Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand

[spurs' magna carter]

Personally thought that was a good and honest peice by the THST, whilst they may not be liked they have a flipping good point, yes it is commercially sensitive to spill all the beans but it really has gone for long enough.

 

[braineclipse]

Personally thought that was a good and honest peice by the THST, whilst they may not be liked they have a flipping good point, yes it is commercially sensitive to spill all the beans but it really has gone for long enough.

So you're saying there's a potential trade off between informing the fans of the current situation and what benefits the club long term... But, from the outside, you know what the best decision on this would be?

 

[spurs' magna carter]

No, regardless as to what the reason is, it's been a very frustrating period.

I genuinely couldn't give a flying one who's right or wrong, for 4 years we've heard the club say how they can't say anything. To put that into context Bayern Munich went from drawing designs to the move in the same period of time.

I guess we will have to continue waiting, which considering our position as the halfway house of English football is most probably nessecary as we have to get this right but it's still incredibly frustrating nonetheless.

 

[Jordinho]

The Allianz Arena was built on a large plot of unused land with the World Cup on the horizon. The city of München paid over 200 million euros for development of the area and transport infrastructure. There's 11,000 parking spaces.

Liverpool and Everton have launched and scrapped several plans in the time we've been working on the current development.

 

[braineclipse]

No, regardless as to what the reason is, it's been a very frustrating period.

I genuinely couldn't give a flying one who's right or wrong, for 4 years we've heard the club say how they can't say anything. To put that into context Bayern Munich went from drawing designs to the move in the same period of time.

I guess we will have to continue waiting, which considering our position as the halfway house of English football is most probably nessecary as we have to get this right but it's still incredibly frustrating nonetheless.

This to you constitutes context? A comparison with Bayern Munich's stadium project?

Good for you that you don't care about being right...

 

[greatwhitenorf]

Here's where the Washington Post's arse flies out the window in that snippy, dismissive article linked to earlier:

"Besides, Tottenham’s new stadium — which under the latest plan would get a nifty roll-out fake-turf field for American football — would be owned by the soccer team, with any NFL franchise being relegated to tenant status. That means no chances for an NFL owner to cash in by selling naming rights, ad space on video boards or personal seat licenses for the mere right to buy tickets, like owners in big U.S. markets are doing to fatten their wallets."

I so beg to differ. Let's say the stadium project does not commence until a deal is done to house a NFL team, a reasonable assumption given what we're seeing in architectural design tweaks. It seems inconceivable that so many details wouldn't be arranged beforehand with the team moving in, which I think will be Jacksonville. Jags and Fulham owner Shahid Khan is an astute businessman and sports club owner. He knows how things work in both leagues. That sort of transfer wouldn't happen without a certain amount of foreknowledge and agreement with Spurs.

If the naming rights deal went off properly, there would be a huge fee involved and, surely, the NFL club would earn it's fair share. The same goes with advertising. Similarly, their ticket sales are in no way related to what happens with Spurs. They should be free to act as they please with regard to ticket and suite sales.

The key to this whole arrangement, as I see it, is that it creates a whole new enabling mechanism outside of housing and commercial development. It allows Spurs to have a stadium they might not have been able to achieve without the NFL. They must remain, first and foremost and always, the priority consideration in how the stadium functions. Yet with only eight regular season games and a max of three others, there's huge scope for the NFL team to function freely and profitably and this sort of stadium arrangement gives the NFL the sort of showcase stadium they need to let the game take hold in London.

When you're comparing the potential of London to Jacksonville, it scarcely bears delving into. One utterly dwarfs the other.

 

[Superhudd]

Seems strange that the trust only had there meeting with the hierarchy at Tottenham and are now only asking questions that I would have thought would have been quite near the top of the list when entering the room. What happened that evening, did they get side-tracked by the Garibaldi biscuits on offer, did they all sit around watching tehTrunkTV youtube channel!

 

[metalgear]

thought the thst did what did had to do, its a small voice but not an unreasonable one against a commercial behemoth.

even though everything there's probably been attended to by the club, putting it out in the open and just educating the uninvolved/ignorant about the issues and considerations is good for all parties.

but the club does what it has to do for good reason, so i hope they don't expect to get a complete and timely response.

 

[braineclipse]

thought the thst did what did had to do, its a small voice but not an unreasonable one against a commercial behemoth.

even though everything there's probably been attended to by the club, putting it out in the open and just educating the uninvolved/ignorant about the issues and considerations is good for all parties.

but the club does what it has to do for good reason, so i hope they don't expect to get a complete and timely response.

You say commercial behemoth as if it's a bad thing. If not for being a commercial behemoth our only hope for a new stadium would have been the Olympic Stadium with a running track...

What issues and considerations exactly do you feel this has educated people on?

 

[spurs' magna carter]

Braineclipse, who took the jam out of your doughnuts?

 

[braineclipse]

Braineclipse, who took the jam out of your doughnuts?

The people who replaced it with vanilla custard, cause I prefer that to jam and people are generally nice.

 

[greatwhitenorf]

If Spurs are attempting to do a deal to house a NFL franchise at MegaLane, the need to keep details quiet is even more important. The NFL is very protective of franchise owners and if word leaked out that Spurs stadium was absolutely going to house a NFL team, then it would set off disruptive speculation in the media and amongst fans of teams that might be relocating.

The value of such a deal, both to Spurs and to Haringey, is immense and sets up all sorts of fresh possibilities for further stadium use and the regeneration of Haringey. The club is quite right to sit tight. It's the only way such a deal will get done.

 

[metalgear]

You say commercial behemoth as if it's a bad thing. If not for being a commercial behemoth our only hope for a new stadium would have been the Olympic Stadium with a running track...

What issues and considerations exactly do you feel this has educated people on?

i say commercial behemoth to provide context to the lonely group of amateur fans that are trying to do something productive.

why do you perceive that i meant it as a bad thing? and how do i insinuate that we will be better off without THFC?

we've gotten a lot of bad press along the way e.g. snooping on west ham management, archway's plea, the THST lays it as it is from a fans point of view, in a very very civilized manner- contrast this to what is happening with Saudi Sportswashing Machine, and try to appreciate the situation with a more open mind.

 

[braineclipse]

i say commercial behemoth to provide context to the lonely group of amateur fans that are trying to do something productive.

why do you perceive that i meant it as a bad thing? and how do i insinuate that we will be better off without THFC?

we've gotten a lot of bad press along the way e.g. snooping on west ham management, archway's plea, the THST lays it as it is from a fans point of view, in a very very civilized manner- contrast this to what is happening with Saudi Sportswashing Machine, and try to appreciate the situation with a more open mind.

I guess I'm not used to people using the word behemoth without negative connotations implied.

They do not lay it as it is from my point of view as a fan. At this point, about a month after the CPO saga was finalized with the deal with Archway my fan point of view would be one of a touch of patience and appreciation. Not demands of information along with half baked claims that informing us at this point should not hurt the ongoing process. I asked you what issues they educated people on, because I think they could have done a much better job if that was the goal.

I really don't think our situation is similar enough to what's happening at Saudi Sportswashing Machine to make a comparison like that particularly enlightening.

I do like to be open minded, but not so open minded that my brain falls out.

 

[parklane1]

i say commercial behemoth to provide context to the lonely group of amateur fans that are trying to do something productive.

why do you perceive that i meant it as a bad thing? and how do i insinuate that we will be better off without THFC?

we've gotten a lot of bad press along the way e.g. snooping on west ham management, archway's plea, the THST lays it as it is from a fans point of view, in a very very civilized manner- contrast this to what is happening with Saudi Sportswashing Machine, and try to appreciate the situation with a more open mind.

I can assure you they do not lay it out for me or the guys I travel with and meet at the various games I attend. They are all hot air and very little use to the fans I know.

 

[jts1882]

If Spurs are attempting to do a deal to house a NFL franchise at MegaLane, the need to keep details quiet is even more important. The NFL is very protective of franchise owners and if word leaked out that Spurs stadium was absolutely going to house a NFL team, then it would set off disruptive speculation in the media and amongst fans of teams that might be relocating.

The value of such a deal, both to Spurs and to Haringey, is immense and sets up all sorts of fresh possibilities for further stadium use and the regeneration of Haringey. The club is quite right to sit tight. It's the only way such a deal will get done.

You could argue if there was too much speculation in the press they would arrange for a friendly hack to write a dampener in the Washington Post.

 

[We are Tottenham]

Challenges over new Spurs stadium discussed by Tottenham Hotspur Supporters Trust

There have been some significant developments in the long-running saga of Tottenham Hotspur’s new stadium. And as the prospect of this much-talked-about project finally materialising becomes more likely, fans’ hunger for information about and input into our Club’s new home grows. That presents the club, and the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust, with some challenges.

The Club and its fans need the stadium – to meet demand for tickets and to help keep up with the competition. Building that stadium means meeting a complex set of regulations, and financing it means taking on risk and keeping demanding financial institutions happy. The Trust has been acutely conscious of this since we relaunched two years ago. We’ve sought information and input into the new stadium, but tried to balance this with making sure we don’t add to the risk around the project. We believe that’s the responsible stance Spurs fans want us to take.

One of the many difficulties the project throws up is balancing the interests of a number of different communities, who themselves often have different and conflicting demands and concerns. Our primary responsibility is to Spurs fans, but local residents and local businesses are also affected by what happens – as of course are the club’s current owners. Some might call us naïve, but we believe it is worth working to ensure all interests are properly represented so that the club continues to draw its strength and identity from the area in which it is located.

We’re happy to set out our position here.

• Fans would like to know when work on the new stadium will begin, and what exactly is being built. They would also like clarification on the naming rights issue and rumours of a tie-up with NFL or another sport.

• The Club has confirmed it will be necessary to move away from White Hart Lane for at least one season while rebuilding occurs, and we’ve accepted this is the course the Club is committed to. The overwhelming preference of Spurs fans is to relocate temporarily to Wembley.

So we would like confirmation that Wembley has been approached and that meaningful negotiations are happening. We do not believe such confirmation will jeopardise any chance of a deal.

• The Club has indicated Stadium MK is still on the agenda. We have stated our strong opposition to any such move because of the threat to THFC’s heritage and identity, the travel problems it will present for many fans, and the association with franchise football. We have said we will not enter discussions about theoretical situations, but while MK remains on the agenda there are two questions fans would like answered.

1 Has any approach been made to Stadium MK?

2 Is MK likely to be the only alternative because it is the cheapest alternative?

That second question is vital because we believe the interests of a 133-year-old institution override the interests of any temporary owner. A situation in which a move out of London to Milton Keynes really was the only option left open to Tottenham Hotspur, with all the damage that could do to the club’s identity and the inconvenience it would pose for supporters, would raise serious questions about how that situation was arrived at.

• A new stadium with a bigger capacity provides a perfect opportunity to address the concerns about the high price of English football tickets, while also ensuring the stadium is regularly full. We want to see a progressive pricing policy put in place, which means employing stretch pricing to ensure top-level corporate packages enable prices to be reduced in a significant section of the ground.

We welcome THFC’s support for safe standing and believe this provides one key way to both reduce prices and increase income. Against the background of unprecedented income for the game, and the latest set of healthy financial figures for the Club, we say there is no excuse for failing to relieve the financial burden on fans.

We accept that issues around player wages and the financial structure of the game affect every Club’s financial position, and that is why we work alongside other football organisations for reforms in the way the game is run. But as far as increasing the financial burden on fans goes, we say enough is enough.

• The Club has repeatedly stressed the benefits the stadium can bring the local area. There is a complex argument in the sports business world about what benefits stadium projects bring to the surrounding areas and how those benefits can be measured – with no conclusion yet reached. We still believe the stadium represents the best available chance for regenerating an area sorely in need of regeneration. Whatever the arguments, some regeneration is better than none.

But the Club, like Haringey Council, has to recognise there is still a great deal of genuine suspicion in the local community about the plans. The Club’s current owners, remember, wanted to move the Club to Stratford. So we would like to see the Club build on the work it is already doing in its highly-regarded community projects to rebuild community confidence in a project that could make our Club a beacon for world football. We would be happy to play whatever part we could in this.

The new stadium project is an opportunity to write a new chapter in the Club’s history. One which benefits the Club, its fans and the local communities. For this to happen, there needs to be a fresh approach to working together.

http://www.haringeyindependent.co.u...Tottenham_Hotspur_Supporters_Trust_statement/

draw its strength and identity from the area in which it is located.

People in Tottenham do not go to Tottenham Hotspur Football Club anymore!

do they? well maybe -1.3% LOL

 

[We are Tottenham]

The Washington Post, although reporting the Tottenham / NFL rumours, doesn't seem to think it holds much attraction for an NFL owner.

When news broke recently that the London football club (that’s soccer to us Yanks) Tottenham Hotspur was thinking of designing its new stadium to be fit for American football (that’s football), several thoughts no doubt ran through the minds of NFL fans. Like, “Does this mean that the NFL will soon become the first trans-Atlantic sports league?” and “Will West Coast fans have to starting setting their alarms for 6:30 a.m. on Sundays?” and “Will Coach Lasso finally have to learn how to say Tottenham Hotspur’s name?”

At first blush, this is just part of the NFL’s relentless march toward world domination, now that it’s officially taken over as America’s number one sport. The league has been playing at least one game a year in London since 2007, drawing decent crowds of enthusiastic if oddly dressed fans. And every time there’s a new development across the pond, there’s renewed talk that an existing franchise could soon relocate to London — say, the Jacksonville Jaguars, who currently decamp to the U.K. for one game a year, and who play in one of the league’s smallest U.S. metro areas.

Which all makes sense — until you stop to think about the particular peculiarities of NFL finances. If you were, say, an NBA team, London would be an alluring market: more than 8 million people, many of them awash in spending money, and tons of opportunities to rake in the dough selling everything from TV rights to souvenir jerseys. The chance to get rich in a big market in basketball is the reason why Steve Ballmer was willing to drop $2 billion on the Los Angeles Clippers last year (that, and because when you’re the ex-CEO of Microsoft, price tags are a mere abstraction).

In the NFL, though, things are different. There are no local cable deals: All TV money flows through the national networks, so market size doesn’t give you much of a financial advantage. (That’s one reason the Green Bay Packers have survived all these years: They get the same yearly Fox checks as everyone else.) And with only eight home games a year, sellouts are common, so you can’t expect to double your ticket sales by moving to a bigger city.

Besides, Tottenham’s new stadium — which under the latest plan would get a nifty roll-out fake-turf field for American football — would be owned by the soccer team, with any NFL franchise being relegated to tenant status. That means no chances for an NFL owner to cash in by selling naming rights, ad space on video boards or personal seat licenses for the mere right to buy tickets, like owners in big U.S. markets are doing to fatten their wallets.

So for any individual NFL team owner, London doesn’t seem that much better than any American market — even Jacksonville.

But for the league as a whole, London can serve a bigger purpose: It can be the new Los Angeles.

Ever since the Rams and Raiders split for St. Louis and Oakland two decades ago, L.A. has been a bizarre anomaly on the NFL landscape, the nation’s second-largest city but without a pro football team to call its own. The reason is part political — L.A. officials have balked at the kind of lavish stadium subsidies that St. Louis and Oakland lured their former teams away with — and partly thanks to those curious NFL finances: It wasn’t worth it for any owner to build an L.A. stadium on his own dime with no local cable riches to be won. And with Angelenos happy enough to watch whatever national games were on TV that week, having a long-term L.A. vacancy was no skin off the NFL’s nose, either.

However, that may soon be changing. Last year, the owners of the San Francisco 49ers discovered that their new stadium in Santa Clara, Calif., could pay its own way and then some, thanks to all those seat licenses and ad boards and upscale restaurants to dislodge money from wealthy tech moguls. And now, the owners of no fewer than three teams — the San Diego Chargers, plus the prodigal Raiders and Rams — are talking about trying to replicate the 49ers’ success with a pair of new $1.5-billion-plus stadiums in L.A.

While any moves are still very much a maybe — the L.A. stadium financing plans still have more holes than a retired NFL lineman’s brain — filling the L.A. vacuum with even one team would have huge repercussions for the league as a whole. That’s because during its 20 years in the football wilderness, Los Angeles has served a valuable role as a threat, for other team owners to take out and brandish whenever local legislators got cold feet about opening their checkbooks for new stadiums. In Minnesota, all it took was a one-day visit from commissioner Roger Goodell and some sports columns warning that L.A. was waiting with open arms, and next thing you know, Vikings owner Zygi Wilf was walking away with more than $1 billion in cash subsidies and tax breaks, courtesy of the citizens of Minnesota.

Without L.A. in play, NFL team owners would need to find a new bogeyman. Enter London. If the league plays its cards right, it can spend the next two decades dangling London as a threat to silence any U.S. stadium naysayers — while still using the distant promise of a team to plump up British interest in the NFL, in a kind of “watch us and we will come” strategy aimed at the 64 million bereft souls who have never known the joy of buying a $10 foam finger.

This might seem needlessly cruel to British fans who’d be getting their hopes up, or to fans in U.S. cities who would start clamoring to reenact the Boston Tea Party at the prospect of losing a team to another continent. (No taxation without the shotgun formation!)

To the NFL, however, it’s not rapacious greed, it’s just good solid business strategy. Though these days, it’s getting harder and harder to tell the difference.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...27/the-nfls-stadium-game-is-heading-overseas/

I'd rather us have a proper football stadium than one tailored for American Rugby..and don't forget man u fans are
not happy with their American owners..Its profit before the Team.

OK it maybe a money opportunity missed ...but we need a proper owner that is not poor relatively speaking
compared to what other clubs have in the League!

 

[Finney Is Back]

I'd rather us have a proper football stadium than one tailored for American Rugby..and don't forget man u fans are
not happy with their American owners..Its profit before the Team.

OK it maybe a money opportunity missed ...but we need a proper owner that is not poor relatively speaking
compared to what other clubs have in the League!

If there is a way of constructing it so that football and NFL can coexist harmoniously with separate playing surfaces (and surely that's not beyond the realms of possibility these days?) then I don't see the drawbacks at all. It would be good for both THFC and the local area financially.

 

[jts1882]

I'd rather us have a proper football stadium than one tailored for American Rugby..and don't forget man u fans are
not happy with their American owners..Its profit before the Team.

OK it maybe a money opportunity missed ...but we need a proper owner that is not poor relatively speaking
compared to what other clubs have in the League!

But what is a proper owner?

• The real sugar-daddies (Chelsea, City)
• The rich bottom-line types (Liverpool, Villa, us?)
• The rich rapacious types (the Glazers, Hicks & Gilett)
• The incompetent (Leeds)
• The fraudulent millionaires (Portsmouth)
• Traditional (Hill-Woods etc)
  
• Real fans (Whelan, Haywood)