Wow, they really are cut from the same cloth are they not, Merde and Lady Brady?
Feel like banging their heads together in an attempt to induce some sort of grasp of reality...
A crucial difference is that Brady is actually qualified to do her job and has actually shown that she is capable of running a business, or in fact being involved in a business above the level of whoever cleans the building after all the other staff has left.
Could you imagine Merde being Alan Sugar's advisor on the Apprentice? She'd probably be the first one to be fired!
Ok, probably don't want to know what makes a dildo mean rather than otherwise.
Karen Brady is a successful CEO and has done very well for her clubs. One of the reasons we have been talking about the London Stadium is precisely because Karen negotiated a deal that just looks too good to an impartial observer.
Katrien Meire is a wannabe Karen Brady but without any of the business acumen. She is an incompetent CEO. The only reason they are talked about in the same breath is because they are both football club CEOs and both female.
One of the reasons we talk about Katrien Meire is because she has shown no signs of being able to negotiate a commercially neutral deal never mind about a beneficial one.
Back to the stadium deal though, it seems wrong that the stadium owning company has to pick up the tab for policing the fans.
That could easily put them into a loss position and then West Ham can buy them out for peanuts as they go insolvent?
If E20 go bust, wouldnt more money be realised by knocking the stadium down and selling the land for development? Also, if West Ham do end up with it they will have to pay the running costs in full - making them worse off than they are currently.
Won't be able to knock it down, west ham have a 99 year lease. And it depends on the price west ham can negotiate, or already have in their contract. If over the remaining years of the lease they'd make more than the buying price than what's they'd pay in shares of being rights, catering, etc. then it could be easy to construct a scenario where west ham could buy the stadium and be better off or at least no worse off.
There may be a '99 year lease' but realistically who expects the stadium to last that long ? Clubs have been around for longer and in many cases at the same ground (some have moved once or twice or seven times) but a) every stadium will have been developed/altered over that time; and b) the pace of change now and in the future will be far greater than the past 99 years. And on top of it all, the OS isn't even a purpose built football stadium. My guess, if I am ever asked to make one, is that stadium will be demolished a lot sooner than people think. That is some serious expenditure.
If E20 go bust, wouldnt more money be realised by knocking the stadium down and selling the land for development? Also, if West Ham do end up with it they will have to pay the running costs in full - making them worse off than they are currently.
Won't be able to knock it down, west ham have a 99 year lease. And it depends on the price west ham can negotiate, or already have in their contract. If over the remaining years of the lease they'd make more than the buying price than what's they'd pay in shares of being rights, catering, etc. then it could be easy to construct a scenario where west ham could buy the stadium and be better off or at least no worse off.
There may be a '99 year lease' but realistically who expects the stadium to last that long ? Clubs have been around for longer and in many cases at the same ground (some have moved once or twice or seven times) but a) every stadium will have been developed/altered over that time; and b) the pace of change now and in the future will be far greater than the past 99 years. And on top of it all, the OS isn't even a purpose built football stadium. My guess, if I am ever asked to make one, is that stadium will be demolished a lot sooner than people think. That is some serious expenditure.
I agree, I wouldn't be surprised to see the stadium gone in less than 30, but it won't be demolished if West Ham don't want it to be.
If E20 go bust, wouldnt more money be realised by knocking the stadium down and selling the land for development? Also, if West Ham do end up with it they will have to pay the running costs in full - making them worse off than they are currently.
Won't be able to knock it down, west ham have a 99 year lease. And it depends on the price west ham can negotiate, or already have in their contract. If over the remaining years of the lease they'd make more than the buying price than what's they'd pay in shares of being rights, catering, etc. then it could be easy to construct a scenario where west ham could buy the stadium and be better off or at least no worse off.
There may be a '99 year lease' but realistically who expects the stadium to last that long ? Clubs have been around for longer and in many cases at the same ground (some have moved once or twice or seven times) but a) every stadium will have been developed/altered over that time; and b) the pace of change now and in the future will be far greater than the past 99 years. And on top of it all, the OS isn't even a purpose built football stadium. My guess, if I am ever asked to make one, is that stadium will be demolished a lot sooner than people think. That is some serious expenditure.
You are correct - Wembley Stadium (The old one) was built in 1923 wasn't it?
"We have the best stadium – there are some great stadiums in this country but there is only one Olympic Stadium and it’s ours." - Karren Brady
Sorry, I thought it still belonged to us?
To an extent I can understand her "bravado" as she obviously is trying to sell the deal to her own fans, rather than to give a more technically correct answer.
What is completely inaccurate is that they have the best stadium. Even as an Olympic stadium, it did the job, but no more, and all the massive expense since then has given it a new roof and some prefab seats nearer the pitch
If the major fear is for trouble after the game, then surely just keep the Chelsea fans in the ground for 30-45 minutes after the game.
Also i'm pretty sure Bilic is severely underestimating 5k Chelsea fans here:
"Despite fears that any skirmishes on the pitch could be transferred to the stands, Bilic said that he is not concerned by the occasion. 'At the end of the day it is not like we are playing Millwall, we are playing Chelsea'
So I don't think I'll be cycling the Greenway past the OS tonight then. Last time it was like cycling through a school of claret and blue overweight whales. Put about 5 minutes on to my journey.
So I don't think I'll be cycling the Greenway past the OS tonight then. Last time it was like cycling through a school of claret and blue overweight whales. Put about 5 minutes on to my journey.
Could've done it in less time if you hadn't insisted on running over them all twice "just to be sure"!
My train to and from Gillingham (I went on HS1) was full of fans going to and from the West Ham Sunderland game. On the way back, there was a father and young boy carrying a massive bag of stuff from the West Ham club shop...
My train to and from Gillingham (I went on HS1) was full of fans going to and from the West Ham Sunderland game. On the way back, there was a father and young boy carrying a massive bag of stuff from the West Ham club shop...
My train to and from Gillingham (I went on HS1) was full of fans going to and from the West Ham Sunderland game. On the way back, there was a father and young boy carrying a massive bag of stuff from the West Ham club shop...
Comments
Could you imagine Merde being Alan Sugar's advisor on the Apprentice? She'd probably be the first one to be fired!
Karen Brady is a successful CEO and has done very well for her clubs. One of the reasons we have been talking about the London Stadium is precisely because Karen negotiated a deal that just looks too good to an impartial observer.
Katrien Meire is a wannabe Karen Brady but without any of the business acumen. She is an incompetent CEO. The only reason they are talked about in the same breath is because they are both football club CEOs and both female.
One of the reasons we talk about Katrien Meire is because she has shown no signs of being able to negotiate a commercially neutral deal never mind about a beneficial one.
Back to the stadium deal though, it seems wrong that the stadium owning company has to pick up the tab for policing the fans.
That could easily put them into a loss position and then West Ham can buy them out for peanuts as they go insolvent?
Not long til chaos...
What is completely inaccurate is that they have the best stadium. Even as an Olympic stadium, it did the job, but no more, and all the massive expense since then has given it a new roof and some prefab seats nearer the pitch
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3856602/West-Ham-police-inside-London-Stadium-time-against-rivals-Chelsea-EFL-Cup.html#ixzz4NhyWP2Yx
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
It doesn't say who's paying.
The rest of us are paying for the extra police around the ground.
This looks like a disaster waiting to happen. Police not entering stadium unless asked?
Have Charlton ever offered cheap beer to get people into ground early?
Do Charlton employ Jumbos?
Best for all parties if everyone cuts their losses and they move back.
Or, a new contract is written up whereby the claret and blue motherfuckers actually pay for some shit and stop blaming everyone else.
You get what you pay for and that pay nothing towards security and stewards, so they should have to deal with all the shit themselves
Also i'm pretty sure Bilic is severely underestimating 5k Chelsea fans here:
"Despite fears that any skirmishes on the pitch could be transferred to the stands, Bilic said that he is not concerned by the occasion. 'At the end of the day it is not like we are playing Millwall, we are playing Chelsea'
Last time it was like cycling through a school of claret and blue overweight whales. Put about 5 minutes on to my journey.