Will it be a similar deal as Man City and the Etihad?

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/oct/04/manchester-city-council-stadium-naming-rights

I doubt they're just giving it to them. I imagine there will be some fairly hefty rent involved, or a big old mortgage

Its the equivalent of them facks on benefits getting a big 5bedroom house for free. They will be paying a tiny amount of rent compared to what the stadium will generate.

We long considered moving into old Wembley before our attention shifted to Ashburton Grove. Would that have been awful too?

I imagine that they will lease the stadium for a significant sum. Coventry do it, I believe. You also have to look at Brighton's search for a home over the 90's and 00's. The Amex stadium is their salvation.

On a footballing level I understand your problem as an Arsenal fan. However, West Ham has huge support and will finally be able to have an attendance reflective of that. Not only that, it's far better that we use an Olympic stadium that would otherwise be a white elephant. Just look at the facilities in Athens. That's far more shameful.

They pay 2m a year in rent which is not much, not sure if they get all the cash from ticket sales and commercial revnue (naming rights etc) and they don't get anything from other sportings events/concerts going on there. But they saved £500m building a new stadium, so the positives outweigh the negatives

Will they have to hand over the Boleyn ground over to the council?

You can see why levy wanted spurs to move there. The council should take west ham current stadium and sell it on to help cover the costs. They should easily get 100Mil for that as it's in London.

As long as it isn't redeveloped into expensive flats for foreign investors and the super rich.

It is a stadium for the community of the area. The future use of the land should be for the benefit of the community there.

If all that have to pay is a couple of mil a year then that's definitely a straight up unfair advantage thats been gifted to them. They're effectively going to be able to plough the cost of building the stadium, directly into the team. How have the other clubs in the league not gone absolutely potty about it because they're the ones being cheated. They should all demand some sort of financial recompense. West Ham get a half billion pound stadium for zero building cost. Well then maybe they should all get 50 million each to spend on their squads to go some way to making up for the blatantly free money that West Ham have been gifted. Really can't see how 2mil rent a year is fair on anyone but most of all it's a massive injustice to all the teams not already in a 40,000+ stadium

comment by WengersBodyguard2 (U8276)
posted 40 minutes ago
If all that have to pay is a couple of mil a year then that's definitely a straight up unfair advantage thats been gifted to them. They're effectively going to be able to plough the cost of building the stadium, directly into the team. How have the other clubs in the league not gone absolutely potty about it because they're the ones being cheated. They should all demand some sort of financial recompense. West Ham get a half billion pound stadium for zero building cost. Well then maybe they should all get 50 million each to spend on their squads to go some way to making up for the blatantly free money that West Ham have been gifted. Really can't see how 2mil rent a year is fair on anyone but most of all it's a massive injustice to all the teams not already in a 40,000+ stadium
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I completely agree I can think of 2 options that would be fairer
1) West Ham pay off the cost of the stadium over and agreed number of years
2) All other clubs get a percentage of gate receipts and any other income(eg naming rights) that West Ham get because of the stadium

unfortunately life is unfair

Do West Ham pocket the money for the sale of Upton Park too? That should be their downpayment on the rent.

Just did a quick search and looks like they sold Upton Park for about £70m and get to keep that. And they have a £2m a year lease for 99 years. West Ham are hardly paying anything for the work they're doing to convert it to a football stadium, most of it paid for by taxpayer money

The stadium cost about 430m to build, another 200m to convert it to a football stadium and West Ham have only paid 15m towards it. Plus they share revenues from other events and keep all cash from tickets and merchandise. Lucky s

The way it's fair to others is that if any other club see's such an opportunity arise then they are more than welcome to take it.

Well done West Ham imo.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator