23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

All you need to know about West Ham United FC's potential move to Stratford.

Moderators: Romford, Rio, Gnome, Northern Paulo, Lost Hammer, bonehead, chalks, goes2eleven, Alf Garnett's (Ex) Missus, bristolhammerfc, Wheels, sicknote

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby the pink palermo on Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:44 am

the pink palermo wrote:There are no plans .


Doc H Ball wrote:Don't understand that Pinky - seems you have been shown 'detailed plans'


Doc - it all depends of course upon what you believe to be detailed plans .

From memory 4 sketches / mocl ups were shown .In no way could they be described as "detailed plans" .It's a complete whopping fib .In the context of the newspaper article it's a lie .

So you know , I've specified (large ) factories for construction in my time - I know what a detailed plan is .What the SAB were shown were no more than - at best - outline sketeches ."Concepts" if you like .

Think along the lines of "here is some blue sky , and if you look over here, you can see some green grass" .....that level of detail .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27430
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby brownout on Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:50 am

It seems that Brady may just be 'misrepresenting' fans.

The poll by WHU's VIEW? will give supporters a chance to express their views.

All, whatever your views, are very welcome at meeting tonight (7pm, Supporters' Club, Castle Street).
User avatar
brownout
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 9:26 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby taffhammer on Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:03 am

I don't quite follow this.Can someone explain how the organisation that has control of an olympic stadium can hand over control for the next 99 years to a football club that has not shown them any detailed proper plans of what they are going to do it ? They couldn't hand over control unless they thought the plans were workable as the whole bidding process would be back to square one.
Wake up people they must have plans but have only shown them to the people they think matter. I'm for the move but this doesn't smell right.
User avatar
taffhammer
 
Posts: 1518
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby the pink palermo on Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:11 am

Taff

I'm on the SAB , and have been shown no detailed plans .

I've asked relevant commercial questions , which the minutes of the SAB meetings clearly state KB has declined to answer .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27430
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby taffhammer on Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:22 am

Yes pink , i understand they didn't show them to the SAB.What i'm saying is they couldn't bid for the stadium and win if they hadn't shown detailed plans to the people that decide the winning bid.Firstly how could they award it to us if we didn't know what we were going to do with it and secondly if we won it and then drew up plans that maybe impossible to carry out what would the OPLC do, open up the bidding again? They would never give it to us on that basis. Which means there's plans and maybe we won't like them or why don't they reveal them now as all bids are in.
User avatar
taffhammer
 
Posts: 1518
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby the pink palermo on Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:49 am

Taff

I understood what you meant , and of course I am not naive enough to believe they will show people on the SAB their full or even partial hand .

My point is they don't have plans for the simple reason they don't know hopw much money is available to pay for a conversion , or even who is paying for the conversion , who gets the naming rights money , or now much it is ( the proportion iof the naming rights the bidder gets was up for negotiation as part of the tendering process , for example ) .

What they have are outline concepts , and borad brush ideas , for example

At one end we plan to put all the coporate boxes.......at the other end we plan to put a hotel .......down the sides we don't think too much will be required , perhaps some demountable seating ......

And on the "business plan"......

Of course much will depend upon who we share with , but we see, in the summer , in addition to Athletics , it ought to be possible to have a Baseball team located here , and T20 games of cricket , with our good friends at ECCC .We see the OS as a perfect venue for Grid Iron and have partnered with AEG to bring an American football side to the OS on three ocassions per season .We believe that each "non football" event , such as Baseball, Grid Iron, Cricket , Boxing or pop concerts could gross in excess of £1m at the box office , and we anticipate 40 such events a year ....

Their plan is to get the keys , and negotiate from there ....sweat the "asset" , but as yet there will be no real detailed plans .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27430
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby hadleighhammer on Wed Apr 04, 2012 12:43 pm

NorthBankAlliance wrote:Looks like hadleigh was right


Not entirely. I merely thought they would publicise the SAB majority 'Yes' vote as the fans being polled, being for it, and that's done and dusted and the OPLC can be happy our bid will be wonderful.

I didn't expect the ***** to downright lie about it. The SAB could've voted anything and Brady could've still come out with this tripe.

Saying that though, I'm not surprised about these lot lying to get their way though. They're fans themselves so it's all ok though apparently. :evil:
User avatar
hadleighhammer
 
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 6:18 pm
Location: On my computer trying to keep up with the Sky fixture changes

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby taffhammer on Wed Apr 04, 2012 2:24 pm

the pink palermo wrote:My point is they don't have plans for the simple reason they don't know hopw much money is available to pay for a conversion , or even who is paying for the conversion , who gets the naming rights money , or now much it is ( the proportion iof the naming rights the bidder gets was up for negotiation as part of the tendering process , for example ) .

What they have are outline concepts , and borad brush ideas ,
Their plan is to get the keys , and negotiate from there ....sweat the "asset" , but as yet there will be no real detailed plans .


Pink, your spot on. But if i was the OPLC and the bid infront of me didn't have a set of detailed plans with rough costings for every particular scenario then the American entertainment company would win hands down. I know your not naive but they can't be either.
User avatar
taffhammer
 
Posts: 1518
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby The Old Mile End on Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:56 am

taffhammer wrote:What i'm saying is they couldn't bid for the stadium and win if they hadn't shown detailed plans to the people that decide the winning bid.


Why not Taff? They did last time.
User avatar
The Old Mile End
 
Posts: 860
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2003 2:40 pm
Location: Singing in the Kharzi, sussing out the moon

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby taffhammer on Thu Apr 05, 2012 10:19 am

Because i believe they showed them very detailed plans then as well. Watch how quick they come up with the plans if they win the bid .
User avatar
taffhammer
 
Posts: 1518
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby York Ham(mer) on Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:45 pm

The bidding process is different this time. The OPLC will draw up detailed plans for the stadium after consideration of proposals from bidders, conversion costs and income. There's a good post from MEM on this: viewtopic.php?f=39&t=139389&p=3346440#p3346440
User avatar
York Ham(mer)
 
Posts: 6726
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:15 am
Location: In exile up north

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby brownout on Sun Apr 08, 2012 10:12 pm

Tickets available on the day for Birmingham match - and its kids for quid.
Where are we going to find another 20,000+ supporters who will come to the Olympic Stadium week in week out, but wont come to a vital promotion game at Upton park?
User avatar
brownout
 
Posts: 6635
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 9:26 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby EvilC on Sun Apr 08, 2012 11:32 pm

brownout wrote:Tickets available on the day for Birmingham match - and its kids for quid.
Where are we going to find another 20,000+ supporters who will come to the Olympic Stadium week in week out, but wont come to a vital promotion game at Upton park?


They'll be enticed by being so far from the action that they won't be able to see how awful we are.
User avatar
EvilC
 
Posts: 7814
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 5:54 pm
Location: In the street as the cold wind blows, in the ghetto...

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby taffhammer on Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:06 pm

York Ham(mer) wrote:The bidding process is different this time. The OPLC will draw up detailed plans for the stadium after consideration of proposals from bidders, conversion costs and income. There's a good post from MEM on this: http://www.kumb.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 0#p3346440" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Thanks York,that makes a bit more sense .So i can't see them giving it to us due to the problems and cost in changing it for football when the other options will involve less cost to the OPLC.
User avatar
taffhammer
 
Posts: 1518
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby MEM on Tue Apr 10, 2012 3:35 pm

taffhammer wrote: The bidding process is different this time. The OPLC will draw up detailed plans for the stadium after consideration of proposals from bidders, conversion costs and income. There's a good post from MEM on this: viewtopic.php?f=39&t=139389&p=3346440#p3346440" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks York,that makes a bit more sense .So i can't see them giving it to us due to the problems and cost in changing it for football when the other options will involve less cost to the OPLC.


Not necessarily much of the cost of the stadium is involved in the infrastructure and base, the pathways in, the foundations and lower tier built on contaminated land etc and this has already been spent. If they scale it back to a 25,000 open stadium they still have to spend another £40M? on conversion/reduction and what return can they get on that and how long will it take to break even? If on the other hand they leave as is without an anchor tenant the same scenario for the next 25 years until the working life of the infrastructure requires re-building or scrapping.

The only scenario that offers the government a guaranteed steady income over the long term from the tenants is via us and in that case they need to work out the RoI of all three cost options, costs are approx : a) £40 in 2108 b) £40M+ in 2038? or c) £100M+? in 2013 How much will they get back in scenario a) when the only income will be a few minor cricket and athletics meetings and some office accommodation I don't think the venue is suitable for concerts in that mode. same as in b) with a few concerts and maybe some winter team games like rugby added on. Or c) where they get back the RoI for a) + b) + c) with the majority risk free and guaranteed (subject to us not going under!)

So the only thing to work out is Conversion Costs against Income in which case our scenario might look quite a bit more attractive financially AND politically.

They have to spend £40M no matter which option they choose.So


Option c) RoI = (cost of option c) conversion - cost of option a) or b) conversion) - additional income of option a), b) and c) x 100 years

For example if our conversion is £140M (plus anything else West Ham might pay for seating etc.so not included here) and we pay £3M per annum and others £1M ~ prepared to be shot down on this. Then ignoring inflation NPV / IRR etc.

RoI = (£140M - £40) - (3M+£1M) x100 or £100M - £400M and is £300M over 100 years or payback after just over 30 years.

Compare that to scenario a) or b) RoI = £40M - x £1M Rental x 100 years they will still need to get well over £1M pa annum to break even in 40 years with no real guaranteed income.


hope that makes sense :think:
MEM
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby the pink palermo on Tue Apr 10, 2012 4:17 pm

MEM

As interesting as that is , how much more will we get to spend on players each season ? I asked the VC and she wouldn't tell me .

Also , how much further away will the Chairman be sitting compared with now ? That may give me a clue as to how far away I'll be sitting from the action .

Finally , my ST this year was £730 - how much lower will it be in the OS ? I'll need it to be cheaper to offset the cost of rail travel to the game as there will be insufficient parking .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 27430
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby mushy on Tue Apr 10, 2012 4:28 pm

the pink palermo wrote:
Finally , my ST this year was £730 - how much lower will it be in the OS ? I'll need it to be cheaper to offset the cost of rail travel to the game as there will be insufficient parking .


Which is an interesting point, dont we currently have somewhere in the region of 60% travelling by car?
Does everyone know that there will be virtually nowhere to park in the area?
Are they happy that park and ride may need them to drive to Epping and tube it in?
(I made the Epping part up based on the fact that I could not think of any stations close by that do not already have parking restrictions).
mushy
 
Posts: 7711
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:17 pm
Location: Kumb Poster of the year 2009

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Hammers80 on Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:07 pm

will parking in Westfield be off limits?
User avatar
Hammers80
 
Posts: 1453
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Mega Ron

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Hammer110 on Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:10 pm

taffhammer wrote: York,that makes a bit more sense .So i can't see them giving it to us due to the problems and cost in changing it for football when the other options will involve less cost to the OPLC.


The problem for the OPLC is that they need a high profile tenant (and a winter user) so given that the other other bidders are (allegedly) Live Nation, Newham Council and the East of London University (possibly in conjunction with Essex CC), that puts us in a very good position to get what we want. And to be honest if the list of bidders is correct, I can see us all getting it.
User avatar
Hammer110
 
Posts: 2485
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Looking forward to the new season, new league, new challenges, bring it on. 父 父

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby mushy on Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:18 pm

Hammers80 wrote:will parking in Westfield be off limits?

Yes, without doubt, why would they allow the car parks to be full of non-shoppers? They would be shooting themselves in the foot.
Am not sure what they do at the other Westfield on QPR home games though.
The Westfield car Parks at Stratford will be completly closed for 3 months during the olympics- for security reasons.
mushy
 
Posts: 7711
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:17 pm
Location: Kumb Poster of the year 2009

PreviousNext

Return to The Olympic Stadium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Hammertapp and 6 guests