The legal papers relating to West Ham's tenancy agreement for the Olympic Stadium have been released, they will pay just £2.5m rent a year and contributed just £15m towards the £270m cost of converting the stadium..... They don't have to pay a number of running costs or Policing....... http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/36043808 That is some deal compared to the cost of building a ground...... Thoughts?
No outrage from me Their owners,aside from being odious, have negotiated a great deal for their club. Good luck to them apart from when they play us which won't happen any time soon.
Not much different from other schemes where local/town/city councils have paid for a new stadium and let a pro football team play there.
how did they manage to get that deal? Nearly as good as when they shifted Dowie and Rowlands to us, for Sinclair in exchange
Lord Coe's 'legacy' indeed. The deal was made because there was no alternative, another 'white elephant' like the Millenium Dome would have been unacceptable especially considering Coe eulogising endlessly about a 'legacy'. West Ham accepted the athletics part of the deal and obviously used it to drive a hard bargain, 'The Pornographers' done good. With Spurs and Chelsea spending £400-500 million on their new grounds the Hammers could find themselves quids-in and steal a march on the pair of them on the playing side. Whatever happens it looks like they'll be a serious contender for the Champion's League places pretty soon...
No one aside from Wet Spam should be required to meet any related costs. User pays, not the public. You want to own a Bentley, you service it, not your local community.
You own your Bentley, or have a loan to pay for it. West Ham don't have a share in the place they play, no capital assets. But they will be cash rich as long as they stay in the Prem.
