I think it is perfectly right for West Ham Fans to come on here, flick the 'V's and call us c**ts and wallow in thieving money from the taxpayer for their exclusive benefit. They laugh in our faces like the rest of their Tory brothers and sisters. Nothing West Ham achieve from now on will be because they're a decent football club, but because they're a bunch of tossers who have won first prize in licking the aunses of members of the Conservative Party.
Pah, copy cats, we went down that route years ago but it didnt work out and I can remember Curbs hinting about it afterwards when he kept saying 'maybe Lidl Charlton ain't so Lidl anymore'
Shirley Porter was the daughter of Tesco founder Sir Jack Cohen. Guess what? She was a Tory politician.
The Conservatives were narrowly re-elected in Westminster in the 1986 local council elections. Fearing that they would eventually lose control unless there was a permanent change in the social composition of the borough, Porter instituted a secret policy known as 'Building Stable Communities'.
Eight wards were selected as 'key wards' – in public it was claimed that these wards were subject to particular 'stress factors' leading to a decline in the population of Westminster. In reality, secret documents showed that the wards most subject to these stress factors were rather different, and that the eight wards chosen had been the most marginal in the City Council elections of 1986. Three – Bayswater, Maida Vale and Millbank, had been narrowly won by Labour, a further three, St. James's, Victoria and Cavendish had been narrowly lost by them, in West End ward an Independent had split the two seats with the Conservatives while in Hamilton Terrace the Conservatives were threatened by the SDP.
An important part of this policy was the designation of much of Westminster's council housing for commercial sale, rather than re-letting when the properties became vacant. The designated housing was concentrated in those wards most likely to change hands to Labour in the elections. Much of this designated housing lay vacant for months or even years before it could be sold. To prevent its occupation by squatters or drug dealers, these flats were fitted with security doors provided by the company Sitex at a cost to local tax payers of £50 per week per door.
Other council services were subverted to ensure the re-election of the majority party in the 1990 elections. In services such as street cleaning, pavement repair and environmental improvements, marginal wards were given priority while safely Labour and safely Conservative parts of the City were neglected.
Another vital part of 'Building Stable Communities' was the removal of homeless voters and others who lived in hostels and were perceived less likely to vote Conservative, such as students and nurses, from the City of Westminster. While this initially proved successful, other Councils in London and the Home Counties soon became aware of homeless individuals and families from Westminster, many with complex mental health and addiction problems, being relocated to their area.
As the City Council found it more and more difficult to move homeless people outside Westminster, increasingly the logic of the 'Building Stable Communities' programme required the concentration of homeless people within safe wards in the City. In 1989 over 100 homeless families were removed from hostels in marginal wards and placed in the Hermes and Chantry Point tower blocks in the safe Labour ward of Harrow Road. These blocks contained a dangerous form of asbestos, and should have either been cleaned up or demolished a decade before, but had remained in place due to funding disputes between the City Council and the by now abolished Greater London Council. Many of the flats had had their heating and sanitation systems destroyed by the council to prevent their use as drug dens, others had indeed been taken over by heroin users and still others had pigeons making nests out of asbestos, with the level in flats in Hermes and Chantry Points well above safe norms. One former homeless refuge was sold off at a discounted price to private developers and converted into private flats for young professional people at a cost to the ratepayer of £2.6 million.
Labour councillors and members of the public referred this policy to the District Auditor to check on its legality, and as a result it was ordered to be halted in 1989 whilst investigations continued. In 1990, the Conservatives were re-elected in Westminster in a landslide election victory in which they won all but one of the wards targeted by Building Stable Communities.
Porter stood down as Leader of the Council in 1991, and served in the ceremonial position of Lord Mayor of Westminster in 1991-2. She resigned from the council in 1993, and retired to live in Israel with her husband.
They are at home to Northampton in the week commencing November 7th. Where will they play?
Competition Rules state that the U21 teams home games will be played at their first teams home stadium. Will this be at the OS? Or, "TOS" as we should now call it, if Tescos are involved. If not, where?
Porter is a singularly despicable person who just happens to be the daughter of Jack Cohen. She may or may not (or more likely her family as she funneled all her personal wealth to them to avoid paying the damages levied against her for gerrymandering) still hold Tesco shares but where is the possible link between her, Gullivan, Bojo, or the LDDC?
Porter is a singularly despicable person who just happens to be the daughter of Jack Cohen. She may or may not (or more likely her family as she funneled all her personal wealth to them to avoid paying the damages levied against her for gerrymandering) still hold Tesco shares but where is the possible link between her, Gullivan, Bojo, or the LDDC?
I was thinking legacy thirsty Lord Coe, Boris Johnson, and West ham's Baroness Karren Brady are all Tories, and now Tesco who's upper echelons appear to be Tory minded, with Tory connections, they all appear to be linked.
Tesco buying the naming rights adds another reason not to attend the stadium, in case we needed one. Tesco is a despicable entity run by arrogant, smug, dishonest, complacent chancers. Tesco effectively shut down half of Dartford for several years while it fannied about proposing a redevelopment and another new supermarket. After they got found out for cooking their books, it all went very quiet for a long time until they quietly shelved such plans as had maybe existed and walked away without a backwards glance. There were a few thin platitudes but the town centre is devalued indefinitely while the perpetrators got away scot free. Dartford is one of a dozen or so locations similarly effected. All Tesco operations should be boycotted in the same way we're boycotting roly's toxic pantomime.
They are at home to Northampton in the week commencing November 7th. Where will they play?
Competition Rules state that the U21 teams home games will be played at their first teams home stadium. Will this be at the OS? Or, "TOS" as we should now call it, if Tescos are involved. If not, where?
As I mentioned above, they have apparently been allowed not to play at the OS. Just like that, despite the rule you quote. They don't want to play at the OS because they would have to pay an extra one-off rental payment. Instead some other club has to host them, paying the match day overheads and police costs.
The OS Coalition will be making a fuss about this, you can be sure.
I'm assuming that West Ham have told those that need to know about what days they will need to play their homes games as the fixture list has been released? What about when games are moved for Sky? What about extra dates needed for FA or League Cup replays? If they advance in the Europa League?
I'm assuming that West Ham have told those that need to know about what days they will need to play their homes games as the fixture list has been released? What about when games are moved for Sky? What about extra dates needed for FA or League Cup replays? If they advance in the Europa League?
And then there will be games that are postponed/abandoned due to bad weather and have to be played on another day, albeit there aren't too many of those these days
I'm assuming that West Ham have told those that need to know about what days they will need to play their homes games as the fixture list has been released? What about when games are moved for Sky? What about extra dates needed for FA or League Cup replays? If they advance in the Europa League?
Good question. We provided the answer to the Information Tribunal. We showed with this answer that it is impossible for another FAPL team to share with West Ham, because of the unclear dates you mention. Under the contract West Ham need to specify the dates when they expect to need the Stadium. The contract allows for one day either side of the match for West Ham's paraphernalia to be set up and taken down. So we took Spurs actual calendar for August - December 2015, (spurs being a team that actually plays in Europe) including possible changes due to Sky moving them. We showed that 71 days needed to be reserved for such a club just up until the end of the year. So maybe 150 days for a season; thus giving the big lie to Sullivan's "we only need it 25 days a year, they can rent out for the other 340". It was also clear from our graphic that if you tried to superimpose on that, the matches of another FAPL club, there would be date clashes. The FA and FAPL would never accept such a scenario.
This evidence was heard by the LLDC and its legal counsel in sullen silence. It was not challenged at all.
Tesco buying the naming rights adds another reason not to attend the stadium, in case we needed one. Tesco is a despicable entity run by arrogant, smug, dishonest, complacent chancers. Tesco effectively shut down half of Dartford for several years while it fannied about proposing a redevelopment and another new supermarket. After they got found out for cooking their books, it all went very quiet for a long time until they quietly shelved such plans as had maybe existed and walked away without a backwards glance. There were a few thin platitudes but the town centre is devalued indefinitely while the perpetrators got away scot free. Dartford is one of a dozen or so locations similarly effected. All Tesco operations should be boycotted in the same way we're boycotting roly's toxic pantomime.
They don't just keep it to town centres, I work in the food industry and they are absolute bastards to deal with, fortunately we don't deal with them direct but we get the horror stories from our customers who do. Avoid their stores like the plague
What West Ham paraphernalia do they need to put up before a game? The whole place is decked out in their colours at the moment.
Also a good question, which I was pondering after watching Mo Farah making the same point. (video in that Mail Online story)
In principle they have to be able to return it to "clean stadium" status within 24 hours. So that clearly means removing the goalposts, corner flags, etc. If they are letting West Ham keep a load of other stuff up, simply because no other tenants are in sight, then Mo Farah is right, it is effectively their stadium. I guess the question might be, whether "Clean stadium" is sufficiently well defined. Something else to look at.
When it comes to the digital wrap, I assumed the idea was the same as at the Allianz. At the flick of a switch it can be changed from a Bayern to a TSV Allianz, colour wise. But I wonder.
And as I have said previously how clean is a stadium with West Ham coloured seating? Not to mention the Superstore, the West Ham themed boxes, the Claret astroturf with a West Ham badge on it, the Champions square with West Ham paraphernalia in it, and the fecking bubble machines they'll no doubt install everywhere
Who's paying for the warehouse that they have got by the stadium?
Almost certainly you, (and I), but can you tell us more?. A separate building, next to the stadium? Was it there previously, can you recall? And does it have their name on? They have space inside the stadium, and @rikofold has been trying to get that valued, but its the first I heard of a separate building.
Competition Rules state that the U21 teams home games will be played at their first teams home stadium. Will this be at the OS? Or, "TOS" as we should now call it, if Tescos are involved. If not, where?
Does that mean the fans who support West Ham will now be known as TOSsers?
Competition Rules state that the U21 teams home games will be played at their first teams home stadium. Will this be at the OS? Or, "TOS" as we should now call it, if Tescos are involved. If not, where?
Does that mean the fans who support West Ham will now be known as TOSsers?
Who's paying for the warehouse that they have got by the stadium?
Almost certainly you, (and I), but can you tell us more?. A separate building, next to the stadium? Was it there previously, can you recall? And does it have their name on? They have space inside the stadium, and @rikofold has been trying to get that valued, but its the first I heard of a separate building.
My brother works over that way and mention a warehouse, just checked with him, it's inside the stadium.
Comments
Nothing West Ham achieve from now on will be because they're a decent football club, but because they're a bunch of tossers who have won first prize in licking the aunses of members of the Conservative Party.
West Ham to receive money for the deal too. Ridiculous.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3711562/West-Ham-s-Olympic-home-rebranded-Tesco-Stadium-supermarket-chain-set-bid-naming-rights.html
The Conservatives were narrowly re-elected in Westminster in the 1986 local council elections. Fearing that they would eventually lose control unless there was a permanent change in the social composition of the borough, Porter instituted a secret policy known as 'Building Stable Communities'.
Eight wards were selected as 'key wards' – in public it was claimed that these wards were subject to particular 'stress factors' leading to a decline in the population of Westminster. In reality, secret documents showed that the wards most subject to these stress factors were rather different, and that the eight wards chosen had been the most marginal in the City Council elections of 1986. Three – Bayswater, Maida Vale and Millbank, had been narrowly won by Labour, a further three, St. James's, Victoria and Cavendish had been narrowly lost by them, in West End ward an Independent had split the two seats with the Conservatives while in Hamilton Terrace the Conservatives were threatened by the SDP.
An important part of this policy was the designation of much of Westminster's council housing for commercial sale, rather than re-letting when the properties became vacant. The designated housing was concentrated in those wards most likely to change hands to Labour in the elections. Much of this designated housing lay vacant for months or even years before it could be sold. To prevent its occupation by squatters or drug dealers, these flats were fitted with security doors provided by the company Sitex at a cost to local tax payers of £50 per week per door.
Other council services were subverted to ensure the re-election of the majority party in the 1990 elections. In services such as street cleaning, pavement repair and environmental improvements, marginal wards were given priority while safely Labour and safely Conservative parts of the City were neglected.
Another vital part of 'Building Stable Communities' was the removal of homeless voters and others who lived in hostels and were perceived less likely to vote Conservative, such as students and nurses, from the City of Westminster. While this initially proved successful, other Councils in London and the Home Counties soon became aware of homeless individuals and families from Westminster, many with complex mental health and addiction problems, being relocated to their area.
As the City Council found it more and more difficult to move homeless people outside Westminster, increasingly the logic of the 'Building Stable Communities' programme required the concentration of homeless people within safe wards in the City. In 1989 over 100 homeless families were removed from hostels in marginal wards and placed in the Hermes and Chantry Point tower blocks in the safe Labour ward of Harrow Road. These blocks contained a dangerous form of asbestos, and should have either been cleaned up or demolished a decade before, but had remained in place due to funding disputes between the City Council and the by now abolished Greater London Council. Many of the flats had had their heating and sanitation systems destroyed by the council to prevent their use as drug dens, others had indeed been taken over by heroin users and still others had pigeons making nests out of asbestos, with the level in flats in Hermes and Chantry Points well above safe norms. One former homeless refuge was sold off at a discounted price to private developers and converted into private flats for young professional people at a cost to the ratepayer of £2.6 million.
Labour councillors and members of the public referred this policy to the District Auditor to check on its legality, and as a result it was ordered to be halted in 1989 whilst investigations continued. In 1990, the Conservatives were re-elected in Westminster in a landslide election victory in which they won all but one of the wards targeted by Building Stable Communities.
Porter stood down as Leader of the Council in 1991, and served in the ceremonial position of Lord Mayor of Westminster in 1991-2. She resigned from the council in 1993, and retired to live in Israel with her husband.
They are at home to Northampton in the week commencing November 7th. Where will they play?
Competition Rules state that the U21 teams home games will be played at their first teams home stadium. Will this be at the OS? Or, "TOS" as we should now call it, if Tescos are involved. If not, where?
Porter is a singularly despicable person who just happens to be the daughter of Jack Cohen. She may or may not (or more likely her family as she funneled all her personal wealth to them to avoid paying the damages levied against her for gerrymandering) still hold Tesco shares but where is the possible link between her, Gullivan, Bojo, or the LDDC?
The OS Coalition will be making a fuss about this, you can be sure.
TataSamsungThis evidence was heard by the LLDC and its legal counsel in sullen silence. It was not challenged at all.
Locals in Bexleyheath now have the delight of having 'sports direct' or at least landlords with the empty garage site opposite.
In principle they have to be able to return it to "clean stadium" status within 24 hours. So that clearly means removing the goalposts, corner flags, etc. If they are letting West Ham keep a load of other stuff up, simply because no other tenants are in sight, then Mo Farah is right, it is effectively their stadium. I guess the question might be, whether "Clean stadium" is sufficiently well defined. Something else to look at.
When it comes to the digital wrap, I assumed the idea was the same as at the Allianz. At the flick of a switch it can be changed from a Bayern to a TSV Allianz, colour wise. But I wonder.