• 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

monkeybarry said:
It's unusable as a football stadium, so they may have little choice.

I see them going down this year and the dildos selling to a dodgy foreign investor who will also have to buy the stadium.
Khan will get the money in for London and it will end up Arab owned (liked most of London) as will West Ham.
And they will probably end up being a top half Championship club for a decade
Click to expand...

If that happens they could easily do a City. Really do not want another arab money doped club, especially in London
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
How much could Levy tap them up for?

He got it bang on that it was not suitable for football and must be feeling so smug now with all those people who had a go at him. In all seriousness though we won the Olympic big because of the legacy angle and if you got rid of the Athletics track from the stadium it would be a shambles.

Really impressed by the Hungarians who protested not to bid for the Olympics because of the cost of it, a clever people them lot.
Click to expand...


Why would Levy get money out of this?
 
What are the Penalty clauses for not returning to "Football mode" (yeh right) any one seen it? If they are only paying 2.5M p/a surely its cheaper to just take this hit and not move the seats back.
 
r-u-s-x said:
What are the Penalty clauses for not returning to "Football mode" (yeh right) any one seen it? If they are only paying 2.5M p/a surely its cheaper to just take this hit and not move the seats back.
Click to expand...
If they're losing around £7.5M pa too then it's unlikely any compensation due to West Ham would outweigh 99years of that.
 
r-u-s-x said:
What are the Penalty clauses for not returning to "Football mode" (yeh right) any one seen it? If they are only paying 2.5M p/a surely its cheaper to just take this hit and not move the seats back.
Click to expand...
I saw something on KUMB that if the stadium is not back in football mode by the appointed date, then WH are due something like £1M per match.

In today's report, there is a section on the potential delays in re-opening the stadium due to a claim made by Balfour Beatty for delay and disruption and in relation to the acceleration work needed to meet the deadline. BB suspended their acceleration work until the claim was resolved. In assessing the claim, LLDC took into consideration additional costs they would have to incur if they didn't settle with Balfour Beatty, one of which was WH not being able to play their opening games :

While the full cost of cancelling these events was not easy to assess, the reputational impact was inevitably significant, and the compensation payable to WHU for missed games was estimated at £1.25m per match, plus compensation for lost retail and catering sales.
Click to expand...

Whether that was specific to those particular first games, or whether it would still apply now, I don't know. There doesn't appear to be any mention in the report of the penalties associated with not returning to football mode.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
How much could Levy tap them up for?

He got it bang on that it was not suitable for football and must be feeling so smug now with all those people who had a go at him. In all seriousness though we won the Olympic big because of the legacy angle and if you got rid of the Athletics track from the stadium it would be a shambles.

Really impressed by the Hungarians who protested not to bid for the Olympics because of the cost of it, a clever people them lot.
Click to expand...
Not sure, but they spent a fudging fortune avoiding paying him off when they kept the running track, etc. So it must have been significant.
 
West Ham said:
As the report confirms, the Concession Agreement is a watertight, legally binding contract signed in 2013 in good faith by West Ham United, who remain absolutely committed to its terms for the entire 99-year duration.

We have delivered everything we committed to within the Concession Agreement, and act as the primary vehicle for London Stadium’s legacy, delivering its most watched sporting spectacles, revenue driving events and thousands of jobs for local people.

It is not in West Ham United’s interests for the Stadium to not be performing in line with aspiration and, as we have done ever since moving to Stratford in the summer of 2016, we continue to offer the benefit of our commercial expertise and substantial experience in managing successful stadia.

West Ham United will continue to devote our absolute commitment to London Stadium, but our first priority in this sense is always to act in the best interests of our supporters.

We fully concur that West Ham United has played a significant part in the most successful regeneration programme in the history of the modern Olympics, however the stadium itself craves renewed leadership and direction and we welcome the Mayor’s decision to step in and deliver this. West Ham United is firmly behind him.
Click to expand...
 
No standards, then, for 'fit and proper' tenants?

Because West Ham are nothing like and never will be. Candidates for the next Planet of the Apes film.
 
Spur of the moment said:
Wow!
Tottenham £45m from an average of 31,639 (plus four Wembley games)
West Ham £29m from a fictional* average of 56,972

*Following a Freedom of Information request midway through last season police records showed the numbers actually present at the Taxpayers Stadium on matchdays were up to ten thousand below the official attendance figure.
Click to expand...
In this case it doesn't matter if they turn up. When you're representing revenue a sold ticket is a sold ticket.
 
So each seat at WHL yielded more than twice as much as seats at the Olympic stadium over the season.

That's the problem with going for a stadium that is too big for the club. You have to discount tickets to fill the stadium and once people can get tickets for the games they want they will no longer shell out for a season ticket. Sunderland had this problem. West Ham may find their season ticket numbers declining unless they put on performances that get the fans excited.

Instead they seem to be doing everything to turn fans away: non-investment in the team, with thinly veiled stunt transfer targets, lack of security that will keep families away, etc. The stadium was an opportunity to bring in new fans, getting more young people attending than at other London clubs. The persistent crowd trouble will do the opposite.
 
Spur of the moment said:
Wow!
Tottenham £45m from an average of 31,639 (plus four Wembley games)
West Ham £29m from a fictional* average of 56,972

*Following a Freedom of Information request midway through last season police records showed the numbers actually present at the Taxpayers Stadium on matchdays were up to ten thousand below the official attendance figure.
Click to expand...
Dippers saw a bigger increase in revenue just from redeveloping their main stand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/973118013187731457

No wonder the Green Street Elite are up in arms about Shady Brady and the Doldo Bros selling them a pup, for the relatively meagre sum of £38m.

https://twitter.com/x/status/971666537378668544
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back