain the track, a plan that Spurs claim is not sustainable, whereas the north London club will take down the existing structure and build a dedicated football stadium. UK Athletics and a string of athletes have slammed the Spurs plan to provide an athletics legacy by refurbishing Crystal Palace.

"What's the point of having something you know doesn't work?" Levy said. "It is going to come back and bite you. I hope the decision makers will take a long-term decision. This isn't about today, this is about five, 10, 15 years from now."

During an increasingly acrimonious campaign, Spurs have attempted to raise the prospect of West Ham removing the track in years to come if it proves unviable. West Ham, partnered with Newham council, insist that the lease arrangements and penalty clauses would prevent that happening.
"Whatever they may think now, thereThere is not one example where athletics and soccer work together," Levy said. "Even if there is a £100m penalty if they take it away, it's irrelevant. If in five years' time there's a major problem, they will have to deal with it because they'll be the only game in town."

He said he believed the "vast majority" of Spurs fans were behind the plan because the new 60,000 stadium and enhanced revenue generating possibilities would help the club compete at the top of the European game.
"If we want progress, we need to be bold. All I care about is moving the club forward. If I had a choice of course you'd love to redevelop and have great public transport at Tottenham. But there is a better alternative at the moment and we're going to fight very hard to try to get it," he said.
"You're always going to have a small group of people who will make a noise and, whatever the circumstances, will not want to leave the current stadium. That's emotive. But when it comes to buying players I can't deal in emotion and I need to deal with what's going on in football."
There have been persistent rumours that the move to a well-connected and regenerated Olympic Park, which became the club's preferred choice after it claimed plans to redevelop White Hart Lane became mired in difficulties, is part of a plan to sell Spurs. There has been rumoured interest from Qatar, while others believe the US giant AEG, the O2 operator that is partnering Tottenham in the scheme, would like to buy the club once the move is complete.

"There is no truth whatsoever in any form of conversation with anybody about selling the club," Levy said. "No one gives guarantees on the future. We're a public company with 30,000 shareholders. I can never give an undertaking that [majority owner] Joe Lewis, myself or Harry Redknapp will be here in two years or 10 years. But we haven't put this amount of effort into building up Tottenham with the intention of moving it on to someone else. We want to see this project through."

He unequivocally ruled out any interest from AEG, who were originally in talks with West Ham but switched to Spurs when the east London club insisted on keeping the track: "They have no interest in buying Tottenham Hotspur, or any other club for that matter, and they have made that clear."

 

[ethanedwards]

I haven't seen that BT. It will be a huge let down to the local community.

Kishman, as one of the anti Stratford supporters, why after 3 months there have only been 7000 + signatures for the N17 signatures. It does not seem to have a lot of support.

 

[michaelden]

Just come across a really good blog/video on the BBC about how Tottenham have decimated the area around the ground on the promise of regenerating the area, it's a good read for those who don't think Tottenham have any responsibility to help regenerate the local area. Not sure if it's been posted in the last few days, as I haven't been around much, apologies if it has:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/kurtbarling/2011/01/who_rules_the_roost.html

Good post BT :up: It is the fairest article on the topic I have seen.

I agree that questions should asked as to why NDP is no longer viable, and who carries the burden of the £40m Newham loan to WHU-SPV.

But I do think that should the answer be that its best for the club's future then we should all accept it and not be of the view Tottenham or nothing

 

[Rocksuperstar]

Kishman, as one of the anti Stratford supporters, why after 3 months there have only been 7000 + signatures for the N17 signatures. It does not seem to have a lot of support.

I can take a stab at that - most people are like me, don't really want to leave Tottenham but 1) if that is the only other option then we would have to begrudgingly accept it and 2) i fully expect West Ham to get the nod anyway.

When the decision is made and the prospect of us leavin the Lane becomes real THEN you'll see people start to sway one way or the other.

 

[Misfit]

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_6721195,00.htmlIf you look across Europe we are the only major club to play in such a small stadium.

Juventus disagree. Our small stadium hurts us domestically but at the prices we get charged for tickets, against most of the German/Italin/Spanish teams I doubt our turnover from ticket sales is much less, if at all. It's other areas where we fall down. The corporate boxes/facilities, or lack thereof, are a real killer. Not to mention, how well do our shirts sell internationally etc?

TBH, if these FFR do, by some miracle, turn out to be something other than the latest line of bullshit from UEFA then we'd be sitting pretty. Even in the tiny, miniscule shitbox that WHL apparently is. These sugardaddies spending their own personal fortunes are what has us in the shitter right now. Not our stadium.