The Times- West Ham open to sharing Olympic Stadium

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,427
#25
£2.5m a year rent but policing and running costs paid by lldc. So basically getting it for free.

Next step complaint to the eu for state aid. Just hope they are a bit quicker than the investigation into real madrid which has taken years.
 

Drink!Drink!

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
714
#26
Right, let's be clear that I personally was totally against us moving to Stratford...but just think LLDC had an alternative offer from Spurs that would rebuild the stadium AND upgrade Crystal Palace athletics stadium for absolutely no cost to the tax payer....and this is all they could "negotiate" out of west ham?

I would really like to know more about how characters like Boris Johnson and Seb Coe intervened and influenced all of this. It just doesn't smell right.
 

Armstrong_11

Spurs makes me happy, you... not so much :)
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Messages
6,384
#27
Time to move on from the Olympic stadium lads.... I always prefer us to have our own place to call Home.

Would be nice to share it for a season or two while we construct our own stadium... But it's Home. Not a rented place.
 

McArchibald

Active Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
616
#29
Works out to just over 100k per game with no running costs, that's a joke
Looking forward to a whole host of lawsuits revolving around state aid / unfair competitive advantage...

The arrogance of the OPLC in handing out millions of taxpayer money to the Spammers while thinking they could keep their backhanded dealings a secret is breathtaking though...
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,427
#30
Looking forward to a whole host of lawsuits revolving around state aid / unfair competitive advantage...

The arrogance of the OPLC in handing out millions of taxpayer money to the Spammers while thinking they could keep their backhanded dealings a secret is breathtaking though...
The eu has to investigate. west ham and lldc will say that they have already looked at it and gave it a pass but this isn't true. The eu were called in by the architect when the first tenders went in. Newham realised that their "loan" to west ham was in breach of state aid as they hadn't offered the same loan to us, or any other football team. So the deal was scrapped and a new round of bids were arranged. Having been scrapped the eu said that it would not investigate further "at this time".
I'm sure the next step will be the supporters trust making a complaint to the eu on state aid as the rent is practically zero (west ham will actually get free money if the naming rights are over £6.5m). This distorts the market. Thus is in breach of eu rules.
The eu can then force west ham to pay more towards the conversion costs, and also pay market rate rent (£15m a year for a 50k wembley).

Please god make it so. Do that for me and i'll quit being an atheist.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
17,249
#31
Is this the right place?

Simon Harris ‏@simonharrisitv 5m5 minutes ago
West Ham's rent for the Olympic Stadium confirmed as £2.5m as Legacy Chiefs abandon legal battle to keep deal secret. @itvlondon


Wembley is being talked about as a 15-20m venue.
And apparently they won't have to contribute to any running costs, even goalposts, bloody ridiculous, heads should roll for this, whether or not we think we should have got the place, form a public accounts point of view our offer was clearly a better option and this deal is financial negligence.
I actually think this deal is so bad one day a government will decide to sell it on to West Ham and they'll demolish and rebuild you mark my words.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,427
#32
And apparently they won't have to contribute to any running costs, even goalposts, bloody ridiculous, heads should roll for this, whether or not we think we should have got the place, form a public accounts point of view our offer was clearly a better option and this deal is financial negligence.
I actually think this deal is so bad one day a government will decide to sell it on to West Ham and they'll demolish and rebuild you mark my words.
They'd have to build athletics a new stadium which is what levy made sure of before pulling out.
 

chaching

Active Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
170
#33
If we want to use the stadium I don't think they would be able to refuse due to the term below:

"Priority Use means that use by the Grantor or any other person can only occur if either the Concessionaire has given permission (not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed). or: (a) the Grantor or a Grantor Party. requires access to perform its obligations under the Concession Documents (including for operations, maintenance or repairs); or (b) to allow access to professional sports teams. sportsmen. sportswomen and their staff and coaches in connection with events at the Stadium at which professional sports will be played; and (c) access required for the Stadium tour operations,

So they would have to be asked for permission as Brady has said but considering everything else they would need to have a very good reason for us to not use the stadium.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,427
#34
If we want to use the stadium I don't think they would be able to refuse due to the term below:

"Priority Use means that use by the Grantor or any other person can only occur if either the Concessionaire has given permission (not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed). or: (a) the Grantor or a Grantor Party. requires access to perform its obligations under the Concession Documents (including for operations, maintenance or repairs); or (b) to allow access to professional sports teams. sportsmen. sportswomen and their staff and coaches in connection with events at the Stadium at which professional sports will be played; and (c) access required for the Stadium tour operations,

So they would have to be asked for permission as Brady has said but considering everything else they would need to have a very good reason for us to not use the stadium.
If they do share they get half the money they gave to redevelope it back (£7.5m they'd get back). Can't see lldc or us wanting to pay that.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
17,249
#35
They'd have to build athletics a new stadium which is what levy made sure of before pulling out.
That was then but eventually they'll just want to get shot and they'll be able to point to the lack of support for athletics to make their case.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,427
#36
That was then but eventually they'll just want to get shot and they'll be able to point to the lack of support for athletics to make their case.
Athletics has a 99 year lease. They will not leave without somewhere to go and they would make west ham pay to build them a new home.
 

Spursidol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
12,636
#37
Athletics has a 99 year lease. They will not leave without somewhere to go and they would make west ham pay to build them a new home.
So Wham offer to re-build a nice 15,000 seater (Athletics doesn't need more) Crystal Palace, cost £25m....and then gets the OS for diddly squat...to rebuild on the existing site (and sell off surplus land).

Net cost to Wham fckall
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
32,427
#38
So Wham offer to re-build a nice 15,000 seater (Athletics doesn't need more) Crystal Palace, cost £25m....and then gets the OS for diddly squat...to rebuild on the existing site (and sell off surplus land).

Net cost to Wham fckall
Why would athletics be happy with a 15k capacity stadium when they have a 60k one basically rent free? Also i hope they get some of the naming rights money.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
15,027
#39
Right, let's be clear that I personally was totally against us moving to Stratford...but just think LLDC had an alternative offer from Spurs that would rebuild the stadium AND upgrade Crystal Palace athletics stadium for absolutely no cost to the tax payer....and this is all they could "negotiate" out of west ham?

I would really like to know more about how characters like Boris Johnson and Seb Coe intervened and influenced all of this. It just doesn't smell right.
I've posted before how seb Coe is involved in a development company that now is redeveloping the athletics stadium at crystal palace. Surely there's a massive conflict of interest there. He's going to make money out of that and he was part of the decision making process that prevented us getting the Olympic stadium and giving athletics a free stadium to use. It absolutely stinks!
 

Spursidol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
12,636
#40
Why would athletics be happy with a 15k capacity stadium when they have a 60k one basically rent free? Also i hope they get some of the naming rights money.
athletics virtually never fills a 60k stadium , maybe once a decade it does.

So no atmosphere. Most of the time 15l is enough, 25k assuming expansion of interest ? That's why Athletics (but not Seb Coe) would be very happy with a smaller stadium.
 
Top