@gavros forgot to mention the digital wrap, which wasn't going to be taken up due to the cost (who's paying for that again ?). Add in the 6,000 extra seats and the benefit from the public funding. It's great to be WHU eh ? Karen Brady as Tory Lord and Sullivan attending the Black & White ball where big political donations are levied, Boris Johnson looking to claim a legacy for his push as Tory leader. The whole thing stinks and I hope the exact nature of the deal becomes public knowledge as it should. If there is nothing to hide then there shouldn't be any problem.
This.
@vff , please may I use this on twitter, facebook etc...
MOG
You might find that on Twitter especially, this @Stig masterpiece will save you 140 letters
@gavros forgot to mention the digital wrap, which wasn't going to be taken up due to the cost (who's paying for that again ?). Add in the 6,000 extra seats and the benefit from the public funding. It's great to be WHU eh ? Karen Brady as Tory Lord and Sullivan attending the Black & White ball where big political donations are levied, Boris Johnson looking to claim a legacy for his push as Tory leader. The whole thing stinks and I hope the exact nature of the deal becomes public knowledge as it should. If there is nothing to hide then there shouldn't be any problem.
This.
@vff , please may I use this on twitter, facebook etc...
That's fine @Miserableoldgit. Good of you to ask. Hope it helps.
There needs to be a level playing field between London clubs. One club should not get a financial leg up because it suits certain political interests. I am sure decent West Ham United supporters want to succeed due to the successful way they run the club and play on the field. It is better to have everything clear and not have the success they have not sullied due to some dubious back room deals, that becomes revealed in the future, as these things are likely to do.
Thanks @stonemuse Frankly sickening that the benefits are astronomical compared to the paltry outlay that a Gold-laden Premiership team are paying.
Just a couple of points from that...
1. The article suggests that WHam are paying a basic £15m a year rent. That's 6x more than we had been led to think so far. Where are the Express getting that from, or have I missed something?
2. Reiterates that Gaillard paid £20m for Upton Park - valued at c.£72m as far as I can remember. 700 homes to be built - 2 bed apartments in nearby Canning Town are going for £550k. Will Gaillard make them all as affordable as Brady's undercutting season ticket prices? She did say that they were leaving a legacy at Upton Park didn't she?
3. The paper suggests that this is costing £272m to make fit for football - the largest of its kind in the world. That's just lazy journalism...largest roof, rather than largest stadium is what they should have said.
The writer has clearly confused the one -off payment West Ham make of £15m towards capital (rebuild) costs, with the rent, which is widely reported as £2.5m (overhead costs thrown in). The actual rent still remains redacted in the contract, but if it was any more than the 2.5m reported, you can bet your life we'd have heard about it by now. It can only be even less, otherwise why keep it secret?
I love football but the WHU deal / fix is one of the things that makes me want to walk away from the game. Arsenal paid for their stadium over a number of years. Why is WHU getting such largesse ? They are being handed the keys to the top 6. This will damage all the surrounding smaller London clubs.
It wouldn't surprise me if this article was written with the help of WHU. Based on what we already know, it seems inaccurate in places, maybe deliberately.
Since I am the Second Party to the Tribunal, and I don't know that, then that would suggest a serious breach of court protocol.
I see that you are re-cycling a post from Red Ken's Slave on KUMB. It is also clear that Red Ken's Slave was present at the second day of the Tribunal, but not at the first.
How he knows that, will be an interesting question to put to the Tribunal. And I have taken a screenshot so don't bother running off to him suggesting he deletes it....
Pub talk, pure and simple. If you haven't been informed then can't be the case im sure given you're the one with the claim. Or would be pure coincidence.
Maybe he knows sod all. He's also posted "ITK" things about the contract which I brought him up on an showed to be false. Still, on your merry way with your jumping up and down adventure.
As for 'running off to tell him' I'm not that childish.
Think you've slipped up there, @gavros, but thanks for alerting me, I might have missed it.
He actually seems like quite a reasonable guy, and I would certainly be happy to have a chat with him over a beer about it, as he says, because it's not the sort of (potentially tribal) argument you can conduct effectively in an internet forum. You could learn from him.
Red Ken's Slave on KUMB has now magically edited his post and tries now to suggest that April 8 was only his "prediction". @gavros slips in a dig against me at the same time, in an attempt to save face. Never mind. Probably nothing sinister. I doubt fans of a club who cannot even create a Supporters Trust are capable of "infiltrating" such a Tribunal :-)
Happy tool? OK. All I can say is that West Ham are flying high in the premier league and would be higher were it not the case for some shocking referring decisions lately, but otherwise I'm very happy, thanks. I wish Charlton no harm, in fact like most of us we have a soft spot for you lot and definitely appreciate what former owners have done for you in terms of making the Valley a great place to watch football. I also have admiration for what Prague has tried to do, despite a few friendly digs on the way. I believe it is in the taxpayers interest for the deal to eventually be revealed but also understand the circumstances behind why they don't want to do it right now with the stadium sponsor unannounced and spurs still viewing the stadium as an option for the season they are away from WHL. I won't comment on Charltons state of affairs, other than saying it's a bloody tragedy as far as I and any well meaning Londoner is concerned.
Happy tool? OK. All I can say is that West Ham are flying high in the premier league and would be higher were it not the case for some shocking referring decisions lately, but otherwise I'm very happy, thanks. I wish Charlton no harm, in fact like most of us we have a soft spot for you lot and definitely appreciate what former owners have done for you in terms of making the Valley a great place to watch football. I also have admiration for what Prague has tried to do, despite a few friendly digs on the way. I believe it is in the taxpayers interest for the deal to eventually be revealed but also understand the circumstances behind why they don't want to do it right now with the stadium sponsor unannounced and spurs still viewing the stadium as an option for the season they are away from WHL. I won't comment on Charltons state of affairs, other than saying it's a bloody tragedy as far as I and any well meaning Londoner is concerned.
@Gavros. We have already demonstrated in Tribunal evidence that it is logistically impossible for another FAPL club to share it with West Ham. We will release our full evidence to the public in due course, but with a club like Spurs, who have rather more European commitments than your lot, there are too many potential clashes on the calendar. Our evidence was not challenged by Geraldine Murphy of the LLDC, she effectively conceded it. So that's not the reason. Doubtless this was also why Brady was so bullish on the issue in the press. It means that Goldstone will have questions to answer because he clearly led the GLA to believe another club sharing was still on the agenda. Whichever way the Tribunal decides, we have plenty of ammo left to fire...
Nice words, not sure what's behind them, but the person who deserves a more conciliatory approach from you is Mat Roper of Orient. You've been trying to bully him on his fanzine's Facebook page since he started his campaign, and when he was on his own in doing so.
Finally, while I appreciate you are not an admin on KUMB, I wonder what you make of the fact that they have blocked me from signing up to the forum there? That's what @LoOkOuT meant when he referred to the big boys. On CL we generally all know that if you dish it out, you have to be ready to take it too. I guess that's what a Charlton life teaches you.
Comments
You might find that on Twitter especially, this @Stig masterpiece will save you 140 letters
There needs to be a level playing field between London clubs. One club should not get a financial leg up because it suits certain political interests. I am sure decent West Ham United supporters want to succeed due to the successful way they run the club and play on the field. It is better to have everything clear and not have the success they have not sullied due to some dubious back room deals, that becomes revealed in the future, as these things are likely to do.
Excellent work from @PragueAddick .
Just seen this via Twitter
Just a couple of points from that...
1. The article suggests that WHam are paying a basic £15m a year rent. That's 6x more than we had been led to think so far. Where are the Express getting that from, or have I missed something?
2. Reiterates that Gaillard paid £20m for Upton Park - valued at c.£72m as far as I can remember. 700 homes to be built - 2 bed apartments in nearby Canning Town are going for £550k. Will Gaillard make them all as affordable as Brady's undercutting season ticket prices? She did say that they were leaving a legacy at Upton Park didn't she?
3. The paper suggests that this is costing £272m to make fit for football - the largest of its kind in the world. That's just lazy journalism...largest roof, rather than largest stadium is what they should have said.
4. Newham's contribution is now £45m not £40m
5. Nice first comment!
Is it true that to celebrate the move to the OS WHU are launching a new website - www.WHU.gov.uk ?
Based on what we already know, it seems inaccurate in places, maybe deliberately.
http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11685/10221689/west-ham-want-to-sign-zlatan-ibrahimovic-from-psg-says-david-Sullivan
I see that you are re-cycling a post from Red Ken's Slave on KUMB. It is also clear that Red Ken's Slave was present at the second day of the Tribunal, but not at the first.
How he knows that, will be an interesting question to put to the Tribunal. And I have taken a screenshot so don't bother running off to him suggesting he deletes it....
As for 'running off to tell him' I'm not that childish.
He actually seems like quite a reasonable guy, and I would certainly be happy to have a chat with him over a beer about it, as he says, because it's not the sort of (potentially tribal) argument you can conduct effectively in an internet forum. You could learn from him.
Preys on birds maybe.
Nice words, not sure what's behind them, but the person who deserves a more conciliatory approach from you is Mat Roper of Orient. You've been trying to bully him on his fanzine's Facebook page since he started his campaign, and when he was on his own in doing so.
Finally, while I appreciate you are not an admin on KUMB, I wonder what you make of the fact that they have blocked me from signing up to the forum there? That's what @LoOkOuT meant when he referred to the big boys. On CL we generally all know that if you dish it out, you have to be ready to take it too. I guess that's what a Charlton life teaches you.