Olympic Stadium; our day in court
Comments
-
If I had enough cash, I'd sponsor it.guinnessaddick said:
I'd call it "The self-serving corrupt Boris cunt in bed with the Dildo brothers shafted taxpayers bowl"
Or something18 -
"But leading sponsorship adviser Tim Crow, who has been involved in numerous stadium rights deals, said more non-football events needed to be staged at the venue."
Can't happen for 9 months of the year though, that's the issue.0 -
If West Ham paid an extra £5M a year as "naming sponsor", they could call it the "New Boleyn" or something.
Most people would be happy they were paying a reasonable 'rent' and let them paint the place Claret and Blue and make it their "home".
Everything would settle down a bit and - who knows - it might be possible to find a way to attract more events and sponsors and make a profit out of the f*ing place!1 -
IdleHans said:
If I had enough cash, I'd sponsor it.guinnessaddick said:
I'd call it "The self-serving corrupt Boris cunt in bed with the Dildo brothers shafted taxpayers bowl"
Or something
Catchy, I like itIdleHans said:
If I had enough cash, I'd sponsor it.guinnessaddick said:
I'd call it "The self-serving corrupt Boris cunt in bed with the Dildo brothers shafted taxpayers bowl"
Or something0 -
Research by global valuation advisor Duff & Phelps has suggested naming rights for the venue could fetch at least £4.8m annually.
What's West Ham's cut again?0 -
Why should they be getting a cut?The Red Robin said:Research by global valuation advisor Duff & Phelps has suggested naming rights for the venue could fetch at least £4.8m annually.
What's West Ham's cut again?1 -
Ann Summers should sponsor it and rename it the "Prolapsed Arsehole" on account of us being continually shafted by the whole situation2
-
I'm not saying they should, but they do.guinnessaddick said:
Why should they be getting a cut?The Red Robin said:Research by global valuation advisor Duff & Phelps has suggested naming rights for the venue could fetch at least £4.8m annually.
What's West Ham's cut again?
Under the terms of their agreement with the LLDC, West Ham are entitled to 50 per cent of any stadium naming rights revenue after the first £4m-a-year.'0 -
From memory, 20% but only for amounts above £4m, which simply is not going to appear.The Red Robin said:Research by global valuation advisor Duff & Phelps has suggested naming rights for the venue could fetch at least £4.8m annually.
What's West Ham's cut again?
@stevexreeve suggestion above is actually a pragmatic solution which will probably be part of an eventual re-negotiated deal.
But the bigger loss making issue is the retractable seats. West Ham have to give up on their insistence on them. they never insisted on them in the first incarnation of the stadium where they were to own 50% with Newham. It only became terribly, terribly important when they knew we the taxpayer would pay.
2 -
Paid my first visit, for the Foo Fighters gig, recently. It already is claret and blue and it certainly looks very West Ham...although to be fair they didn't bring the fake cladding with them from the Boleyn.stevexreeve said:If West Ham paid an extra £5M a year as "naming sponsor", they could call it the "New Boleyn" or something.
Most people would be happy they were paying a reasonable 'rent' and let them paint the place Claret and Blue and make it their "home".
Everything would settle down a bit and - who knows - it might be possible to find a way to attract more events and sponsors and make a profit out of the f*ing place!
They're essentially paying a net nil per annum at the moment. An extra £5m a year, plus any additional costs (to those already being paid) should be the minimum requirement.
Paying £90m+ for players this transfer window and whatever enormous amount they are paying for Pellegrini, shows the spending power they now have, aided by this deal. They're a different beast now, at everyone else's expense.14 - Sponsored links:
-
Recent Newham Council statement plus QC's report on it's funding of the stadium - that may be of interest to those who've been involved in this:
https://www.newham.gov.uk/Pages/News/Newham-Council-publishes-independent-QC-report-on-flawed-decisions-made-by-previous-administration-regarding-40-million-.aspx0 -
Lack of transparency and accountability down to the Council arguing commercial sensitivity.
The same specious argument they deployed to try and prevent @PragueAddick getting access to the information. In laying down the case against commercial sensitivity @PragueAddick clearly made the case why the Council had bought a pup, had no commercial value to protect and release of the documents was in the public interests on grounds of accountability to tax payers.
All of this could so easily have been swept under the carpet away from public view had our CL hero not been sniffing around for a fight on his bloody high horse, just like he does on here.
28 -
And that corrupt oaf Boris Johnson tries to shift the blame.TelMc32 said:
Paid my first visit, for the Foo Fighters gig, recently. It already is claret and blue and it certainly looks very West Ham...although to be fair they didn't bring the fake cladding with them from the Boleyn.stevexreeve said:If West Ham paid an extra £5M a year as "naming sponsor", they could call it the "New Boleyn" or something.
Most people would be happy they were paying a reasonable 'rent' and let them paint the place Claret and Blue and make it their "home".
Everything would settle down a bit and - who knows - it might be possible to find a way to attract more events and sponsors and make a profit out of the f*ing place!
They're essentially paying a net nil per annum at the moment. An extra £5m a year, plus any additional costs (to those already being paid) should be the minimum requirement.
Paying £90m+ for players this transfer window and whatever enormous amount they are paying for Pellegrini, shows the spending power they now have, aided by this deal. They're a different beast now, at everyone else's expense.1 -
2012 Legacy events have generated over £130 million.
UK Sport says more than £130m has been generated in London by National Lottery and taxpayer-funded events following the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Last July's IAAF World Athletics Championships at the London Stadium led the way, bringing in £79m.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/44966586
0 -
WHU have taken out a full page advert in the Express, advertising their new kit.3
-
Why not? We're paying for it...Dansk_Red said:WHU have taken out a full page advert in the Express, advertising their new kit.
7 -
£79m ? Off the scale bullshit.clive said:2012 Legacy events have generated over £130 million.
UK Sport says more than £130m has been generated in London by National Lottery and taxpayer-funded events following the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Last July's IAAF World Athletics Championships at the London Stadium led the way, bringing in £79m.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/44966586
1 -
It's not £79m profit and certainly not monies going into the admin of the stadium.
The BBC are getting that figure from an "event impact study" which said that the championships contributed £79.01m to the London economy, total economic impact ranging between £109.03m and £159.60m and a total contribution to GDP of between £45.36m and £66.39m.3 -
Let's hope it all goes terribly wrong for the claret n blue twunts this season.5
-
Can't see Pellegrini letting things slip
. In the 15 days between the 01st and 15th of July he has bought in Ryan Fredericks, Jack Wilshere, Andriy Yarmolenko, Fabian Balbuena and Felipe Anderson for a total cost of around £61,000,000.
Just goes to show what can be done with the weight of the taxpayer behind you ... how can this be legal?
8 - Sponsored links:
-
Their combined wages will probably add another £20 million to the club’s annual outgoings. Let’s hope they’ve got long contractsRaith_C_Chattonell said:Can't see Pellegrini letting things slip
. In the 15 days between the 01st and 15th of July he has bought in Ryan Fredericks, Jack Wilshere, Andriy Yarmolenko, Fabian Balbuena and Felipe Anderson for a total cost of around £61,000,000.
Just goes to show what can be done with the weight of the taxpayer behind you ... how can this be legal?1 -
Is there a Justgiving page for them, or shall i just use the HMRC site?Raith_C_Chattonell said:Can't see Pellegrini letting things slip
. In the 15 days between the 01st and 15th of July he has bought in Ryan Fredericks, Jack Wilshere, Andriy Yarmolenko, Fabian Balbuena and Felipe Anderson for a total cost of around £61,000,000.
Just goes to show what can be done with the weight of the taxpayer behind you ... how can this be legal?15 -
EIther will do, or just add your card details in the gofuckme.com linksoapy_jones said:
Is there a Justgiving page for them, or shall i just use the HMRC site?Raith_C_Chattonell said:Can't see Pellegrini letting things slip
. In the 15 days between the 01st and 15th of July he has bought in Ryan Fredericks, Jack Wilshere, Andriy Yarmolenko, Fabian Balbuena and Felipe Anderson for a total cost of around £61,000,000.
Just goes to show what can be done with the weight of the taxpayer behind you ... how can this be legal?0 -
Report in Mail today that West Ham will train at the London Stadium on Friday ahead of Cherries game .
It goes on to say that while LLDC claimed the club must seek permission to use the pitch it is understood that West Ham's deal allows them to access it a day either side of a game.
Can this be right ? If so it makes a mockery of the number of days West Ham claimed they would be using the stadium for .3 -
Can't someone, say a local athletics club, hold another event there that day as well, say Javelin practice?Starinnaddick said:Report in Mail today that West Ham will train at the London Stadium on Friday ahead of Cherries game .
It goes on to say that while LLDC claimed the club must seek permission to use the pitch it is understood that West Ham's deal allows them to access it a day either side of a game.
Can this be right ? If so it makes a mockery of the number of days West Ham claimed they would be using the stadium for .3 -
More like the hammer throw (them out).killerandflash said:
Can't someone, say a local athletics club, hold another event there that day as well, say Javelin practice?Starinnaddick said:Report in Mail today that West Ham will train at the London Stadium on Friday ahead of Cherries game .
It goes on to say that while LLDC claimed the club must seek permission to use the pitch it is understood that West Ham's deal allows them to access it a day either side of a game.
Can this be right ? If so it makes a mockery of the number of days West Ham claimed they would be using the stadium for .6 -
West Ham are technically right. The CA specifiies that the Stadium is reserved for set up and take down of WHU garbage 24 hours either side of a game. We pointed out way back during the Information Tribunal that this means the Stadium is blocked for over 110 days - because at the beginning of the season they don't know if some games might be moved. And then of course there are possible Cup games which must be planned for. That's why there is hardly any other usage during the season, E20 hardly have any spare windows. the old "25 days a year " trope which Gullivan still bandy around, is a complete distortion of the truth.Starinnaddick said:Report in Mail today that West Ham will train at the London Stadium on Friday ahead of Cherries game .
It goes on to say that while LLDC claimed the club must seek permission to use the pitch it is understood that West Ham's deal allows them to access it a day either side of a game.
Can this be right ? If so it makes a mockery of the number of days West Ham claimed they would be using the stadium for .
As for training, I guess West Ham are just cynically utilising the agreement that the day is reserved for them, even though it was reserved for an entirely different purpose. Great that you alerted me to this though.
There will be more OSC news soon, probably after the holiday...
2 -
What West Ham garbage do they set up? All their stuff seem to be up all the time.PragueAddick said:
West Ham are technically right. The CA specifiies that the Stadium is reserved for set up and take down of WHU garbage 24 hours either side of a game. We pointed out way back during the Information Tribunal that this means the Stadium is blocked for over 110 days - because at the beginning of the season they don't know if some games might be moved. And then of course there are possible Cup games which must be planned for. That's why there is hardly any other usage during the season, E20 hardly have any spare windows. the old "25 days a year " trope which Gullivan still bandy around, is a complete distortion of the truth.Starinnaddick said:Report in Mail today that West Ham will train at the London Stadium on Friday ahead of Cherries game .
It goes on to say that while LLDC claimed the club must seek permission to use the pitch it is understood that West Ham's deal allows them to access it a day either side of a game.
Can this be right ? If so it makes a mockery of the number of days West Ham claimed they would be using the stadium for .
As for training, I guess West Ham are just cynically utilising the agreement that the day is reserved for them, even though it was reserved for an entirely different purpose. Great that you alerted me to this though.
There will be more OSC news soon, probably after the holiday...1 -
Maybe they could help Spurs out in October?2
-
Good question. Officially it would be matchday stuff like goalposts and corner flags, but you start to wonder - if there is little other usage between games, do they even bother now? It is of course the stadium operator and not West Ham who do the work.guinnessaddick said:
What West Ham garbage do they set up? All their stuff seem to be up all the time.PragueAddick said:
West Ham are technically right. The CA specifiies that the Stadium is reserved for set up and take down of WHU garbage 24 hours either side of a game. We pointed out way back during the Information Tribunal that this means the Stadium is blocked for over 110 days - because at the beginning of the season they don't know if some games might be moved. And then of course there are possible Cup games which must be planned for. That's why there is hardly any other usage during the season, E20 hardly have any spare windows. the old "25 days a year " trope which Gullivan still bandy around, is a complete distortion of the truth.Starinnaddick said:Report in Mail today that West Ham will train at the London Stadium on Friday ahead of Cherries game .
It goes on to say that while LLDC claimed the club must seek permission to use the pitch it is understood that West Ham's deal allows them to access it a day either side of a game.
Can this be right ? If so it makes a mockery of the number of days West Ham claimed they would be using the stadium for .
As for training, I guess West Ham are just cynically utilising the agreement that the day is reserved for them, even though it was reserved for an entirely different purpose. Great that you alerted me to this though.
There will be more OSC news soon, probably after the holiday...
0
