Anyone else think west have have done very nicely out of that deal!! Not only have they had to cough up just £15m for the redevelopment works (against about £165m costs) but they get a prime state of the art stadium for 99 years at just £2m a year - not sure if the lease is subject to rent reviews but probably not going on the terms of the rest of the deal! when you think coventry were paying £1m a year rent for their stadium in well, coventry, it puts it into perspective.
I still wouldn't like to be sat behind the athletics track mind as it will kill the atmosphere. Did they get permission to use portable seating on top of the track?
yes their redeveloping so the seats will move over the running tracks on match day. they've got a dream home!!
Great use of public funds, and about £140m of them. Surprised that doesn't amount to some for of irregular "state aid" for a football club to be honest.
At the very least the ground should be shared with Orient, or even Spurs. It is completely wrong for a single club to have the benefit of a national treasure like the Olympic Stadium.
Agree it should be shared. Personally don't think it will make an ideal football stadium- even with re-development how can they move all seating closer to the pitch? Seats at the back will have a crap view, surely?
I can't see an alternative. Why should we pay more than 2m a year for a stadium that we will on average only use around 22 days of the year? This frees up over 300 days the stadium can be used for other events. The conversion costs are massive but seeing as we are not going to "own" the stadium, I see no reason why we should be stumping up any more than the 15m contribution. When I was renting my house, I certainly wouldn't have paid thousands of pounds for new double glazing or an extension. Improvements like that would be down to my landlord. If West Ham had been involved in the design process of the stadium as we originally wanted, the stadium conversion costs would have been minimal. Blame Seb Co. Not West Ham.
Always a great idea to subsidise millionaire businessmen who made their fortune selling porn. Plus of course, the two year police investigation into their tax affairs will be hushed up & buried. Plus of course, West Ham fans have a history for violence and racism, so very deserving of a helping hand when other decent clubs have gone bust with no help. The seats that will extend over the running track still means the pitch will be a long way from normal football viewing positions. The running track behind the goals is still 30-40 yards away from the edge of the goalline due to the oval shape. Actually, I'm sure the longstanding West Ham fan will hate it. Will be a flood of corporate fans and city types filling seats killing any atmosphere. Or when they struggle to sell tickets, they'll be giving them away to kids. I am absolutely certain that Gold, Sullivan & Brady will be coining it in somewhere due to this decision.
Of course we would right now Lambo. But we have been selling out the Boleyn for most games this season. The OS is only 19,000 bigger. Is that really unrealistic for a club looking to step up to the next level?
I'm not at all bitter, its just laughable that a public funded project has been so planned out so badly from start to finish. I agree with you about the lack of forward planning in the design of the stadium in the first place. As ever in this country, the architect was part of the "old boys network" when it should have been given to a partnership that specialises in multifunction stadia. I'm convinced it will continue to be a farce, which would be funny to watch as an outsider, if it wasn't for the public funding element to all this.
Personally I think it's a daft use for it, at least should have let another club ground-share, but I don't begrudge West Ham for jumping onto the opportunity of taking it. I do believe that they should pay every penny of the redevelopment funds that will be needed for the football stadium metamorphosis. You can expect your landlord to pay for a new boiler or roof repairs but if you want to buy a 60-inch TV and a pool table for then you'd better stump up your own cash.
This must be the biggest black mark against London 2012. It's a terrible piece of planning based on naively or hope towards the popularity of athletics, a pressure to follow the Chinese and a hope of a private sector bail out. What makes it look even worse is the relative success of the city of Manchester stadium. As for Orient sharing, whilst I think it's fair as its their manor so to speak. Brisbane road looks pretty sparse even with 4k saints fans.
In what way is Stratford in Orients "Manor"? Leyton is in Waltham Forest. Stratford is in Newham. West Ham is in Newham. Stratford is also a lot closer to West Ham than Upton Park is. If anything, we are moving closer to our roots.
I'm happy the stadium at least remained a stadium. Despite all the 'Olympic legacy' promises I don't think that was guaranteed. Seems like a nice deal for WHU to get a nice new stadium, but it's not without precedent -the Man City's stadium was built for the 2002 commonwealth games and the city council chipped in towards the redevelopment costs after the games were over. As I'm an athletics fan as well I'm also happy it is still a potentially world class athletics venue. Don't think there were ever any realistic ground share proposals, and the other main bidder at the time original bids were made was Spurs who wanted to ditch the athletics track - ok, with some promise of building one elsewhere (I remember Picketts Lock). Feel sorry for Orient but what can you do, can't please everyone.
Think the most important thing is that the stadium is being reused for sport and other events. It would be a shame to demolish it and it appears that after the initial large amount of money spent on it (which you had to if you want to hold the Olympics) and subsequently to refit it, it will now be a source of income for the taxpayer rather than an ongoing white elephant. The Government will receive not only the rent, but a share of all profits from events including concerts for 10 years. We had to build it in the first place anyway, so you might as well wipe that cost off. Feel sorry for Crystal Palace...no true fan will change to West Ham, but possible future fans may very well start supporting the Hammers in their shiny bright stadium. Sorry, did I say Palace
I agree except that on a commercial lease it is the leaseholder and not the owner who is responsible for any repairs/improvements/safety costs etc. I have always thought that strange but its how it is.
