• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The London Taxpayers' Stadium Shambles

Guess they'll just appeal again and drag this out another year, gives them a bit more time to get their paper trail in line.
 
Notmegov said:
The guys on Skyscrapper city (Spam fans) seem to think that the stadium move will only benefit them to the tune of a extra 10 million a year. To me that sounds a bit puny considering the 2nd rate stadium they are going to have to live in.
Click to expand...


that can't be true, can it?
 
paxtonwolf said:
yakster on ftl: We are negotiating to use Olympic Stadium
For one year
Don't know much apart from they think it makes sense
Top table stuff this

hertyid on yaksters info:It will come out.
Always does.
CEO of LLDC wants us in there for our season away.

hertyid again: Fwiw west ham categorically do not have a legal veto. They can object but if the LLDC as the sole owner decide to lease the stadium to us on alternate weekends for our home league games then Brady has to take it on the chin.
Click to expand...

If there is any truth in the above, then Levy now has a clear precedent/marker to work with.

And this caught my eye in the summary on the BBC website :
Extra payments West Ham could have to make
£1m if they win the Champions League
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
 
dingdongo said:
So did they reveal anything interesting in the stadium deal that was not expected?
Click to expand...

All bubble blowing products are banned.

LLDC to supply corner flags, nipple tape, ralgex.

Any profits from pie sales to go to People's Trust For Endangered Species.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
If there is any truth in the above, then Levy now has a clear precedent/marker to work with.

And this caught my eye in the summary on the BBC website :
Extra payments West Ham could have to make
£1m if they win the Champions League
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
Click to expand...

Rent halved when they get relegated
 
I think we will end up a Wembley but It would be rather amusing if Levy managed to negotiate a better deal for A season the OS than WH (obviously hard to compare like for like).
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I think we will end up a Wembley but It would be rather amusing if Levy managed to negotiate a better deal for A season the OS than WH (obviously hard to compare like for like).
Click to expand...
If nothing else we now have a good pricepoint to start negotiations at, though knowing Levy he'll probably demand to be payed to play there for strengthening the West Ham brand by assosiating spurs with West ham :D
 
West Ham got a pretty good deal, thinks like Policing etc I believe can be around £1m a year or so particularly when there's a lot of London derbies and need greater police presence.
 
On first glance it looks like the LLDC have negotiated a poor deal and West Ham have got a fantastic one. The £2.5 million a season that West Ham are paying - which is cut in half when they are relegated (and I say 'when' as history shows us it is a case of when rather than if) will probably barely cover the operational costs which include Policing on the stadium island (a cost that is covered by the LLDC).

That being said, the opportunities for West Ham to earn lots of extra revenue from the stadium are not particularly great:
  • The number of corporate seats is reasonably small (I think around 2,000 compared to around 9,000 at The Emirates and 8,000 planned at the new Spurs stadium (potentially extendable by another 1,000 or so).
  • They will only get a share (I assume an equal share with the LLDC and Newham Council) of anything over £5 million a year stadium naming rights. If we assume that naming of the former Olympic stadium would bring in around £8 million a year then that would only equate to £1 million going to West Ham.
  • They will only earn 30% of any catering revenues over £500,000 each year.
  • They cannot earn anything from additional events at the stadium (all profits from these would go to the LLDC)
I would imagine that the LLDC are reasonably happy to break even on the operational costs in the knowledge that they can expect a £6 million a year windfall from the naming rights and also make additional revenues from the catering and extra events.

I would expect West Ham's revenue to increase by approximately £20 million as a direct result of the stadium, which is not to be sniffed at seeing as West Ham only contributed £15 million to the refit which was more than covered by their sale of The Boleyn ground. However the opportunity for further income growth is pretty slim.

I also wonder what will happen in 10 to 15 years time when the stadium needs sprucing up. Who will pay for it? The LLDC have no need to do so as they have an anchor tenant in place on a long (effectively unbreakable) lease.

Something else that I am unclear about is whether the £2.5 million rent payable by West Ham is set for the entire 99 years. Typically any long lease will include reviews at set periods (say every 5 or 10 years). If review clauses have not been included in this deal then that really would be appalling negotiation from the LLDC as the operational costs are likely to double every 15 years or so.
 
Finney Is Back said:
The LLDC have no need to do so as they have an anchor tenant in place on a long (effectively unbreakable) lease.
Click to expand...
West Ham will never be able to break the lease.

In order to do so they'd need to buy the land for a stadium and then build one too - absolutely impossible for a team of West Ham's means.
 
scaramanga said:
West Ham will never be able to break the lease.

In order to do so they'd need to buy the land for a stadium and then build one too - absolutely impossible for a team of West Ham's means.
Click to expand...

Surely these fundamental details should be part of information made available to the public.
Commercial rent review periods are usually up at the top of the conditions on the any lease.
What about business rates - Have WH got a pass on these also? (not sure if this applies to a sports stadium)
Public need to see the real lease not this PR doctored version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back