From sounding like a decent fella ,GermanEastEnder, you've turned into some sort of snidey twat with your patronising comments Come on surely you're better than that I know we have some too but they're Charlton bells not bow bell bells
@PragueAddick Has the point I made earlier about the realistic life expectancy of a stadium been made at the trust or the discussions with other clubs groups? Apologies if it's been mentioned before, but I hadn't seen it anywhere. I don't know if it's a useful angle, that's all.
It's a very good one, and I clocked it. I will feed it in to the coalition group. I've got a file called "CL ideas" made up of cut and pastes from here, which you have reminded me I need to update.
To be honest there is so much new shit and so many new angles that different people keep uncovering, it's all I can do to keep up. But that's good.
as another Cl'er just said to me privately
"Wonder when the penny will drop this is not going away".
Hey GEE, I thought the euro had finally dropped yesterday when you said this, ‘maybe this has run its course, everything has been said numerous times’.
A little later you said, ‘I'll continue to occasionally drop in’. and then went to a kind of sign off.
Since then - not 24 hours has passed - and you’ve dropped in a further 4 times, you are clearly rattled and in need of some rest and relaxation. Its Friday night, get down the local bierkeller, have a few lagers and chill man.
Hey GEE, I thought the euro had finally dropped yesterday when you said this, ‘maybe this has run its course, everything has been said numerous times’.
A little later you said, ‘I'll continue to occasionally drop in’. and then went to a kind of sign off.
Since then - not 24 hours has passed - and you’ve dropped in a further 4 times, you are clearly rattled and in need of some rest and relaxation. Its Friday night, get down the local bierkeller, have a few lagers and chill man.
I think in deference to all the shenanigans and the extreme makeover it should now be referred to as the Former Olympic Stadium. As for longevity, the 1923 Wembley Stadium was extensively rebuilt in 1963 and totally demolished in 2002.
Of course this whole issue is a ticking bomb, and if not before then when BoJo makes his move on Nr 10 the fuse will be lit. In the meantime, as apparently the OB are wont to tell prime suspects "You have to be lucky every day but we have to be lucky only once". Many unspoilt copies of the contract must exist in the files of various official bodies not to mention numerous lawyers, accountants, consultants etc - how long before a principled whistle-blower or a disgruntled ex-employee opens up? At the very latest the effects of the contract's implementation will be apparent in WHU's 2016/2017 annual accounts. This affair is unlikely to go the full 15 rounds, however ....
I think in deference to all the shenanigans and the extreme makeover it should now be referred to as the Former Olympic Stadium. As for longevity, the 1923 Wembley Stadium was extensively rebuilt in 1963 and totally demolished in 2002.
Of course this whole issue is a ticking bomb, and if not before then when BoJo makes his move on Nr 10 the fuse will be lit. In the meantime, as apparently the OB are wont to tell prime suspects "You have to be lucky every day but we have to be lucky only once". Many unspoilt copies of the contract must exist in the files of various official bodies not to mention numerous lawyers, accountants, consultants etc - how long before a principled whistle-blower or a disgruntled ex-employee opens up? At the very latest the effects of the contract's implementation will be apparent in WHU's 2016/2017 annual accounts. This affair is unlikely to go the full 15 rounds, however ....
I'm surprised that hasn't happened already tbh but I'm hopeful a copy will surface sooner or later...and my bet would be it comes from within Newham council. Robin Wales is not universally popular shall we say and there are plenty of people who would not be unhappy to see him politically embarrassed.
I think in deference to all the shenanigans and the extreme makeover it should now be referred to as the Former Olympic Stadium. As for longevity, the 1923 Wembley Stadium was extensively rebuilt in 1963 and totally demolished in 2002.
Of course this whole issue is a ticking bomb, and if not before then when BoJo makes his move on Nr 10 the fuse will be lit. In the meantime, as apparently the OB are wont to tell prime suspects "You have to be lucky every day but we have to be lucky only once". Many unspoilt copies of the contract must exist in the files of various official bodies not to mention numerous lawyers, accountants, consultants etc - how long before a principled whistle-blower or a disgruntled ex-employee opens up? At the very latest the effects of the contract's implementation will be apparent in WHU's 2016/2017 annual accounts. This affair is unlikely to go the full 15 rounds, however ....
I'm surprised that hasn't happened already tbh but I'm hopeful a copy will surface sooner or later...and my bet would be it comes from within Newham council. Robin Wales is not universally popular shall we say and there are plenty of people who would not be unhappy to see him politically embarrassed.
Is it likely that they have a copy of the contract do you all think?
I think in deference to all the shenanigans and the extreme makeover it should now be referred to as the Former Olympic Stadium. As for longevity, the 1923 Wembley Stadium was extensively rebuilt in 1963 and totally demolished in 2002.
Of course this whole issue is a ticking bomb, and if not before then when BoJo makes his move on Nr 10 the fuse will be lit. In the meantime, as apparently the OB are wont to tell prime suspects "You have to be lucky every day but we have to be lucky only once". Many unspoilt copies of the contract must exist in the files of various official bodies not to mention numerous lawyers, accountants, consultants etc - how long before a principled whistle-blower or a disgruntled ex-employee opens up? At the very latest the effects of the contract's implementation will be apparent in WHU's 2016/2017 annual accounts. This affair is unlikely to go the full 15 rounds, however ....
I'm surprised that hasn't happened already tbh but I'm hopeful a copy will surface sooner or later...and my bet would be it comes from within Newham council. Robin Wales is not universally popular shall we say and there are plenty of people who would not be unhappy to see him politically embarrassed.
Is it likely that they have a copy of the contract do you all think?
I think in deference to all the shenanigans and the extreme makeover it should now be referred to as the Former Olympic Stadium. As for longevity, the 1923 Wembley Stadium was extensively rebuilt in 1963 and totally demolished in 2002.
Of course this whole issue is a ticking bomb, and if not before then when BoJo makes his move on Nr 10 the fuse will be lit. In the meantime, as apparently the OB are wont to tell prime suspects "You have to be lucky every day but we have to be lucky only once". Many unspoilt copies of the contract must exist in the files of various official bodies not to mention numerous lawyers, accountants, consultants etc - how long before a principled whistle-blower or a disgruntled ex-employee opens up? At the very latest the effects of the contract's implementation will be apparent in WHU's 2016/2017 annual accounts. This affair is unlikely to go the full 15 rounds, however ....
I'm surprised that hasn't happened already tbh but I'm hopeful a copy will surface sooner or later...and my bet would be it comes from within Newham council. Robin Wales is not universally popular shall we say and there are plenty of people who would not be unhappy to see him politically embarrassed.
Is it likely that they have a copy of the contract do you all think?
Sure. Newham is 35% shareholder in E20 LLP
That is interesting news as pointed out many unhappy workers at Newham and you can bet copies have been sneaked out of the town hall just waiting for the right time. I know it is what I would do!
I need to get back on the hypocrisy issue. You keep mentioning Man City as a glowing example of a fair deal to the taxpayer. Yes, they renegotiated the rent which is slightl yhigher now. But they also pay 2 million a year to get the right to sell the naming rights of the stadium (and keep the profuts for themselves). The deal was rumoured to be 400 million for ten years, 40 million per year. If you deduct the buying expenditure of 2 million that gives City 38 million every year. Why don't I see petitions about a fairer share of that massive naming rights deal in connection with a publicly owned stadium ? Why are you moaning about conversion costs of 280 million in relation to the OS when Man City are being gifted 380 million by their council ?
I'm a bit late to this, but you'll find that the £40m pa deal wasn't just for stadium naming rights, but for shirt and other sponsorships. To put it into context, Man Utd's shirt sponsorship deal with Chevrolet is worth £48m a year, with no naming rights. Arsenal's deal with Emirates contains just £2.8m pa naming rights.
Incidentally, a football financial expert suggested to me that the Olympic Stadium naming rights would be worth no more than £5m. The reality is that it could very well attract a good proportion of that anyway, just on its status. West Ham's contribution needs to be viewed as the delta between what it could attract and what it attracts with them as primary tenant.
West Ham will increase their margins by a conservative £20m. You might be surprised how little the taxpayer makes from the deal, whatever the porn brothers and the baroness tell you.
£200k profit next year when the hammers will be in it for 5 months of the year so when they're using it for 11 months of the season that's £440k profit ! Although I'm sure there are 5 more events taking place that all lose £1m each and profits from West Ham are covering those losses Or Vinci now come under more scrutiny because what are they creaming off the deal .....
This could be quite damaging if it gets enough publicity. Nice work Prague. Will the actual document be released just yet?
Ah, what a question. The ICO keep telling me a decision is imminent, and hint they are on our side, but then warn that they expect the LLDC to appeal.
This story is very much a Coalition production with the Charlton crew playing a minor role. Hats off to Mat Roper of Orient who uncovered the underlying document behind the story. And this is where I'd like to crowdsource a bit of extra help in scrutinising it. It is here, the minutes of an LLDC meeting on 17 March. From page 26, they present the 2016-17 budget for the Park (not just the Stadium) and on 2018 are the revenue projections. We can't see anything like a 2.5m rental figure from West Ham there. Now, that is partly because the accounting year is April -March but even so; Mat Roper is aware that the hockey facility is going gangbusters, and has already enquired of them about rental fees. He thinks that they may be bringing in about 200k p.a already. Therefore the document may show that West Ham's rental is in fact even lower than 2.5m, but we cannot stand that up yet.
So I'd be grateful if people can go over this and share their thoughts on what they may find. It would be good to build a picture of what other revenue-earning units will already be operational during that accounting period.
Later on in that document you can also have a laugh at a "10 Year plan" that is completely devoid of any meaningful number projections. Jeez, even the Soviets used to put numbers to their old 5 year plans, even if they were fantasy figures
Newham's £45m contribution is repayable out of the stadium's annual surplus - looks like it will taking a while ....
So how does that work in the hierarchy of taxpayer returns? If Newham gets paid back first then it will be forever before anything goes back into general coffers, won't it?
£200k profit next year when the hammers will be in it for 5 months of the year so when they're using it for 11 months of the season that's £440k profit ! Although I'm sure there are 5 more events taking place that all lose £1m each and profits from West Ham are covering those losses Or Vinci now come under more scrutiny because what are they creaming off the deal .....
£200k profit next year when the hammers will be in it for 5 months of the year so when they're using it for 11 months of the season that's £440k profit ! Although I'm sure there are 5 more events taking place that all lose £1m each and profits from West Ham are covering those losses Or Vinci now come under more scrutiny because what are they creaming off the deal .....
Budget year is from April, so that's 8 months.
But they won't be playing in it for the first time till August
Comments
Come on surely you're better than that
I know we have some too but they're Charlton bells not bow bell bells
To be honest there is so much new shit and so many new angles that different people keep uncovering, it's all I can do to keep up. But that's good.
as another Cl'er just said to me privately
"Wonder when the penny will drop this is not going away".
A little later you said, ‘I'll continue to occasionally drop in’. and then went to a kind of sign off.
Since then - not 24 hours has passed - and you’ve dropped in a further 4 times, you are clearly rattled and in need of some rest and relaxation. Its Friday night, get down the local bierkeller, have a few lagers and chill man.
I think in deference to all the shenanigans and the extreme makeover it should now be referred to as the Former Olympic Stadium. As for longevity, the 1923 Wembley Stadium was extensively rebuilt in 1963 and totally demolished in 2002.
Of course this whole issue is a ticking bomb, and if not before then when BoJo makes his move on Nr 10 the fuse will be lit. In the meantime, as apparently the OB are wont to tell prime suspects "You have to be lucky every day but we have to be lucky only once". Many unspoilt copies of the contract must exist in the files of various official bodies not to mention numerous lawyers, accountants, consultants etc - how long before a principled whistle-blower or a disgruntled ex-employee opens up? At the very latest the effects of the contract's implementation will be apparent in WHU's 2016/2017 annual accounts. This affair is unlikely to go the full 15 rounds, however ....
It will take only one.
If this celebrated affair is to be given a -gate, may I suggest Billingsgate ....
Incidentally, a football financial expert suggested to me that the Olympic Stadium naming rights would be worth no more than £5m. The reality is that it could very well attract a good proportion of that anyway, just on its status. West Ham's contribution needs to be viewed as the delta between what it could attract and what it attracts with them as primary tenant.
West Ham will increase their margins by a conservative £20m. You might be surprised how little the taxpayer makes from the deal, whatever the porn brothers and the baroness tell you.
It's not going away, is it, Mr Whittingdale?
Also it will only take around 1250 years to recover the revamp costs at that level of profit
Although I'm sure there are 5 more events taking place that all lose £1m each and profits from West Ham are covering those losses
Or Vinci now come under more scrutiny because what are they creaming off the deal .....
...When I read that nonsense why am I instantly reminded of this fella...
Jeez, what would be an unacceptable return to the public purse then? £100,000, £10,000...a quid?!!
This story is very much a Coalition production with the Charlton crew playing a minor role. Hats off to Mat Roper of Orient who uncovered the underlying document behind the story. And this is where I'd like to crowdsource a bit of extra help in scrutinising it. It is here, the minutes of an LLDC meeting on 17 March. From page 26, they present the 2016-17 budget for the Park (not just the Stadium) and on 2018 are the revenue projections. We can't see anything like a 2.5m rental figure from West Ham there. Now, that is partly because the accounting year is April -March but even so; Mat Roper is aware that the hockey facility is going gangbusters, and has already enquired of them about rental fees. He thinks that they may be bringing in about 200k p.a already. Therefore the document may show that West Ham's rental is in fact even lower than 2.5m, but we cannot stand that up yet.
So I'd be grateful if people can go over this and share their thoughts on what they may find. It would be good to build a picture of what other revenue-earning units will already be operational during that accounting period.
Later on in that document you can also have a laugh at a "10 Year plan" that is completely devoid of any meaningful number projections. Jeez, even the Soviets used to put numbers to their old 5 year plans, even if they were fantasy figures
Newham's £45m contribution is repayable out of the stadium's annual surplus - looks like it will taking a while ....
As Newham have a 35% shareholding in E20 LLP perhaps they will be paid pro rata.