Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Olympic Stadium; our day in court
Comments
-
Forget all the snipers, does anyone know if this is true ?Starinnaddick said:According to the Sun West Ham are only liable to pay for damage in excess of £5000 per event
0 -
From the Telegraph article:
Crow said firms could also be put off by being unable to brand the venue during next year’s athletics World Championships, which will be held in a “clean stadium”.
"Clean Stadium", as in no sponsors branding or no West Ham branding? None at all, nowt, zero? Must be a pain taking all that West Ham signage down again...
...oh wait.0 -
.
"Clean Stadium", as in no sponsors branding or no West Ham branding? None at all, nowt, zero? Must be a pain taking all that West Ham signage down again...Markg2004 said:From the Telegraph article:
Crow said firms could also be put off by being unable to brand the venue during next year’s athletics World Championships, which will be held in a “clean stadium”.
...oh wait.
Didn't West Ham carry out pay for the stadium claret and blue makeover & whu rebranding ? If so, as tenants they'd be responsible to restoring it.0 -
Just for a bit of light relief, I pass on the story about Abellio Greater Anglia (the train franchise that operates through Stratford) offering Hamsters 50% off travel to the matches if they signed up to a "season ticket" deal. It seems quite a few Essex-based supporters paidup front, only to find out large numbers of games will be caught by weekend line closures! But they've been told they can use the bus replacement service as it meanders ever so slowly through the East London matchday traffic. They aren't happy.....13
-
Didn't West Ham carry out pay for the stadium claret and blue makeover & whu rebranding ? If so, as tenants they'd be responsible to restoring it.letthegoodtimesroll said:.
"Clean Stadium", as in no sponsors branding or no West Ham branding? None at all, nowt, zero? Must be a pain taking all that West Ham signage down again...Markg2004 said:From the Telegraph article:
Crow said firms could also be put off by being unable to brand the venue during next year’s athletics World Championships, which will be held in a “clean stadium”.
...oh wait.
It is far from clear what West Ham have paid for. We are getting new information which shows that this aspect has been fought over long and hard. The main contract does not deal with it. It makes pretty clear that E20 have to take it down and put it up again (so LS185 will actually do it) at their cost. West ham have sought to specify in great detail what the paraphanalia looks like (branding, in the parallel universe of the Baroness) but then seek to get E20 to share the costs.
West Ham have paid for fitting out the corporate lounges, it seems, which is terribly nice of them, but not for another tenant who might want to do a bit of corporate without being assailed with images of how West Ham won the World Cup in 66. It seems they have also paid to "upgrade" the seating, but that includes sticking their badge etc all over them. You can't "cleanse" the seats of that nonsense, as Mo Farah observed in the summer.
None of this happens at the Allianz where at a flick of a switch, it seems, it morphs from being Bayern to being TSV. Or at least it was the case when I was there in 2014. It might have changed after TSV went bankrupt, and Bayern bought out their share. But otherwise it was a genuinely clean stadium. I went to watch a TSV game, and there wasn't a smidgin of Bayern to be seen anywhere.
9 -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37810269
"Hammers vice-chairwoman Karren Brady acknowledged in a letter outlining the security plan that it is the club's responsibility to put measures in place to prevent further violence.
West Ham's security plan includes:
Creating more distance between opposing fans to prevent missile throwing. This will be achieved by widening the segregation line on both sides of the lower tier.
Removing risk groups from the stadium permanently with our 'zero tolerance' banning policy.
Strengthening and widening the lines of segregation on the lower concourse walkway by creating higher barriers and a 10-metre wide sterile area.
Ensuring home/away fan egress is physically segregated upon exiting the stadium to prevent clashes on the podium. This consists of a physical barrier either side of the away supporter turnstiles, and prevents supporter integration after the game.
Inside the stadium we will also be employing the enhanced tactic of issuing a group of stewards with handheld video cameras. Stewards currently have cameras attached to their armour but we believe this investment will act as a clear and visible deterrent. "
---
0 -
Riff-Raff cleansing now going into full-on mode.0
-
If we were going to make an annual loss on it I'd much rather we had kept it as an athletics stadium. And then filled the gaps with music concerts. The odd sporting event like T20 finals day the odd rugby/NFL/football game etc.10
-
I'll have a flick through that contract again @PragueAddick, my recollection is that it was West Ham's obligation to hand over a clean stadium - and it was why they all went for the stadium fabric wrap. In fact I have a feeling that's also what I was told in one of my FoIs but will check.PragueAddick said:
Didn't West Ham carry out pay for the stadium claret and blue makeover & whu rebranding ? If so, as tenants they'd be responsible to restoring it.letthegoodtimesroll said:.
"Clean Stadium", as in no sponsors branding or no West Ham branding? None at all, nowt, zero? Must be a pain taking all that West Ham signage down again...Markg2004 said:From the Telegraph article:
Crow said firms could also be put off by being unable to brand the venue during next year’s athletics World Championships, which will be held in a “clean stadium”.
...oh wait.
It is far from clear what West Ham have paid for. We are getting new information which shows that this aspect has been fought over long and hard. The main contract does not deal with it. It makes pretty clear that E20 have to take it down and put it up again (so LS185 will actually do it) at their cost. West ham have sought to specify in great detail what the paraphanalia looks like (branding, in the parallel universe of the Baroness) but then seek to get E20 to share the costs.
West Ham have paid for fitting out the corporate lounges, it seems, which is terribly nice of them, but not for another tenant who might want to do a bit of corporate without being assailed with images of how West Ham won the World Cup in 66. It seems they have also paid to "upgrade" the seating, but that includes sticking their badge etc all over them. You can't "cleanse" the seats of that nonsense, as Mo Farah observed in the summer.
None of this happens at the Allianz where at a flick of a switch, it seems, it morphs from being Bayern to being TSV. Or at least it was the case when I was there in 2014. It might have changed after TSV went bankrupt, and Bayern bought out their share. But otherwise it was a genuinely clean stadium. I went to watch a TSV game, and there wasn't a smidgin of Bayern to be seen anywhere.
It would be interesting to see whether similar clean stadium requirements are in Man City's contract - I'm pretty sure whilst their seats are sky blue there isn't any lettering, for example.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Away fans take note!Starinnaddick said:According to the Sun West Ham are only liable to pay for damage in excess of £5000 per event
0 -
As I currently understand it (and the stuff I am sending you is part of this) the whole stadium wrap thing is outside the scope of the main contract. That's why there is a catfight about who pays for how much of what for all that crap.rikofold said:
I'll have a flick through that contract again @PragueAddick, my recollection is that it was West Ham's obligation to hand over a clean stadium - and it was why they all went for the stadium fabric wrap. In fact I have a feeling that's also what I was told in one of my FoIs but will check.PragueAddick said:
Didn't West Ham carry out pay for the stadium claret and blue makeover & whu rebranding ? If so, as tenants they'd be responsible to restoring it.letthegoodtimesroll said:.
"Clean Stadium", as in no sponsors branding or no West Ham branding? None at all, nowt, zero? Must be a pain taking all that West Ham signage down again...Markg2004 said:From the Telegraph article:
Crow said firms could also be put off by being unable to brand the venue during next year’s athletics World Championships, which will be held in a “clean stadium”.
...oh wait.
It is far from clear what West Ham have paid for. We are getting new information which shows that this aspect has been fought over long and hard. The main contract does not deal with it. It makes pretty clear that E20 have to take it down and put it up again (so LS185 will actually do it) at their cost. West ham have sought to specify in great detail what the paraphanalia looks like (branding, in the parallel universe of the Baroness) but then seek to get E20 to share the costs.
West Ham have paid for fitting out the corporate lounges, it seems, which is terribly nice of them, but not for another tenant who might want to do a bit of corporate without being assailed with images of how West Ham won the World Cup in 66. It seems they have also paid to "upgrade" the seating, but that includes sticking their badge etc all over them. You can't "cleanse" the seats of that nonsense, as Mo Farah observed in the summer.
None of this happens at the Allianz where at a flick of a switch, it seems, it morphs from being Bayern to being TSV. Or at least it was the case when I was there in 2014. It might have changed after TSV went bankrupt, and Bayern bought out their share. But otherwise it was a genuinely clean stadium. I went to watch a TSV game, and there wasn't a smidgin of Bayern to be seen anywhere.
It would be interesting to see whether similar clean stadium requirements are in Man City's contract - I'm pretty sure whilst their seats are sky blue there isn't any lettering, for example.
I think the main contract is mainly referring to the obviously portable stuff, such as the corner flags and goalposts. They seem to be putting up an awful lot of stuff that seems permanent to me.
0 -
Man City have exclusive use of the Etihad, so it's a different situation. The fact that the ground has their sponsor shows thisrikofold said:
I'll have a flick through that contract again @PragueAddick, my recollection is that it was West Ham's obligation to hand over a clean stadium - and it was why they all went for the stadium fabric wrap. In fact I have a feeling that's also what I was told in one of my FoIs but will check.PragueAddick said:
Didn't West Ham carry out pay for the stadium claret and blue makeover & whu rebranding ? If so, as tenants they'd be responsible to restoring it.letthegoodtimesroll said:.
"Clean Stadium", as in no sponsors branding or no West Ham branding? None at all, nowt, zero? Must be a pain taking all that West Ham signage down again...Markg2004 said:From the Telegraph article:
Crow said firms could also be put off by being unable to brand the venue during next year’s athletics World Championships, which will be held in a “clean stadium”.
...oh wait.
It is far from clear what West Ham have paid for. We are getting new information which shows that this aspect has been fought over long and hard. The main contract does not deal with it. It makes pretty clear that E20 have to take it down and put it up again (so LS185 will actually do it) at their cost. West ham have sought to specify in great detail what the paraphanalia looks like (branding, in the parallel universe of the Baroness) but then seek to get E20 to share the costs.
West Ham have paid for fitting out the corporate lounges, it seems, which is terribly nice of them, but not for another tenant who might want to do a bit of corporate without being assailed with images of how West Ham won the World Cup in 66. It seems they have also paid to "upgrade" the seating, but that includes sticking their badge etc all over them. You can't "cleanse" the seats of that nonsense, as Mo Farah observed in the summer.
None of this happens at the Allianz where at a flick of a switch, it seems, it morphs from being Bayern to being TSV. Or at least it was the case when I was there in 2014. It might have changed after TSV went bankrupt, and Bayern bought out their share. But otherwise it was a genuinely clean stadium. I went to watch a TSV game, and there wasn't a smidgin of Bayern to be seen anywhere.
It would be interesting to see whether similar clean stadium requirements are in Man City's contract - I'm pretty sure whilst their seats are sky blue there isn't any lettering, for example.0 -
They paid a fair price for the Etihad! They are not scroungers like West Ham. I can't understand why Karen Brady is a Tory Peer, but she is responsible for fleecing taxpayers for far more than the people her party go for prior to elactions. Not defending those scroungers, but why isn't she just as bad or worse?2
-
Sadiq Khan orders inquiry over £51m Olympic Stadium increase
http://news.sky.com/story/sadiq-khan-orders-inquiry-over-16351m-olympic-stadium-increase-10641071
It's a start.20 -
"London deputy mayor says they have inherited "total mess" at Olympic Stadium and vows to investigate all finances including West Ham deal"
Probably too little too late, West Ham are hardly going to agree to renegotiate.0 -
On the contrary, this is fantastic news, and exactly what the Coalition has been pushing for behind the scenes. His statement only refers to the capital costs. However we now have the perfect political vehicle which we can tap into, to highlight the ongoing losses in operations, with the loss of naming rights deal, and spiralling police costs.SELR_addicks said:"London deputy mayor says they have inherited "total mess" at Olympic Stadium and vows to investigate all finances including West Ham deal"
Probably too little too late, West Ham are hardly going to agree to renegotiate.
It's the breakthrough we were seeking and we believe a lot of credit should go to Caroline Pidgeon. She, rather than Khan has been backing us all the way through. But credit Khan for taking it up.
34 -
Has anyone told gavros about the loss of the naming rights..?4
-
Gavros took his seat in the best stadium in the Premiershite to watch the mighty London United, could not see a thing, got assaulted by half a dozen "retired" members of the ICF on the concourse, only to see his team full of international stars lose, so he went home and shot himself...4
-
Sponsored links:
-
In as far as they are actually the stadium operator, so manage non-football events as well. To compare, it would be as if West Ham signed a contract to replace LS185. It's a fair point though, because they hand the stadium over to themselves essentially.killerandflash said:
Man City have exclusive use of the Etihad, so it's a different situation. The fact that the ground has their sponsor shows thisrikofold said:
I'll have a flick through that contract again @PragueAddick, my recollection is that it was West Ham's obligation to hand over a clean stadium - and it was why they all went for the stadium fabric wrap. In fact I have a feeling that's also what I was told in one of my FoIs but will check.PragueAddick said:
Didn't West Ham carry out pay for the stadium claret and blue makeover & whu rebranding ? If so, as tenants they'd be responsible to restoring it.letthegoodtimesroll said:.
"Clean Stadium", as in no sponsors branding or no West Ham branding? None at all, nowt, zero? Must be a pain taking all that West Ham signage down again...Markg2004 said:From the Telegraph article:
Crow said firms could also be put off by being unable to brand the venue during next year’s athletics World Championships, which will be held in a “clean stadium”.
...oh wait.
It is far from clear what West Ham have paid for. We are getting new information which shows that this aspect has been fought over long and hard. The main contract does not deal with it. It makes pretty clear that E20 have to take it down and put it up again (so LS185 will actually do it) at their cost. West ham have sought to specify in great detail what the paraphanalia looks like (branding, in the parallel universe of the Baroness) but then seek to get E20 to share the costs.
West Ham have paid for fitting out the corporate lounges, it seems, which is terribly nice of them, but not for another tenant who might want to do a bit of corporate without being assailed with images of how West Ham won the World Cup in 66. It seems they have also paid to "upgrade" the seating, but that includes sticking their badge etc all over them. You can't "cleanse" the seats of that nonsense, as Mo Farah observed in the summer.
None of this happens at the Allianz where at a flick of a switch, it seems, it morphs from being Bayern to being TSV. Or at least it was the case when I was there in 2014. It might have changed after TSV went bankrupt, and Bayern bought out their share. But otherwise it was a genuinely clean stadium. I went to watch a TSV game, and there wasn't a smidgin of Bayern to be seen anywhere.
It would be interesting to see whether similar clean stadium requirements are in Man City's contract - I'm pretty sure whilst their seats are sky blue there isn't any lettering, for example.
City purchased the naming rights to the stadium as part of a renegotiated lease arrangement that meant the council were guaranteed a higher annual sum for the lease, so it's not exactly as you describe. The seating would have been a legacy of the original contract, but I don't know if Citeh were always the operator.1 -
This is unexpected but very welcome news. Can opened, worms everywhere. Let's hope he does it justice.PragueAddick said:
On the contrary, this is fantastic news, and exactly what the Coalition has been pushing for behind the scenes. His statement only refers to the capital costs. However we now have the perfect political vehicle which we can tap into, to highlight the ongoing losses in operations, with the loss of naming rights deal, and spiralling police costs.SELR_addicks said:"London deputy mayor says they have inherited "total mess" at Olympic Stadium and vows to investigate all finances including West Ham deal"
Probably too little too late, West Ham are hardly going to agree to renegotiate.
It's the breakthrough we were seeking and we believe a lot of credit should go to Caroline Pidgeon. She, rather than Khan has been backing us all the way through. But credit Khan for taking it up.4 -
The stadium were testing the big external advertising screen today - I was going to say "I wonder who paid for that?" but we all know the answer0
-
They could use it to display the cost of the stadium to taxpayers and have the numbers go round to keep track as it increases, or goes down of coursecafc999 said:The stadium were testing the big external advertising screen today - I was going to say "I wonder who paid for that?" but we all know the answer
1 -
They will need a bigger screen to do thatletthegoodtimesroll said:
They could use it to display the cost of the stadium to taxpayers and have the numbers go round to keep track as it increases, or goes down of coursecafc999 said:The stadium were testing the big external advertising screen today - I was going to say "I wonder who paid for that?" but we all know the answer
0 -
Well done Sadiq Khan. I'm not convinced that the deal can be re-adjusted in favour of the taxpayer but it's a good first step.1
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37842354
Bizarre detailsPart of the reason for the increase is a rise in the cost to install and operate the retractable seating, which can be removed for concerts and athletics events. The cost of £8m a year is up from an estimated cost of £300,000 because the company originally contracted for the job had gone bust, reports BBC sports editor Dan Roan.
How can the seating estimate be so out, even with the change of supplier, especially when the seating installed is basically just temporary seating, better quality of course, not not a million miles away from Priestfield's!6 -
They're now talking about redesigning the retractable seating in the summer for West Ham which kills off any other use of the stadium outside the football season.0
-
I always thought this would be the case.The Red Robin said:They're now talking about redesigning the retractable seating in the summer for West Ham which kills off any other use of the stadium outside the football season.
Once they got in no one was ever going to kick them out. They can do what they like with it now I imagine.
The whole thing really sickens me.2 -
Sir Robin Wales welcomes the independent enquiry - "we have a duty to the taxpayers".
Welcome to the party, Sir Robin, better late than never ....
3
