23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

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

Moderators: bristolhammerfc, sicknote, -DL-, Rio, Gnome, chalks, the pink palermo

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby NorthBankAlliance on Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:50 pm

Proper supporters ignored again then, broken promises and lies.
Two more years of West Ham, then they can sanitise us how they want.
AFC West Ham or the like for me.
NorthBankAlliance
 
Posts: 2504
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:21 am

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby hadleighhammer on Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:54 pm

WHUTerry wrote:Technically you're right but that yes vote from the SAB wasn't a blind yes or a yes regardless of the conditions. It was heavily dependent on the stadium and other factors being in line with what the supporters want.

Also, I think the polls on here have been flawed, especially the last one which crucially didn't include an option to vote yes if the supporter's wishes around sightlines, the feel of the stadium, income, etc were met.


Let's face it though Terry, they're going to run with that yes vote and publicise that to all and sundry whether or not they intend to live upto the promises they made to get it but won't tell the rest of us and won't allow you to tell us.

Hopefully I'm proved wrong and they make a fantastic FOOTBALL stadium as, if so, I'd be there like a shot. I'm not holding my breath though.
User avatar
hadleighhammer
Gentrified
 
Posts: 9659
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 WHUTerry on Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:00 am

mywhufc wrote:As a SAB member today's bid came as no surprise, except that the club have not listened to the fans, I myselfs received and forwarded nearly 50 emails to the SAB member who's was charged with conducting the poll. Every person that emailed me said they did not want the OS, some it seems put along time in writing those emails all to be ignored. The report was sent in to the club Wednesday at 12pm yet 48hrs later it seems the club still put a bid in, ignoring the majority and before any othe SAB members try and say otherwise, it was a definate majority, of fans and submit a bid. And if to rub salt in the wounds they thank those they ignored.
I'd like to apologise to those that emailed me for it seems waisting their time. The club wernt bothered in what they think or said, they will do as they please.


I think the majority of fans have moved away from the Olympic Stadium move because of the well-discussed concerns rather than being against it full stop. What was clear in the substantial report that was passed to the club is that it has been made very clear to them what the supporter's requirements are if the move is going to enjoy widespread support. I've read the report, which is extensive, and the key issues are communicated very clearly. To say the club haven't listened is unfair without knowing the terms of the bid. If they try to move us into an athletics stadium with no retractable seating for example, then it will be fair to say they haven't listened. I'd be interested to know when they plan to release details of the bid. Will it be before the 21st May or after that date (if we win) and before contracts are signed. Clarity from the club on this issue would be welcome.
User avatar
WHUTerry
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:24 pm
Location: Epping

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby WHUTerry on Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:09 am

hadleighhammer wrote:Let's face it though Terry, they're going to run with that yes vote and publicise that to all and sundry whether or not they intend to live upto the promises they made to get it but won't tell the rest of us and won't allow you to tell us.

Hopefully I'm proved wrong and they make a fantastic FOOTBALL stadium as, if so, I'd be there like a shot. I'm not holding my breath though.


I agree that using that poll is a mistake, especially as a contrary one has been run since. It's an issue that won't go away and will be interpreted as cynical spin unless they remove any reference to it.
User avatar
WHUTerry
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:24 pm
Location: Epping

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Hammer110 on Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:31 am

mywhufc wrote:As a SAB member today's bid came as no surprise, except that the club have not listened to the fans, I myselfs received and forwarded nearly 50 emails to the SAB member who's was charged with conducting the poll. Every person that emailed me said they did not want the OS, some it seems put along time in writing those emails all to be ignored. The report was sent in to the club Wednesday at 12pm yet 48hrs later it seems the club still put a bid in, ignoring the majority and before any othe SAB members try and say otherwise, it was a definate majority, of fans and submit a bid. And if to rub salt in the wounds they thank those they ignored.
I'd like to apologise to those that emailed me for it seems waisting their time. The club wernt bothered in what they think or said, they will do as they please.


So you received nearly 50 emails against the move and none for well that's not surprising why would pro-O/S fans emial an anti-O/S fan? And how are you quantifying a majority are against the move?
Apologies if I have missed something, been away with work for a while.

And anyway if this is true:

The Hammers, along with three other un-named rivals, submitted applications to lease the stadium in Stratford on Friday.............................. but insist they will only move there if the stadium is converted in to a "world-class" 60,000-seater football ground after the 2012 Games.


it looks like we aren't going to be moving :lol:
User avatar
Hammer110
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Dreaming 父 父

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Iron-worx on Sat Mar 24, 2012 1:35 pm

Hammer110 wrote:So you received nearly 50 emails against the move and none for well that's not surprising why would pro-O/S fans emial an anti-O/S fan?


Indeed why would anybody who is for the move be emailing anybody at all given as it seems to be going ahead ?

And why would undecideds be emailing anybody either, other than maybe asking for more info on which to base their decision ?
User avatar
Iron-worx
 
Posts: 5288
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:44 pm
Location: Rebuilding Lady Garrets Tower

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby mywhufc on Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:45 pm

Hammer110 wrote:
So you received nearly 50 emails against the move and none for well that's not surprising why would pro-O/S fans emial an anti-O/S fan? And how are you quantifying a majority are against the move?
:

The fans were those that responded to WHUs views email, which is neither pro or anti, asking fans to take part in the consultation.
User avatar
mywhufc
 
Posts: 3253
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:25 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Pedant on Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:00 pm

NorthBankAlliance wrote:Proper supporters ...
AFC West Ham or the like for me.

Does not compute.
Pedant
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:28 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby hadleighhammer on Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:20 am

WHUTerry wrote:I agree that using that poll is a mistake, especially as a contrary one has been run since. It's an issue that won't go away and will be interpreted as cynical spin unless they remove any reference to it.


It's not a mistake. It's ****ing clever. You lot gave them that vote though to run with. I hope what you saw about this stadium that you can't tell us about was truly magic to make you all vote that way, despite a majority % of non-SAB supporters thinking different.
User avatar
hadleighhammer
Gentrified
 
Posts: 9659
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 the pink palermo on Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:57 am

Edit .
Last edited by the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 38997
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Sexy football not sexist football

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby hadleighhammer on Sun Mar 25, 2012 9:51 am

TPP

Not all then, but the majority of the SAB. My original question was if there was a vast majority of support for it as MYWHUFC seemed to suggest there was. I don't know, I wasn't there. If that is the case, I'm hoping the plans they showed to the SAB are fantastic as overwhelming support isn't representative of the supporters view at this time.

Now if there was a significant opposition and the doubts have been raised with G&S&B then fair play. The SAB has done it's job.

I'm fully aware there is also some support for the stadium and fair enough, their allowed that opinion however wrong I think it may be. I've just never thought it was a majority. If it's not a majority then there are serious concerns from the fanbase.

I'm also aware G&S&B were always going to ignore us. If the SAB voted for it they've made it very easy for them though.

I think the majority of supporters would want a vote. Can't understand why the SAB would not ask about this?
User avatar
hadleighhammer
Gentrified
 
Posts: 9659
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 Hammer110 on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:02 am

hadleighhammer wrote:I think the majority of supporters would want a vote. Can't understand why the SAB would not ask about this?


HH, I appreciate what you are saying but what would we vote on? We have already been told the club can't publicly release any details of the bid etc due to constraints put in place by the OPLC. There may also be considerable room for negotiations on exactly what the club gets for it's money, if as is believed we are the only headline user bidding. Or are you happy for people to vote based on guesswork and assumptions on both sides.
User avatar
Hammer110
 
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Dreaming 父 父

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby hadleighhammer on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:14 am

Surely the groundwork would need to be set now for a vote after the bids are submitted and the details released? Then the club can issue a vote based on all the facts. If it's pro, then fair enough. If t does go tits up at least we had a say. You can't apportion all blame to G&S&B then as they would've simply delivered what the supporters wanted.

This is what shows how much a joke the situation is. G&S&B harp on about listening to supporters, but are pressing ahead without question on something they don't know whether we support it, and (apparently) can't tell us about anything to do with the stadium. If there was a vote, we could have the ridiculous situation of bidding, winning it, then turning it down based on the plans we submitted if the supporters voted against it and G&S&B listened.

If they're not bothered about our opinion and will not be listening to it as they plough ahead regardless, at least be honest for once and admit it. Or would that be bad PR for our supporter owners so they'd never admit it, but instead will twist polls in their favour?
User avatar
hadleighhammer
Gentrified
 
Posts: 9659
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 the pink palermo on Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:30 am

Edit .
Last edited by the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 38997
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Sexy football not sexist football

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby hadleighhammer on Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:13 pm

Cheers TPP. Not much I disagree with there.

Out of the 1/3 of the SAB there, what % of hands that went up were for a yes would you say? I'm trying to understand if this is the 'yes' vote G&S&B will run with when we win it and they tell us we were consulted.
User avatar
hadleighhammer
Gentrified
 
Posts: 9659
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 the pink palermo on Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:22 pm

Edit ..
Last edited by the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 38997
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Sexy football not sexist football

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby WHUTerry on Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:18 pm

hadleighhammer wrote:It's not a mistake. It's ******* clever. You lot gave them that vote though to run with. I hope what you saw about this stadium that you can't tell us about was truly magic to make you all vote that way, despite a majority % of non-SAB supporters thinking different.


I was referring to the KUMB poll, not the straw poll at the SAB meeting. If the SAB poll is the one you are referring to, then I’ve stated clearly in my previous post that the majority yes vote came with a lot of caveats. I’ve re-read the minutes and it is says that at the end an overwhelming yes vote was received to the straw poll. That isn’t actually a lie, so I have no problem with that being publicised. What the club do have is 29,000 words (nearly 200 pages) detailing a range of opinions including many that are negative or sceptical. The SAB collated opinions; the SAB fed those opinions back verbatim. In addition to speaking to fellow season tickets holders and members, several SAB members asked for feedback from this site. I’d be interested to know if you think we could have done anymore in terms of obtaining opinions.
I’m actually quite proud to be part of something that may well give the club leverage in terms of negotiation. What the club will be able to say is that in principle the supporters are receptive to a move IF the terms are right for the club. They can then also say that there are grave reservations about playing in an athletics stadium.
The SAB supporters have given up their time to try and partake in a positive, constructive method of collating opinions to be forwarded onto the club. This isn’t a secret group. All our names are on the website. It won’t take a huge amount of deduction to work out who I am. I put myself up because I like all the other SAB members care greatly about this club and wanted to ensure that those in power received as much input as possible via this channel. I, as stated previously, see this as one method of communication, not necessarily the only one.
The ‘you lot’ you refer to are genuine fans who have done everything they can (and will continue to do so) to ensure the club receive the opinions of the supporters. Obviously, what the club do with those opinions is out of our hands. I would imagine if they were to misrepresent them though, then SAB members wouldn’t shy away from expressing their disappointment. Only time will tell. My offer of being PM’d with questions or thoughts still stands and, even though the deadline for submitting feedback has passed, will still pass them onto the club. I’d welcome, rather than having a pop at a group that want to do something constructive, your questions, opinions or thoughts. It’s an open invite.
User avatar
WHUTerry
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:24 pm
Location: Epping

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby mushy on Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:15 am

Can I ask if any of the kumb representatives on the SAB did actually put their hands up and vote yes to the move?
So far as far as I can gather we have heard from two kumb representatives and neither of them voted yes.
That apparently leaves only one other person at the meeting who did not vote yes.
This is not a dig by the way, am interested in the reasons why you put your hands up, was it for instance because you were completely bowled over with the first class presentation and decided there and then to vote yes? Or was it becuase you had done your own small scale straw polls and based it on that?
Or was there some other reason?
mushy
 
Posts: 12795
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:17 pm
Location: Kumb Poster of the year 2009

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby the pink palermo on Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:15 am

Edit
Last edited by the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 38997
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Sexy football not sexist football

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Hampshire Hammer on Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:51 pm

hadleighhammer wrote:So, if I'm reading this right, have the majority on here voted against the stadium consistently in all bar one poll, yet the SAB had an overwhelming majority for the move when meeting with the club?


WHUTerry wrote:Technically you're right but that yes vote from the SAB wasn't a blind yes or a yes regardless of the conditions. It was heavily dependent on the stadium and other factors being in line with what the supporters want.

Also, I think the polls on here have been flawed, especially the last one which crucially didn't include an option to vote yes if the supporter's wishes around sightlines, the feel of the stadium, income, etc were met.


The trouble is that the question put to the SAB is also flawed The stadium being modified to what the fans want means different things to different people. For some it will be seats right up to the edge of the pitch, or standing areas, or plenty of bogs for the weak bladdered, or plenty of food outlets so you don't have to queue, or nice comfy seats, etc etc Until there are plans laid out all polls are flawed. Also sightlines is not the same as viewing distance, no matter how many times the club try to confuse people.

Some of the people gobbing off on this thread won't attend unless free buses are laid on from their house with free food and beer, wherever our home ground is so I don't know why they insist on digging others out who do attend. :think: Not you Terry in case that wasn't clear.
User avatar
Hampshire Hammer
 
Posts: 8813
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2003 3:18 pm
Location: Somewhere south of sanity

PreviousNext

Return to The Olympic Stadium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests