Please Register to access the whole of the site and to post on the forums.
Discussion in 'The New Stadium' started by Mattspur, Sep 10, 2014.
They have no veto and no choice, they're a tennent not a partner and that's it
The the LLDC would have a very hard time explaining to the taxpayer why they turned down a (say) £10m a season offer.
West Ham would also find it practically impossible to kick up a fuss when loads of clubs across Europe share stadiums and when they paying just a fraction of that each season.
I imagine she's had worse on her chin.
As I say, I'm only going by what they have said. They did sign a tenant contract, and nobody knows what was in it yet. So let's see.
And a similar size to where we will be playing thereafter. Easy access for Kent and Essex too.
Kind of thought I heard we'd offered £4m per season for Wembley whilst the chavs had offered more.
Anyway, whatever the amount, I suppose it'll go towards paying for their screens.
Money wouldn't go to West Ham. It'll go to LLDC.
These days Stratford is easy access from everywhere.
Don't think I said it would? Can't imagine West Ham investing in the screens alone when it will obviously benefit all sporting events.
I was just trying to correct the fact you had suggested £10m 'payment' a season whereas Wembley would cost us circa £4m according to earlier reports. Not sure where the £10m came from that's all.
Its double easy for me, 10 mins to the station, half hour on the rattler and however long the walk is from Stratford station to the ground. Fucking hell, i'm one pikey in the family away from becoming a West ham fan!
It seems it's not LLDC that could be the problem?? My email below!!
Dear Mr Wells,
Thank you for your email.
There is no clause in the contract with West Ham United to use the Stadium that gives them a veto over another football clubs using the Stadium. However, in order for a ground-share with another football club to take place it would need the agreement of the Premier League and this would require the consent of both clubs involved in the ground-share.
I hope this helps.
From: Edward Wells [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: 27 March 2016 16:33
Subject: Olympic Stadium
Could you please let me know if West Ham Utd have a legal veto to stop other football clubs using the stadium as their home ground?
Sorry for linking the Sun.
TOTTENHAM will agree a deal to play European ties at Wembley while their new stadium is built.
Also the head of THST tweeted the link saying:
Kat @Katspur71 10m10 minutes ago
You could call it a second home anyway considering we're half of the England team
Suggests to me that we must be close to agreeing the Olympic Stadium for domestic matches then?
edmonton: Stratford is available but neither Club keen. I still think Wembley.
I'm sure given a choice and all things being equal that the fans would prefer Wembley. But time will tell I guess.
So with the two bits above could it potentially be Wembley for everything?
That's OK. If West Ham aren't happy to share the OS with us they can always move to Stadium:MK for a season...
Lol! Cue the puns.....
A hole of a stadium, that's complete pants filled with a pile of ****s......
what day is it today?
I'd quite like to use the OS just to piss all those hammers fans off.
Separate names with a comma.