SPURS New Stadium

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Spurf

Spurf

Thread Mover
Forum Moderator
Jan 27, 2011
26,876
14,894
113
SCOTLAND
Well lots of issues here, from the new stadium to the effects on the area, to the loss to local businesses from Enics gain.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/oct/30/tottenham-new-stadium-local-business-demolition

he full extent of public contribution to Tottenham Hotspur's planned new stadium project can be revealed for the first time, with the club positioned to benefit from controversial council plans to develop an area opposite the new ground involving the demolition of existing local businesses.

Spurs have bought substantial land in that area, now proposed for residential development, and recently moved ownership of the property offshore, raising the possibility of avoiding corporate capital gains tax when it is sold at a profit – although Spurs deny the transfer was motivated by tax avoidance.
Click to expand...

Just a taster on some 3 pages devoted to the subject in today's Guardian.
 
My Dad said awhile back that he'd be in the ground before the foundations for the stadium are, at this rate we all will! <yikes>
 
why is this country so ****? The japanese would have built this years ago already. And the germans.
 
The full extent of public contribution to Tottenham Hotspur's planned new stadium project can be revealed for the first time, with the club positioned to benefit from controversial council plans to develop an area opposite the new ground involving the demolition of existing local businesses.
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, I don't recall it being controversial when they did the same thing in Stratford...
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
Funnily enough, I don't recall it being controversial when they did the same thing in Stratford...
Click to expand...

Or just not reported or just overshadowed by the Olympic hype. My own brotherinlaw lost his premises and business due to the redevelopment of the Olympic site. Nevertheless even though this issue of big eating small is par for the course it should at least be reported so that people know what they are subscribing to.
 
Spurf said:
Or just not reported or just overshadowed by the Olympic hype. My own brotherinlaw lost his premises and business due to the redevelopment of the Olympic site. Nevertheless even though this issue of big eating small is par for the course it should at least be reported so that people know what they are subscribing to.
Click to expand...

Every part of London where events were held was hit in the pocket. Local businesses in Stratford and Greenwich lost out because spectators were herded from station to stadium and back, usually bypassing any local businesses (but it's okay, you could buy IOC-approved food and drink from corporations that don't even need your money in the stadium!), whilst the whole towns along the cycling route were told to shut down for the weekend the road race was on by the police.
 
humanbeingincroydon said:
Every part of London where events were held was hit in the pocket. Local businesses in Stratford and Greenwich lost out because spectators were herded from station to stadium and back, usually bypassing any local businesses (but it's okay, you could buy IOC-approved food and drink from corporations that don't even need your money in the stadium!), whilst the whole towns along the cycling route were told to shut down for the weekend the road race was on by the police.
Click to expand...

Make that every part of Britain. For example, lottery money was diverted to the Olympics, halting projects all over the country.
 
"Spurs have bought substantial land in that area, now proposed for residential development, and recently moved ownership of the property offshore, raising the possibility of avoiding corporate capital gains tax when it is sold at a profit &#8211; although Spurs deny the transfer was motivated by tax avoidance."

What other possible motives Spurs have to move the ownership offshore (Bahamas) if not to avoid tax? Surely, not another Rosie47 account?
 
JamieIron said:
"Spurs have bought substantial land in that area, now proposed for residential development, and recently moved ownership of the property offshore, raising the possibility of avoiding corporate capital gains tax when it is sold at a profit &#8211; although Spurs deny the transfer was motivated by tax avoidance."

What other possible motives Spurs have to move the ownership offshore (Bahamas) if not to avoid tax? Surely, not another Rosie47 account?
Click to expand...

Obviously it is for tax avoidance, although our owner is based in the Bahamas too.

Probably not the best for a West Ham fan to talk about robbing the tax payer. Aren't you guys borrowing £50mill interest free off one of the poorest councils in London because you couldn't afford to convert the Olympic stadium?
 
Without West Ham's help, that £500mil stadium would become a white elephant. Please check the facts about that £50mil "interest free" loan and moreover it's UK's legacy.

Spurs are robbing the poor, forcing business to relocate probably to somewhere out near the M25. Remember what happened in the south east when relocation happened prior to 2008?
 
JamieIron said:
Without West Ham's help, that £500mil stadium would become a white elephant. Please check the facts about that £50mil "interest free" loan and moreover it's UK's legacy.

Spurs are robbing the poor, forcing business to relocate probably to somewhere out near the M25. Remember what happened in the south east when relocation happened prior to 2008?
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't because Spurs or Leyton Orient would move in
 
A stadium which they clearly won't be able to fill, following the most dubious bidding process in recent history.
Half-season tickets available now, kids for a quid v Villa and the Chelsea game on the 23rd is on general sale, unbelievably.
 
JamieIron said:
Without West Ham's help, that £500mil stadium would become a white elephant. Please check the facts about that £50mil "interest free" loan and moreover it's UK's legacy.

Spurs are robbing the poor, forcing business to relocate probably to somewhere out near the M25. Remember what happened in the south east when relocation happened prior to 2008?
Click to expand...

Our plan involved zero public funding. I'm pleased we didn't get it but it was a far more generous business plan and other events companies also offered good financial deals for the taxpayer but they just didn't have people that work for their companies also working for the committee that decided the preferred bidder.

Robbing the poor? Businesses in the area will receive a big boost when they have their new regeneration project inline with much increased crowds at the Lane.

What happened with the last relocation? Do tell because I've not got a clue what you're on about.
 
Yes it's likely that we will take abuse from a West Ham fan trying to gain the moral high ground. <laugh> Who are the owners of West Ham, remind me?

The number of victims manufactured during the building of the Olympic stadium reduces the White Hart Lane ramfications to insignificance.
 
JamieIron said:
Without West Ham's help, that £500mil stadium would become a white elephant. Please check the facts about that £50mil "interest free" loan and moreover it's UK's legacy.

Spurs are robbing the poor, forcing business to relocate probably to somewhere out near the M25. Remember what happened in the south east when relocation happened prior to 2008?
Click to expand...

Are you trying to say that Newham council giving West Ham an interest free loan of £50m isn't robbing the poor? You better not have had a straight face when you were typing that twaddle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back