Open letter from Daniel levy

Joined
Dec 31, 2003
Messages
291
#61
They could take a gamble that spurs won't be the preferred bidder, or that they won't actually move.
Seems like a big gamble. If we are preferred bidder, we could still stay at WHL - and I guess we will have a far stronger negotiating position with the land owners around WHL. So my ideal is that we are preferred bidder, use that to bash down the costs surrounding staying at WHL, and stay put.
 

rsmith

The hand of Ghod
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
611
#63
If we get the OS, a change of name is inevitable. Just as Woolwich Arsenal became Ar5ena1, we would need to consider something similar.
 

Rout-Ledge

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
6,104
#64
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.
Why are you so opposed to potentially moving to Stratford?
 

roosh

aka tottenham_til_i_die
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
4,621
#65
Seems like a big gamble. If we are preferred bidder, we could still stay at WHL - and I guess we will have a far stronger negotiating position with the land owners around WHL. So my ideal is that we are preferred bidder, use that to bash down the costs surrounding staying at WHL, and stay put.
it is a gamble indeed, but I suspect they didn't really have an inkling about the OS bid, so to them it probably seemed like a sure bet. Once we started bidding for the OS, they would have a choice, approach the club and be reasonable, in which case the club would have the stronger bargaining position and could try and negotiate them lower, or they can wait and see if spurs get preferred bidder status and then approach them.

If they wait, and we get preferred bidder status, then they are in pretty much the same position as if they go now, but they are in a much stronger position if we get refused.

It could also be a case that they just don't want to move, and put a higher value on staying.


I think gaining preferred bidder status, and leveraging the cost of the NDP down would be the sweetest deal in fairness, and would certainly be my own ideal as well.
 

SpurSince57

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
45,214
#67
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?
The only visible landowners left are the Archway Sheet Metal Works in Paxton Road and a little garage and MOT centre in Northumberland Park. The Jehovah's Witnesses' Hall in Paxton I'm not sure about, but I heard that the club had offered to build them a new hall in the back garden of one of the big houses opposite the B&H and Corner Pin (or what was the Corner Pin). There may be others, but with the entire area around the Wingate Estate boarded up it's difficult to see where they are.

I just don't buy this idea that it's going to take 'years' to get CPOs in place. It's also going to make flogging the land off to a developer more difficult.

Is this letter just Levy's way of saying he got his sums wrong?
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
16,679
#70
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?
I expect we call it what we liked, "Nicholson Park" for example.
 

Paxtonite

Active Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
1,956
#71
I have mixed feelings about the whole issue. We'd no longer be a North London outfit and the scum at the emirates wont let us forget it even though they trekked north from the south side of the river.

One thing that has been confirmed to me from this thread is what i have been saying all along and that is that the club are banking on the fact that supporters will quickly move on once the decision has been made to move to the OS. In fact with one open letter Levy has already got most of you lapping it up by the looks of things. Fickle? Er yeah... (OMG you're all trying to figure out names for the new venue :roll:)

What i find disappointing is that the whole NDP was nothing more than a sham. If so many issues truly remain unresolved how on earth were they planning to deliver a stadium by 2015?? Either the issues were already there and the club was prepared to address them; or they are not as significant as the club is now making out and they are being used as a catalyst for the change of plan.

In any case the decision lies with the Olympic Legacy committee (or whatever they are called) and no doubt their hearts will rule their heads and they will give it to spammers. That would be great because i believe that club will eventually die, however what is our club's plan B?? Do we go back to the NDP and confront all the issues "that could take years" or do we start hunting for an alternative location?? Perhaps Wembley??

Levy has not addressed this and he certainly has not even acknowledged the feeling of the fans in moving East or sought to "understand" that it ought to be a difficult dilemma for the club and its heritage.

Very disappointing.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
904
#73
The only visible landowners left are the Archway Sheet Metal Works in Paxton Road and a little garage and MOT centre in Northumberland Park. The Jehovah's Witnesses' Hall in Paxton I'm not sure about, but I heard that the club had offered to build them a new hall in the back garden of one of the big houses opposite the B&H and Corner Pin (or what was the Corner Pin). There may be others, but with the entire area around the Wingate Estate boarded up it's difficult to see where they are.

I just don't buy this idea that it's going to take 'years' to get CPOs in place. It's also going to make flogging the land off to a developer more difficult.

Is this letter just Levy's way of saying he got his sums wrong?
He said it can take years conclude, not it will. For all we know the owners are awaiting the outcome of the bid next week, as they know they will get top price for there land, or await CPO.
 

jj87

Active Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Messages
1,734
#74
The only visible landowners left are the Archway Sheet Metal Works in Paxton Road and a little garage and MOT centre in Northumberland Park. The Jehovah's Witnesses' Hall in Paxton I'm not sure about, but I heard that the club had offered to build them a new hall in the back garden of one of the big houses opposite the B&H and Corner Pin (or what was the Corner Pin). There may be others, but with the entire area around the Wingate Estate boarded up it's difficult to see where they are.

I just don't buy this idea that it's going to take 'years' to get CPOs in place. It's also going to make flogging the land off to a developer more difficult.

Is this letter just Levy's way of saying he got his sums wrong?
Or is he just deliberately being vague/disingenuous as he quite obviously prefers the OS bid?
 

roosh

aka tottenham_til_i_die
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
4,621
#77
Levy has not addressed this and he certainly has not even acknowledged the feeling of the fans in moving East or sought to "understand" that it ought to be a difficult dilemma for the club and its heritage.

Very disappointing.
He doesn't seek to address the concerns of the fans, as he quite clearly says there would be consultation before any move, which is presumably when the concerns would be addressed.

There's only so much that he can say publicly without jeopardising the OS bid, which is far from a foregone conclusion, even if we are the preferred bidder.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
16,679
#78
Bottom line is Levy saw that the OS would be a cheaper option and has jumped off the NDP ship.
I doubt with Levy's record that he would just go for the cheaper option, I reckon he'd feel it would have to be better value which is not quite the same thing.

Just on the open letter I wonderif he's released this because every media outlet is giving out information that is not correct and and seem to have a West Ham leaning.
I may be wrong of course, he may always have intended to release it.
 
Top