SPURS V ARCHWAY K.O. 10.30 AM 17/2/2015

[SpursManChris]

If we wanted to build a stadium, we've owned enough space to build it 5 years ago. But we couldn't make it viable. So the Council and Mayor's office have bent over backwards to make it so.

How on earth were we surrounded by enough space, let alone own it 5 years ago?

 

[Gaz_Gammon]

You wanted how much Josif?........................

 

[spursfan1991]

EVERYWHERE WE GO, EVERYWHERE WE GO, ITS THE BULLDOZER MAKING ALL THE NOISE

 

[midspur]

It was actually counsel for Archway who claimed that Spurs had already agreed a naming rights deal. Spurs' counsel denied it.

That said, even if Spurs haven't yet agreed a naming rights deal, I suspect that they could do so tomorrow - if they chose. I'd be very surprised if they didn't have a number of options already on the table.

How about the Archway Stand?

 

[jambreck]

How about the Archway Stand?

I don't think that would be appropriate.

We could, though, go for a first in naming rights sponsorship.....

The Archway Centre Circle.

 

[Twizzle]

The Archway Circle Jerk ?

 

[Spurger King]

From cashes to ashes?

 

[yankspurs]

The Archway Circle Jerk ?

I really wanna rate this winner but i feel like that would look bad so ill juat rate this funny

 

[Lilbaz]

So we can now start some serious work on the stadium. All the land is ours, planning permission in place, financials are there (even if we have to get the bridging loan from HSBC) and only 7 years (7 FUCKING YEARS!!!) since we announced it. Now all we need is avoid digging up Lord Lucan and Shergar.

 

[Navin R Johnson]

And I've “heard it suggested” that all landowners were delighted with the terms offered, and moved very willingly - with smiles on their faces in fact.

So nothing proven or disproven either way then. My point stands, just because someone's moved we cannot assume it's an amicable arrangement as was suggested in the post I replied to. Many people take the least bad offer because they feel powerless against big companies.

 

[Navin R Johnson]

So we can now start some serious work on the stadium. All the land is ours, planning permission in place, financials are there (even if we have to get the bridging loan from HSBC) and only 7 years (7 FUCKING YEARS!!!) since we announced it. Now all we need is avoid digging up Lord Lucan and Shergar.

How funny would it be if that or something similar turned out to be the reason AS were fighting the CPO all along? The ground is broken beneath the old sheet metal works and the proceeds of some sixties or seventies blag were exposed, hidden in holdalls in the boot of an old Cortina. The filth would be all over the gaffe and they'd be sure to give the Josif drum a spin.

 

[jambreck]

So nothing proven or disproven either way then. My point stands, just because someone's moved we cannot assume it's an amicable arrangement as was suggested in the post I replied to. Many people take the least bad offer because they feel powerless against big companies.

We shouldn't confuse the various previous property owners of the Wingate Trading estate with the companies that actually traded there.

There were 70 odd businesses on the site but there weren't anything like that many property owners. It's quite likely that many of the businesses didn't want to move but they had no choice in the matter once their landlords decided to sell to Spurs.

As to why those landlords wanted to sell, it's got nothing to do with feeling "helpless", I think. We're talking about up to 10-12 years ago - long before Spurs even announced their intention to build a new stadium on the site and even longer before any suggestion that CPO's might be served. So there was no undue pressure for anyone to sell.

It's simply that the offer that Spurs made to the various property owners was a good one. Good enough, that is, for all but one property owner.

 

[Navin R Johnson]

We shouldn't confuse the various previous property owners of the Wingate Trading estate with the companies that actually traded there.

There were 70 odd businesses on the site but there weren't anything like that many property owners. It's quite likely that many of the businesses didn't want to move but they had no choice in the matter once their landlords decided to sell to Spurs.

As to why those landlords wanted to sell, it's got nothing to do with feeling "helpless", I think. We're talking about up to 10-12 years ago - long before Spurs even announced their intention to build a new stadium on the site and even longer before any suggestion that CPO's might be served. So there was no undue pressure for anyone to sell.

It's simply that the offer that Spurs made to the various property owners was a good one. Good enough, that is, for all but one property owner.

Thank you, a considered response rather than the answers that came across as knee jerks I'd responded to earlier. As you say, there were more than seventy businesses but far less landlords, once they'd got what was right for them the tenant's opinions were immaterial. Hey ho, I was just making the distinction between business' having to move and being happy to move I guess.

 

[allatsea]

I wonder just how much Archway will actually make out of this after their legal costs have been taken into account. All seems so childish to me.

 

[225]

I wonder just how much Archway will actually make out of this after their legal costs have been taken into account. All seems so childish to me.

Yet it's put their brand name in the papers and is probably known by people around the world now who have kept up to date with the stories.

Don't know if that is part of their incentive or benefits?

 

[longtimespur]

They do say "There's no such thing as bad publicity"

Should I have said that there is a saying......................

 

[JamieSpursCommunityUser]

How on earth were we surrounded by enough space, let alone own it 5 years ago?

The stadium master plan - with the centre circle over archway.

Note the 4 blocks of apartments where the south stand is currently.

http://www.haringey.gov.uk/sites/haringeygovuk/files/re_tottenham-axo_1-lo-res.jpg

Here's WHL in satellite view.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/White Hart Lane/@51.6032526,-0.0673607,621m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x48761e9edfc3bcd7:0x84875fd992812cd2

For many years ENIC have owned all the buildings between WHL car park and the main road, as they have the land at the new Sainsburys to the North of Archway and the North Stand.

The stadium is not finically viable without the apartments, and without a sizeable share of the lolly being made out of the land ENIC has discretely acquired on "High Road West".

1,200 homes being built by Haringey council CPO'ing the f**k out of the Peacock Industrial Estate, Chapel Place, the Carberry Enterprise Centre and Goodsyard Businesses.

http://www.haringeyindependent.co.u...st_regeneration_project_for_Tottenham/?ref=mr

We need Archways land to make money to help pay for the stadium. We don't need it to fit in the stadium. It is what it is.

I'm fine with the CPO decision, it will be a excellent design - and all regeneration is a messy and ethically murky business deciding what is the "greater good".

Very few people in the Tottenham area currently are going to buy a £500,000 apartment and there is no affordable or key worker housing, since Haringey relieved us of our section 106 obligation (so we can make enough money to make it happen).

Instead allowing us to contribute a college above a supermarket - which was a genius move, as what else of £value can you build above a Sainsbury's - and the lease will pay for itself.

I'm delighted for us - just not comfortable with some of our fans mugging off Archway whilst we boot them out.

It's not very nice of us - and misguided animosity based on the PR campaign to paint THFC (ENIC) as some philanthropic protector of the Community, and Archway as the enemies of this.

It's only one side of the story.

 

[Achap]

The stadium master plan - with the centre circle over archway.

Note the 4 blocks of apartments where the south stand is currently.

http://www.haringey.gov.uk/sites/haringeygovuk/files/re_tottenham-axo_1-lo-res.jpg

Here's WHL in satellite view.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/White Hart Lane/@51.6032526,-0.0673607,621m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x48761e9edfc3bcd7:0x84875fd992812cd2

For many years ENIC have owned all the buildings between WHL car park and the main road, as they have the land at the new Sainsburys to the North of Archway and the North Stand.

The stadium is not finically viable without the apartments, and without a sizeable share of the lolly being made out of the land ENIC has discretely acquired on "High Road West".

1,200 homes being built by Haringey council CPO'ing the f**k out of the Peacock Industrial Estate, Chapel Place, the Carberry Enterprise Centre and Goodsyard Businesses.

http://www.haringeyindependent.co.u...st_regeneration_project_for_Tottenham/?ref=mr

We need Archways land to make money to help pay for the stadium. We don't need it to fit in the stadium. It is what it is.

I'm fine with the CPO decision, it will be a excellent design - and all regeneration is a messy and ethically murky business deciding what is the "greater good".

Very few people in the Tottenham area currently are going to buy a £500,000 apartment and there is no affordable or key worker housing, since Haringey relieved us of our section 106 obligation (so we can make enough money to make it happen).

Instead allowing us to contribute a college above a supermarket - which was a genius move, as what else of £value can you build above a Sainsbury's - and the lease will pay for itself.

I'm delighted for us - just not comfortable with some of our fans mugging off Archway whilst we boot them out.

It's not very nice of us - and misguided animosity based on the PR campaign to paint THFC (ENIC) as some philanthropic protector of the Community, and Archway as the enemies of this.

It's only one side of the story.

Very compassionate. Is your suggestion that the Club's planners should have placed the new stadium as in this scale image? In the unlikely event that this placement received Planning Permission, it would have meant the closure of Park Lane, Bromley Road, and Worcester Avenue, plus the relocation of 30 families, and the demolition of their homes. Have you no compassion for them, or is that reserved only for the Archway Sheet Metal Works business?

 

[JamieSpursCommunityUser]

Very compassionate. Is your suggestion that the Club's planners should have placed the new stadium as in this scale image? In the unlikely event that this placement received Planning Permission, it would have meant the closure of Park Lane, Bromley Road, and Worcester Avenue, plus the relocation of 30 families, and the demolition of their homes. Have you no compassion for them, or is that reserved only for the Archway Sheet Metal Works business?

Amusing.

For one your picture wouldn't even fit in the existing plans.

For two, I've never said the Archway CPO should not have happened.

I've said the opposite, and on balance it's the right thing to have happened.

All I'm saying is some of our fans should show a little class and humility, and not mug off Archway.

It's embarrassing.

 

[gilzeantheking]

Peter | Archway® ‏@archwaysm 52s52 seconds ago
Archway Sheet Metal Works Ltd, The Josif Family & THFC Announcement.


https://twitter.com/archwaysm/status/582935483308765184/photo/1