They paid for less than half of the conversion, the council paid the rest. Although granted the conversions costs were much lower as the stadium was built with conversion in mind unlike the Olympic Stadium which was built with no forethought at all, that's the councils fault though and not West Hams.
Sport England paid for the vast majority of the initial construction costs, which is part funded by the treasury with money from UK tax payers.
Surely the riches that Manchester City have now means they could quite easily pay that back. Is the stadium 100% owned by Citeeeh
They've got a great deal on the stadium. They have a 250 year lease. Everybody has gained, Man City from the original deal and, after the takeover, the local area which has loads spent on it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46956887 What;s wrong with football part 738 BBC's unwillingness to mention the elephant in the room (greedy conning owners) because they kowtow to the PL, the money and the powerful lawyers. Happy to highlight the foul deeds of a few hapless pitch invaders, totally unwilling to shine a torch on Karen Brady and her monstrous salary, or the owners' unkept promises of "Let's move to Stratford, it'll be worth it as we'll become a top 6 club". https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...st-ham-united-on-top-of-898k-salary-c8knrbjxb https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2019/jan/07/mascot-fees-premier-league-clubs
