One word. " gentrification" in Tottenham.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
The move to the OS destroys many historic lower league football clubs to an extent. It's really sad.
If we wanted Champions league football and progression at the time then we should have moved into the Olympic stadium
Rather than waiting, letting players leave and going backwards waiting for Archway to leave
*( Totally off topic BTW )
Once again, the only winners will be the poxy lawyers...
Why other clubs think Spam moving to the OS will impact on them I have no idea. Do you see the amount of advertising Spam do in rags like the Standard to flog seats and 'half' season tickets during the season? They don't have a waiting list like some other, better supported teams, they have to heavily discount seats through the season and they have a management team who are praying that 'build it and they will come' applies to football as it does to baseball in Hollywood movies. Good luck on that.
Moving to the same vicinity of Leyton Orient means their young fans are less likely to subscribe with their traditional local club as opposed to the PL club in the big, glittery stadium
Lubricant, Leyton and OS are in different boroughs. West Ham are not moving within their borough, closer to the origins of the club.
Acquire some knowledge before you spout your knowledge mug.
"Once again, the only winners will be the poxy lawyers"
If somebody calls it. No suggestion that is happening (yet) .
Let a lawyer get a sniff of cash and it will become self sustaining. Personally I really want Spam to get the Olympic Stadium now. It'll be like walking into a dirty great echoing cave...
Is anybody there...
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 34 minutes ago
Lubricant, Leyton and OS are in different boroughs. West Ham are not moving within their borough, closer to the origins of the club.
Acquire some knowledge before you spout your knowledge mug.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did I say that? No
I said vicinity
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/20/west-ham-compensation-risk-state-aid-olympic-stadium
Once again I repeat that there is no inference anywhere the WHU themselves have done anything wrong.
This is just an excerpt from part of The Guardian's report.
Yet almost everything surrounding the deal that delivered the stadium to West Ham remains shrouded in secrecy. For a project that has commanded such a flow of public funds, there is a serious lack of transparency.
“The secrecy worries me if those decisions are being made without giving us the ability to hold them to account,” says Conservative London Assembly member Andrew Boff. “But what worries me more is the stupidity of some of the decisions that have been made.”
Campaigners have spent years engaged in FOI ping pong, succeeding only in obtaining a very heavily redacted version of the contract and limited answers about the process from a twitchy LLDC. Heavily redacted versions of the LLDC’s response to the European Commission and the original contract reveal that it will take a cut of the matchday catering revenues up to a certain amount, beyond which the income is split with West Ham. But all hospitality income will remain with the club.
It also argues that the LLDC will receive a “signifcant uplift” in naming rights income as a result of West Ham’s presence and that there is a “significant community benefits arising from West Ham’s use of the stadium” including 100,000 free tickets per annum to be distributed to locals.
The secrecy worries me if those decisions are being made without giving us the ability to hold them to account
Andrew Boff, Conservative London Assembly member
It also highlights the so-called Threshold Amount deal with West Ham ensuring that the LLDC will receive a slice of the proceeds if the club is sold within a certain timeframe (although it will only receive “a share of that increase in value above a certain threshold&rdquo.
Yet all the financial information and contractual details in the 25-page letter and the original contract are redacted for reasons of commercial confidentiality, making it impossible to ascertain whether the deal is fair one.
“The LLDC’s refusal to release the commercial details of the contract even under Freedom of Information law adds to the suspicion that those involved do not want the deal to come under public scrutiny until it is impossible to reverse,” said Clarke. “We hope the Information Commissioner will prevail and that taxpayers can take a good long look at what has been agreed in their name.”
In a response to a letter from a group of Leyton Orient fans, Labour London Assembly Member Len Duvall said: “We are in agreement that there are concerns around the transparency of the Olympic Stadium deal and have requested its publication, with little success.”
Once again the 100,000 "free tickets" belong to Newham Council. They receive these plus a share in the Special Purpose Vehicle (me neither ) that runs the OS & access to the OS, in return for their £40m investment.
West Ham have the use of the stadium for 25 days a year, paying extra if they have to utilise more than that.
When the coalition government and Johnson came into power they resolved to look again at the case for getting a top-flight football club interested, believing it would give the Olympic Park more stardust, footfall, profitability and focus. Johnson persuaded the Spurs chairman, Daniel Levy, to bid, who duly did so on the basis the existing semi-permanent structure should be knocked down and a purpose-built football ground constructed in its place.
It was only when Coe & Co insisted that the track be retained did the problems occur & the taxpayer as usual picks up the tab!
I am looking at the olympic stadium and that stupid monstrosity of a design next to it right now from my office
ShortBack&Sides
What team has a season ticket waiting list?
You are surely not referring to the mythical Spurs one? How many does Levy claim is on it at the moment? When of course it is infact a club membership list for the privilege of priority individual seat purchasing. It just so happens it's also used as the season ticket list.
There is absolutely no way of knowing what number of the people on that list would take up a Spurs season ticket if given the chance.
Greaves
I've now read the Guardian report, what I get from it and you may be reading it differently, is not any suggestion of wrongdoing from any side. More that the lack of transparency brings up the possibility that wrongdoing may have occurred.
Sane.........................................It is how it is interpreted under Article105 that is most important.
But a backlash against the idea of losing the athletics track, led by an emotionally charged Lord Coe, saw West Ham win the day only for the process to be scrapped amid legal paralysis. The LLDC had to rerun the process, this time giving West Ham a licence to use the stadium for a pre-agreed number of days rather than a tenancy.
This enables it to argue West Ham effectively only occupy the stadium for 25 days a year and it can be utilised for a range of other uses outside those periods. But for critics this is a specious argument given that it is designed to look and feel like West Ham’s home stadium for the duration of the football season.
And the narrow legal question of whether European state aid rules have been broken refuses to go away, never mind nagging wider concerns about the amount of public money that has effectively subsidised a new stadium for a Premier League football club.
The other key question is why is the report so heavily redacted so as to raise the suggestions that there is something to hide.
I personally did not want us to move away from Haringey/Enfield, however I think that the handling of this by LLDC & the obfuscation it has created is not quite right. I am in no way suggesting West Ham have done anything wrong at their end.
comment by Sane (U19841)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
ShortBack&Sides
What team has a season ticket waiting list?
You are surely not referring to the mythical Spurs one? How many does Levy claim is on it at the moment? When of course it is infact a club membership list for the privilege of priority individual seat purchasing. It just so happens it's also used as the season ticket list.
There is absolutely no way of knowing what number of the people on that list would take up a Spurs season ticket if given the chance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm somewhere in the 19000 range with my son. I gave up my season ticket years back to raise a family. There are 42000 on the list. I can't be bothered to do the math but it looks pretty healthy. And you don't see Spurs advertising half season tickets or bogof deals. Just saying...
Interesting article. Bookmarked .
ShortBack&Sides
So there are 42,000 Spurs Bronze Club members of which you are about the 19,000 longest member.
Have you any idea how many of the 19,000 in front of you are members who wish to one day purchase a season ticket as opposed to just get the benefit of being able to purchase one off match day tickets before they go on general sale?
To be far that was a rhetorical question, because nobody, not even Levy knows the correct answer.
Sane
There is definitely a waiting list. One of my good friends was on the list for 6 years and only got the opportunity to get one this season.
I'd say a 6 year wait it pretty good evidence there is a few in the queue who want a ST....
Do club ST waiting lists get updated regularly (every season etc) to keep the measure of demand current ??
On waiting lists, I'm sure there is one, but it's genuine length can only be guessed at.
On the article itself, the legacy committee, or whatever it's now named, may be open to legal challenges. Of course it doesn't follow any wrong doing will be proven.
The main worry for West Ham us the potential compensation you may have to pay. As it gives WHU a major advantage in terms of funds available for transfers etc.
Sign in if you want to comment
Olympic Stadium & State Aid?
Page 1 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 21/4/15
One word. " gentrification" in Tottenham.
posted on 21/4/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/4/15
The move to the OS destroys many historic lower league football clubs to an extent. It's really sad.
posted on 21/4/15
If we wanted Champions league football and progression at the time then we should have moved into the Olympic stadium
Rather than waiting, letting players leave and going backwards waiting for Archway to leave
posted on 21/4/15
*( Totally off topic BTW )
posted on 21/4/15
Once again, the only winners will be the poxy lawyers...
Why other clubs think Spam moving to the OS will impact on them I have no idea. Do you see the amount of advertising Spam do in rags like the Standard to flog seats and 'half' season tickets during the season? They don't have a waiting list like some other, better supported teams, they have to heavily discount seats through the season and they have a management team who are praying that 'build it and they will come' applies to football as it does to baseball in Hollywood movies. Good luck on that.
posted on 21/4/15
Moving to the same vicinity of Leyton Orient means their young fans are less likely to subscribe with their traditional local club as opposed to the PL club in the big, glittery stadium
posted on 21/4/15
Lubricant, Leyton and OS are in different boroughs. West Ham are not moving within their borough, closer to the origins of the club.
Acquire some knowledge before you spout your knowledge mug.
posted on 21/4/15
Are not = are*
posted on 21/4/15
"Once again, the only winners will be the poxy lawyers"
If somebody calls it. No suggestion that is happening (yet) .
posted on 21/4/15
Let a lawyer get a sniff of cash and it will become self sustaining. Personally I really want Spam to get the Olympic Stadium now. It'll be like walking into a dirty great echoing cave...
Is anybody there...
posted on 21/4/15
comment by MafiaBoy (U8613)
posted 34 minutes ago
Lubricant, Leyton and OS are in different boroughs. West Ham are not moving within their borough, closer to the origins of the club.
Acquire some knowledge before you spout your knowledge mug.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did I say that? No
I said vicinity
posted on 21/4/15
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/20/west-ham-compensation-risk-state-aid-olympic-stadium
Once again I repeat that there is no inference anywhere the WHU themselves have done anything wrong.
This is just an excerpt from part of The Guardian's report.
Yet almost everything surrounding the deal that delivered the stadium to West Ham remains shrouded in secrecy. For a project that has commanded such a flow of public funds, there is a serious lack of transparency.
“The secrecy worries me if those decisions are being made without giving us the ability to hold them to account,” says Conservative London Assembly member Andrew Boff. “But what worries me more is the stupidity of some of the decisions that have been made.”
Campaigners have spent years engaged in FOI ping pong, succeeding only in obtaining a very heavily redacted version of the contract and limited answers about the process from a twitchy LLDC. Heavily redacted versions of the LLDC’s response to the European Commission and the original contract reveal that it will take a cut of the matchday catering revenues up to a certain amount, beyond which the income is split with West Ham. But all hospitality income will remain with the club.
It also argues that the LLDC will receive a “signifcant uplift” in naming rights income as a result of West Ham’s presence and that there is a “significant community benefits arising from West Ham’s use of the stadium” including 100,000 free tickets per annum to be distributed to locals.
The secrecy worries me if those decisions are being made without giving us the ability to hold them to account
Andrew Boff, Conservative London Assembly member
It also highlights the so-called Threshold Amount deal with West Ham ensuring that the LLDC will receive a slice of the proceeds if the club is sold within a certain timeframe (although it will only receive “a share of that increase in value above a certain threshold&rdquo.
Yet all the financial information and contractual details in the 25-page letter and the original contract are redacted for reasons of commercial confidentiality, making it impossible to ascertain whether the deal is fair one.
“The LLDC’s refusal to release the commercial details of the contract even under Freedom of Information law adds to the suspicion that those involved do not want the deal to come under public scrutiny until it is impossible to reverse,” said Clarke. “We hope the Information Commissioner will prevail and that taxpayers can take a good long look at what has been agreed in their name.”
In a response to a letter from a group of Leyton Orient fans, Labour London Assembly Member Len Duvall said: “We are in agreement that there are concerns around the transparency of the Olympic Stadium deal and have requested its publication, with little success.”
posted on 21/4/15
Once again the 100,000 "free tickets" belong to Newham Council. They receive these plus a share in the Special Purpose Vehicle (me neither ) that runs the OS & access to the OS, in return for their £40m investment.
West Ham have the use of the stadium for 25 days a year, paying extra if they have to utilise more than that.
When the coalition government and Johnson came into power they resolved to look again at the case for getting a top-flight football club interested, believing it would give the Olympic Park more stardust, footfall, profitability and focus. Johnson persuaded the Spurs chairman, Daniel Levy, to bid, who duly did so on the basis the existing semi-permanent structure should be knocked down and a purpose-built football ground constructed in its place.
It was only when Coe & Co insisted that the track be retained did the problems occur & the taxpayer as usual picks up the tab!
posted on 21/4/15
I am looking at the olympic stadium and that stupid monstrosity of a design next to it right now from my office
posted on 21/4/15
ShortBack&Sides
What team has a season ticket waiting list?
You are surely not referring to the mythical Spurs one? How many does Levy claim is on it at the moment? When of course it is infact a club membership list for the privilege of priority individual seat purchasing. It just so happens it's also used as the season ticket list.
There is absolutely no way of knowing what number of the people on that list would take up a Spurs season ticket if given the chance.
posted on 21/4/15
Greaves
I've now read the Guardian report, what I get from it and you may be reading it differently, is not any suggestion of wrongdoing from any side. More that the lack of transparency brings up the possibility that wrongdoing may have occurred.
posted on 21/4/15
Sane.........................................It is how it is interpreted under Article105 that is most important.
But a backlash against the idea of losing the athletics track, led by an emotionally charged Lord Coe, saw West Ham win the day only for the process to be scrapped amid legal paralysis. The LLDC had to rerun the process, this time giving West Ham a licence to use the stadium for a pre-agreed number of days rather than a tenancy.
This enables it to argue West Ham effectively only occupy the stadium for 25 days a year and it can be utilised for a range of other uses outside those periods. But for critics this is a specious argument given that it is designed to look and feel like West Ham’s home stadium for the duration of the football season.
And the narrow legal question of whether European state aid rules have been broken refuses to go away, never mind nagging wider concerns about the amount of public money that has effectively subsidised a new stadium for a Premier League football club.
The other key question is why is the report so heavily redacted so as to raise the suggestions that there is something to hide.
I personally did not want us to move away from Haringey/Enfield, however I think that the handling of this by LLDC & the obfuscation it has created is not quite right. I am in no way suggesting West Ham have done anything wrong at their end.
posted on 21/4/15
comment by Sane (U19841)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
ShortBack&Sides
What team has a season ticket waiting list?
You are surely not referring to the mythical Spurs one? How many does Levy claim is on it at the moment? When of course it is infact a club membership list for the privilege of priority individual seat purchasing. It just so happens it's also used as the season ticket list.
There is absolutely no way of knowing what number of the people on that list would take up a Spurs season ticket if given the chance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm somewhere in the 19000 range with my son. I gave up my season ticket years back to raise a family. There are 42000 on the list. I can't be bothered to do the math but it looks pretty healthy. And you don't see Spurs advertising half season tickets or bogof deals. Just saying...
posted on 21/4/15
Interesting article. Bookmarked .
posted on 21/4/15
ShortBack&Sides
So there are 42,000 Spurs Bronze Club members of which you are about the 19,000 longest member.
Have you any idea how many of the 19,000 in front of you are members who wish to one day purchase a season ticket as opposed to just get the benefit of being able to purchase one off match day tickets before they go on general sale?
To be far that was a rhetorical question, because nobody, not even Levy knows the correct answer.
posted on 21/4/15
Sane
There is definitely a waiting list. One of my good friends was on the list for 6 years and only got the opportunity to get one this season.
I'd say a 6 year wait it pretty good evidence there is a few in the queue who want a ST....
posted on 21/4/15
Do club ST waiting lists get updated regularly (every season etc) to keep the measure of demand current ??
posted on 21/4/15
On waiting lists, I'm sure there is one, but it's genuine length can only be guessed at.
On the article itself, the legacy committee, or whatever it's now named, may be open to legal challenges. Of course it doesn't follow any wrong doing will be proven.
posted on 21/4/15
The main worry for West Ham us the potential compensation you may have to pay. As it gives WHU a major advantage in terms of funds available for transfers etc.
Page 1 of 7
6 | 7