• 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

Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

The one thing we must absolutely ensure doesn't happen is that we end up 'homeless' due to some crazy set of events. Getting kicked out of the Prem because we couldn't fulfil our fixtures would be an absolute nightmare.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Finney Is Back said:
I don't think you have thought things through here at all.... If Archway continue to appeal (to the High court and then perhaps all the way to the European court) then the issue could easily take another 12 to 18 months to resolve. Every year that we are delayed in building our new stadium is likely to cost us around £30 million (and perhaps more when you factor in revenue from stadium naming rights). Therefore if the CPO valuation is £2 million but we agree to pay £5 million we are potentially £27 million better off as opposed to £3 million worse off. This is just considering the financials. Remember that there is also a chance at every stage that the court will find in favour of the Josifs, guarding against that would also be worth some sort of premium.

All decisions made in respect to our stadium have to be based on sound business logic and not sentiment.
Click to expand...


But remember the emphasis is on the High Court to permit an appeal to the Court of Appeal - there's no automatic right if the verdict is decisive and they are just being frivolous in trying to continue.

Also remember that the ever-growing legal fees are quickly driving Archway to bankruptcy, whereas Haringey are the other petitioner, not us.

We could settle now for the £25m Archway are demanding, or pay the CPO valuation of £2m in January.
 
Last edited:
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Gutter Boy said:
But remember the emphasis is on the High Court to permit an appeal to the Court of Appeal - there's no automatic right if the verdict is decisive and they are just being frivolous in trying to continue.

Also remember that the ever-growing legal fees are quickly driving Archway to bankruptcy, whereas Haringey are the other petitioner, not us.

We could settle now for the £25m Archway are demanding, or pay the CPO valuation of £2m in January.
Click to expand...

Even if it gets thrown out, they'll be able to waste a few more weeks, if not months, by exhausting every possible opportunity.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Shelfie said:
That's my view as well, that until the Archway biz is resolved how can we have a time scale for a ground share?

If/when it does happen I hope it's at the OS with West Ham, as I think that's the best way forward for that one season, maybe two if things go wrong, which is surely possible.

Incidentally, one of the things I did agree with ENIC was that our best option was to build our new stadium at Stratford. All those people who protested and said we must stay in Tottenham, I wonder if any have changed their feelings now considering the problems the NDP has had, and that we surely would have finished the stadium at Stratford long before we do at the 'new Lane'.

Of course, it turns out the club were played as mugs in order to get us to bid for the OS when we had no real chance of winning. Thus allowing West Ham an easy win over us that they've milked for years now, and will be loving it when they have a new stadium and we're where? Who knows, not me.

14 years ago ENIC took over this club, 14 years later we have no more capacity than we did then. It's almost for sure now that sometime in 2017 West Ham will have a bigger stadium than us, so we will have slipped to fourth biggest stadium in London football, as well as third biggest club in London under ENIC. Indeed in the medium term outlook, it's my guess we'll be more likely fighting off West Ham to hang on to our '3rd biggest' tag, rather than challenging Arsenal or Chelsea for second biggest, assuming we're still with ENIC that is.
Click to expand...

When ENIC took over the club, there was little need for a substantially bigger stadium. Most games, bar Arsenal and Man Utd, used to go to general sale back then and plenty of games were short of capacity. There was no season ticket waiting list nor any suggestion that one would shortly be required.

ENIC said from the outset that their first priority was the team; second was the academy and training ground; third was the stadium. And I think they got their priorities right. When they did get around to the stadium, their first plan had been to redevelop the current ground. But they subsequently decided that that solution wouldn't have delivered sufficient bang for its buck. The capacity increase would have been too small and the consequent extra income to be earned wouldn't have made the expense and effort worthwhile. So they decided to take a long term view instead and embark on a project for an entirely new stadium - except that I doubt they envisaged it being quite this long term!

As to Stratford, I couldn't give a monkeys about whether or not it made sense or whether or not the club would have been in a new stadium a year or two earlier. It would simply have been wrong. We belong in Tottenham. End of story as far as I'm concerned.

As to West Ham, they will have a bigger, newer stadium than us for a year or two. So what? Their income will remain considerably below ours; they will be paying £2m rent per annum; they will struggle to fill the stadium for the majority games other than by giving away tickets; they will no longer own their stadium (and will never again do so); the stadium that they rent will be a poor compromise of an all purpose stadium - not a place that fans will love; it has only 3500 corporate seats (same as the current WHL and half the number as at the proposed new WHL); they will not earn from other events held at the stadium; they will not earn from catering concessions at the stadium, even when West Ham are playing; they will only take a small share of any naming rights deal.

And within a year or two of West Ham moving in, we'll move into a new stadium - a stadium that we will own; that will catapult our income even further ahead of theirs; that will be specifically designed for football, with steep stands, close to the pitch; that will have 7-8K corporate seats; that will have a single tier end; and from which we will earn all income from naming rights, catering concessions and non football events.

I think that's worth a couple of years extra wait.
 
Last edited:
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Gutter Boy said:
But remember the emphasis is on the High Court to permit an appeal to the Court of Appeal - there's no automatic right if the verdict is decisive and they are just being frivolous in trying to continue.

Also remember that the ever-growing legal fees are quickly driving Archway to bankruptcy, whereas Haringey are the other petitioner, not us.

We could settle now for the £25m Archway are demanding, or pay the CPO valuation of £2m in January.
Click to expand...

Haringey are the other petitioner but the costs will be met by Spurs.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Jordinho said:
Even if it gets thrown out, they'll be able to waste a few more weeks, if not months, by exhausting every possible opportunity.
Click to expand...

It's not much in the grand scheme of thing. We've already missed the window to be in by 17-18 season. As long as the diggers roll by August 15, we'll be in by August 18.


jimmyb said:
Haringey are the other petitioner but the costs will be met by Spurs.
Click to expand...

Would Haringey not retain lawyers? This is very routine business for local councils

The most likely outcome anyway is that Archway will now have to pick up Haringey's legal costs.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Hard one this.

I want this new stadium like mad, always wanted spurs to increase capacity (one way or another) since the New East Stand was approved 13 years ago but I've never been able to approve of CPOs for the private sector. If it was Tescos or Barrett Homes not THFC that was the catalyst for the regeneration would you approve?

Yes I know Tottenham is s sh!t hole and needs this but I get sick to death of this constant complaints of interference from government with cries such as "Stop taxing us and let the wealth trickle down!!!!!!!" But then demand that government helps in other areas such as land purchase with CPOs which should be for the state for emergency uses such as war or demand for new hospitals etc.

Deep down inside I want Spurs to win this case and feel that in part Archway are being greedy but I also feel a review is needed of the CPO process because Eric Pickles gave this CPO despite THFC back peddling on Section 106 agreements such as affordable housing. On top of this Arsenal were given CPOs from the top (then Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott) for a project that would 'benefit the local area' and involved a Stadium version of the IPhone (revolutionary in both spec and astonishing revenues) and 1,000 homes, how that could benefit anyone but themselves I'll never know.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Gutter Boy said:
But remember the emphasis is on the High Court to permit an appeal to the Court of Appeal - there's no automatic right if the verdict is decisive and they are just being frivolous in trying to continue.

Also remember that the ever-growing legal fees are quickly driving Archway to bankruptcy, whereas Haringey are the other petitioner, not us.

We could settle now for the £25m Archway are demanding, or pay the CPO valuation of £2m in January.
Click to expand...

Where has the figure of £25 million been heard?
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

What has happened to Safe Standing lobbying?

If football is still for the working man, and not only for global media companies, the government need to sort out safe standing. I hope we have a plan to adapt the new stadium to incorporate safe standing. It would mean cheaper tickets, increased capacity and an improved atmosphere.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

SpurMeUp said:
What has happened to Safe Standing lobbying?

If football is still for the working man, and not only for global media companies, the government need to sort out safe standing. I hope we have a plan to adapt the new stadium to incorporate safe standing. It would mean cheaper tickets, increased capacity and an improved atmosphere.
Click to expand...

Football is no longer for the working man though.

Why the assumption that standing areas will automatically translate into cheaper tickets? They would probably be slightly less expensive, but they wouldn't be cheap. The clubs will still charge as much as they can while being able to sell out.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Jordinho said:
Football is no longer for the working man though.

Why the assumption that standing areas will automatically translate into cheaper tickets? They would probably be slightly less expensive, but they wouldn't be cheap. The clubs will still charge as much as they can while being able to sell out.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Most prefer standing, so they could even be in greater demand! But then I guess you'd just create more standing sections to satisfy demand. What would WHLs capacity be if it was standing? My grandfather went to games around the time of our record attendances. Wasn't it around 70,000 Spurs fans packed into the lane?! Can you imagine - 70,000 all standing, shouting, singing.
 
Last edited:
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

If you got 70k attendances, and 40k were standing, you could charge a significant amount less for standing tickets. Not only would you achieve higher volume of tick sales, the club would make more on food, drinks and merchandising.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

SpurMeUp said:
Yeah. Most prefer standing, so they could even be in greater demand! But then I guess you'd just create more standing sections to satisfy demand. What would WHLs capacity be if it was standing? My grandfather went to games around the time of our record attendances. Wasn't it around 70,000 Spurs fans packed into the lane?! Can you imagine - 70,000 all standing, shouting, singing.
Click to expand...

Using those rail seats effectively doubles the capacity of that section right?
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

I believe that most people prefer standing is an urban myth, maybe 10,000 might but women, older fans and fans with young children tend to prefer sitting. There is still a problem with mindless idiots who get boozed up and could cause safety issues. I've been going to football for nearly 60 years when everwhere had standing and it was not very good, don't believe all the rose tinted stories of passing kids down to the front, it could be very dangerous at times.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

jts1882 said:
Not upsetting the natives seems a bigger problem.
Click to expand...

But MK Dons, let's assume, would be in agreement when we sign the deal. The club that is, not the fans. Some of their fans might object but their board are the ones who could appeal, and won't if they have entered into an agreement.

The idea about the league games having to take priority I think can be got round. We could ground share with Arsenal hypothetically, as we are never at home the same day as them. This sort of problem is sorted out at a different stage. So the guy who does the PL fixtures will need to talk to the guy who does the FL fixtures (possibly the same chap) and add in this parameter.

I think all of that is at the discretion of the board, they can review and change these rules to accommodate. These rules are there to prevent certain abuses, as you've said. The PL acts in the interests of the clubs, to further the PL. It's in the PL's interests for Spurs, Chelsea, Liverpool etc to all have the best stadiums in club football so if the rules need to be tweaked to allow them to fairly progress, thats what will happen.

What does bother me is that these boards are all made up by football men who have a vested interest. Someone like David Dein would try and stop us out of spite. And all these things also need to be sorted in order. We have to have MK Dons onside before we start building, and we have to have the PL happy before we finalise things with them. Otherwise people can have us over a barrel. Can definitely see why we need to have workable alternatives so that we don't get stitched up too. I think Brisbane Road + Wembley should be pushed:

Estimating about 30 matches a season, at WHL we have 30 x 36k = 1,080k seats.
22 matches at Brisbane Road = 220k seats
8 matches at Wembley = 720k seats

Would satisfy a certain demand, although clearly not perfect. I appreciate one of the 24k season ticket holders would be very concerned.
 
Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Brisbane ****ing Road????

You're taking the ****, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back