Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

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: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Doc H Ball on Tue May 15, 2012 11:19 pm

MEM wrote:
A and C

A as Spurs had a good chance of winning a judicial review and we also had the stated commitment by Daniel Levy to leave no stone un-turned in his quest for "justice" As did Barry Hearn

Do you not think a European challenge would have been Spurs next step if they had lost the review? Clearly the government were advised they could lose that otherwise why not let it go ahead in the next few days after the European court announcement before addressing the European considerations.

In other words it was the unfair trading wot done it. Not Spurs complaint about the process, not Orient's complaint about FL/PL/FA Rules, but lil' old desk renting Steven Lawrence's complaint to the EC about Newham's £40m.

You said it was Tottenham and Orient's JRs which scuppered the bid. I pointed out you were wrong and it seems like you might be partially accepting such.


Having asked me a few questions here are two for you :

Do you think the government thought they might lose the judicial review around state aid having lost the appeal previously

A Yes

B No

Er, you're not a lawyer are you? The Judicial Reviews were based on grounds of improper process (Spurs) and Orient's mish mash of that and a breach of FL rules. There was no JR on the grounds of 'State Aid' - that was a complaint to The Commission by Lawrence which is very distinct.

Do you think West Ham would be compromising their T&C's commitments of the bid if they revealed the details of their bid to the West Ham community?

A Yes

B No

Yes. They revealed a lot about their bid in the national media mind. They also shared their vision with Clunge apparently :lol:

'Confidentiality' didn't stop em consulting the fans on the general principles of a move and honouring a pledge though. We don't need to see the detailed costed architects drawings (just as well as there weren't any), we just asked them to ballot on the basis of 'we undertake to provide a stadium with seats no further than the Boleyn, a roof over your head and a home to be proud of'. That's a verbatim question we asked them to put. They said they would give us those things in the press and in the SAB meeting, so why not test it with the regular attending fans?


We have had this discussion before I am not a trained lawyer [but do have an O level in English law : )] but I am a contract director working with corporate lawyer,s on a daily basis, for a very large multi-national I have dealt with tens of Government PQQ's, RFI's and ITT's worth hundreds of millions and know inside out how the process works. Knowing your career I cant believe you think the board should be more open with information about the bid bearing in mind the politics and commercial restraints placed around it.

No, I agree their hands were tied. Just not so tied as to ignore the fans' wishes, to misquote polls in the press and to have zero consultation. They are 2 different things and they have used it as a smokescreen.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 4676
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby paulhs1 on Wed May 16, 2012 9:27 am

Hammer110 wrote:he runs a small rent a desk business.


I must say that I do not understand why you keep making a point about him 'running a small rent a desk business'...really what has this got to do with anything. Most architects work on reputation and previous projects, the size of the office they work from shouldn't really make a difference, it certainly doesn't stop Warren Buffett being one of the worlds most influential men and it's not as though he needs to have an office at the Shard building!
User avatar
paulhs1
 
Posts: 1484
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 3:32 pm
Location: Just north of the Thames

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby MEM on Wed May 16, 2012 3:22 pm

From your own mag The lawyer

Tottenham Hotspur have won the right to proceed to a full judicial review hearing in October following Wednesday’s ruling (24 August 2011) by Mr Justice Collins. The paper application was initially refused in June; however, the club succeeded in persuading the Court at the oral hearing that it had an arguable case.
The basis of the application was that there was procedural impropriety in the decision making process, and the club focused its submissions yesterday on the £40m loan from Newham Council and argued that the loan was a critical component of the bid and gave West Ham an unfair economic advantage.
MEM
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Denbighammer on Wed May 16, 2012 5:33 pm

MEM wrote:Why don't you all let the board get on with their job which is all about the long term security of West Ham.

Like we trusted Terry brown to sell us to someone who would be decent and progressive custodians for he club?

Or, like we trusted the Icelandics to "get on with their job" of getting us into the Champions League?

Do you honestly, in your heart-of-hearts, trust them to deliver us a proper football stadium, a proper home for us as a football club that has no compromises? I've been a big supporter of G&S and was so glad they took us over instead of Twitter Man or Intermarket. However, nothing I have seen has led me to trust them on the key issues I've highlighted above?
User avatar
Denbighammer
 
Posts: 8262
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 7:53 pm
Location: Dodging, Dipping, Diving, Ducking and Dodging.

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Doc H Ball on Wed May 16, 2012 7:20 pm

MEM wrote:From your own mag The lawyer


Yes - Spuds and Hearn launched JR's based on the grounds of procedural irregularity. They were refused leave.

Then Lawrence made his complaint to the Commissioner about unfair competition.

Then Spuds and Hearn renewed their JRs based again of procedural irregularity and of course they raised the pending EC enquiry. (It's an interesting thought the all the Clubs involved wilfully ignored the State Aid point probably because they all wanted to take advantage of such). State aid/unfair competition is not a ground for JR - it has to be dealt with by the EC at that level. The JRs were given leave pending the Commissioner's findings.

Then, of course, the Govt folded knowing what was coming next.

So, as I said, it was the complaint to the Commission wot won it and not Spuds and Hearn.

These semantics are not really relevant and, in general, I agree with your analysis of where the bid is at, what the Club ideally wants etc. We disagree about the amount of trust we have in the owners (and indeed the Govt) to deliver that.

The unfair competition issue remains the thorny one. A complaint to the Commission lays on file and can be renewed easily. The OPLC as then was had a specific financial remit and any private profit without value will be seized upon by Spurs now. JRs and another complaint will be launched as soon as we win the preferred bidder status, everyone knows that.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 4676
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby HamburgHammer on Wed May 16, 2012 7:34 pm

Why then are all those millions Spurs are getting for their new stadium/infrastructure in the surrounding area not state aid and seemingly perfectly fine ? Can we please have a judicial review of that as well ?
User avatar
HamburgHammer
 
Posts: 2607
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby MEM on Wed May 16, 2012 11:15 pm

Doc H Ball wrote:quote="MEM"From your own mag The lawyer


Yes - Spuds and Hearn launched JR's based on the grounds of procedural irregularity. They were refused leave.

Then Lawrence made his complaint to the Commissioner about unfair competition.

Then Spuds and Hearn renewed their JRs based again of procedural irregularity and of course they raised the pending EC enquiry. (It's an interesting thought the all the Clubs involved wilfully ignored the State Aid point probably because they all wanted to take advantage of such). State aid/unfair competition is not a ground for JR - it has to be dealt with by the EC at that level. The JRs were given leave pending the Commissioner's findings.

Then, of course, the Govt folded knowing what was coming next.

So, as I said, it was the complaint to the Commission wot won it and not Spuds and Hearn.

These semantics are not really relevant and, in general, I agree with your analysis of where the bid is at, what the Club ideally wants etc. We disagree about the amount of trust we have in the owners (and indeed the Govt) to deliver that.

The unfair competition issue remains the thorny one. A complaint to the Commission lays on file and can be renewed easily. The OPLC as then was had a specific financial remit and any private profit without value will be seized upon by Spurs now. JRs and another complaint will be launched as soon as we win the preferred bidder status, everyone knows that.


OK Doc lets agree to disagree for what its worth I did do a small bit of casual work for David Gold's dad in my youth and would never ever ever have trusted him ~ David on the other hand is everything his dad is not and I do trust him. And no I don't trust the government in the current economic climate money talks.

One thing we can agree on is we are all West Ham and COYI's for Saturday

By the way you did not train in a certain "Gym" back in the 90's did you?
Last edited by MEM on Wed May 16, 2012 11:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
MEM
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Johnny Byrne's Boots on Wed May 16, 2012 11:15 pm

HamburgHammer wrote:Why then are all those millions Spurs are getting for their new stadium/infrastructure in the surrounding area not state aid and seemingly perfectly fine ? Can we please have a judicial review of that as well ?



Because the millions are not being spent directly on their new stadium. They are/will be spent on improvements to the surrounding area such as roads which just happen to pass right by the new ground, which the council will argue were needed anyway. All part of Spurs blackmailing the council by threatening to move out of the borough if they didn't get the required upgrades on the taxpayer.
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
 
Posts: 7760
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: The dry again leafy lanes of Surrey

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Doc H Ball on Thu May 17, 2012 12:06 am

MEM wrote:
OK Doc lets agree to disagree... One thing we can agree on is we are all West Ham and COYI's for Saturday!



Actually, having read your posts, I don't think we do disagree that much. I think we can all agree that the process has been jank.


By the way you did not train in a certain "Gym" back in the 90's did you?

Peacocks? Did I represent you or something :lol:
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 4676
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby adie on Thu May 17, 2012 9:27 am

MEM you say you trust David Gold more than his dad even though he has said on twitter we have 20,000 members yet the ticket office say we only have 10,000, he said there would be a full consultation of fans about moving and there wasn't, he said he played for West Ham youth but no one remembers him, he told Brum fans he would cut the ticket prices and didn't, he said he respects and honours our traditions yet Ron Greenwood and Johnny Lyall's families had their complimentry tickets taken off them. The bloke is a master of PR unlike his dad. When are people gonna wake up and smell the coffee, the bloke is a fraud, how can anyone trust him
adie
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:30 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby MEM on Thu May 17, 2012 11:53 am

By Paul Kelso, Chief Olympic Correspondent, in Athens10:54AM BST 17 May 2012Comment

London 2012 Olympics: West Ham likely to get Olympic Stadium despite delays, says Boris Johnson


London mayor Boris Johnson says it is “overwhelmingly likely” that West Ham will end up as tenants of the Olympic Stadium despite the latest delay to the error-strewn process of securing its long-term legacy.


Earlier this week the London Legacy Development Corporation, which is responsible for finding a legacy solution and reports to Johnson, delayed the final decision for at least eight weeks, meaning no solution will be finalised until after the Olympics.
West Ham have been in pole position to take on the stadium, but have now twice been told to resubmit their bid because of legal challenges from others, including Tottenham and most recently Leyton Orient chairman Barry Hearne.

The LLDC has been forced to rewrite the tender offer for the stadium for the third time in 18 months to try and avoid challenge from Hearne, further damaging the credibility of the officials and lawyers involved in the tortuous process.
There is huge frustration at West Ham at the delays but Johnson, speaking before the handover of the Olympic flame in Athens, believes they will still end up occupying the arena from 2014.
“I don’t think we should read too much into this [delay],” he said. “It is very important to get all the legal nails hit squarely on the head so that the thing does not come unstuck. That is taking a bit of time.

“I still think it is overwhelmingly likely that there will be a footballing solution and that would be a good thing, but it is not in my view absolutely essential. I can envisage all sorts of other legacy solutions for the stadium.
“It is very important that it should be legally watertight, and if you look at the fate of stadiums around the world, look at Beijing and Athens, stadiums are the most difficult things to make sure you get a serious legacy proposition for.
“In London we are incredibly far advanced compared to other Olympic cities and it is important that we button it down, and that is what this process is about.

“This is a difficult process. This is a major piece of public infrastructure with big state aid implications that we are trying to transfer to commercial concerns and that is always going to evoke very complicated legal problems.”
Johnson said he would consider negotiating directly with Hearne, but was not prepared to discuss on what terms.
“There may or may not be a negotiation with Barry Hearne but I am not going to discuss it now,” he said.
“The point for me is that its is overwhelmingly likely that football will be part of the solution and it will open on time in October 2014.”

Sports minister Hugh Robertson ruled out spending public money to buy off Hearne’s objections. “You cannot use public money to make the problem go away. We would be forever reaching for the chequebook were that the case,” he said.



In other words a legal minefield as I have said all along and that the latest re-bid was good news for West Hams's bid for a stadium fit for football.............hopefully :think:
MEM
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby MEM on Thu May 17, 2012 12:05 pm

Doc H Ball wrote:quote="MEM"

OK Doc lets agree to disagree... One thing we can agree on is we are all West Ham and COYI's for Saturday!



Actually, having read your posts, I don't think we do disagree that much. I think we can all agree that the process has been jank.


By the way you did not train in a certain "Gym" back in the 90's did you?

Peacocks? Did I represent you or something :lol:


No and "NO" I was thinking of another solicitor who used to train at the gym in Collier row back in the 90's
MEM
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby paulhs1 on Thu May 17, 2012 1:35 pm

MEM wrote:London mayor Boris Johnson says it is “overwhelmingly likely” that West Ham will end up as tenants of the Olympic Stadium despite the latest delay to the error-strewn process of securing its long-term legacy.


You would think he would have learnt by his mistakes but it sounds like Boris is giving yet more ammo to Hearne. On Monday they invited more bidders and yet today Boris says West Ham are "overwhlmingly likely" to end up as tenants.
You couldn't make it up!
User avatar
paulhs1
 
Posts: 1484
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 3:32 pm
Location: Just north of the Thames

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby MEM on Thu May 17, 2012 4:36 pm

paulhs1 wrote:quote="MEM"
London mayor Boris Johnson says it is “overwhelmingly likely” that West Ham will end up as tenants of the Olympic Stadium despite the latest delay to the error-strewn process of securing its long-term legacy.


You would think he would have learnt by his mistakes but it sounds like Boris is giving yet more ammo to Hearne. On Monday they invited more bidders and yet today Boris says West Ham are "overwhlmingly likely" to end up as tenants.
You couldn't make it up!


:thup:
MEM
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Johnny Byrne's Boots on Thu May 17, 2012 10:25 pm

From this I deduce Boris is a closet Hammer who doesn't want to leave The Boleyn.
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
 
Posts: 7760
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: The dry again leafy lanes of Surrey

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby Doc H Ball on Thu May 17, 2012 11:39 pm

He actually said it is 'overwhelmingly likely there will be a football solution', Kelso was the one who put the words 'West Ham' in his mouth so I don't think there's an issue there.

Further proof, however, that it is the issue of State Aid which is the big problem.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 4676
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby MEM on Fri May 18, 2012 12:42 am

Doc H Ball wrote:He actually said it is 'overwhelmingly likely there will be a football solution', Kelso was the one who put the words 'West Ham' in his mouth so I don't think there's an issue there.

Further proof, however, that it is the issue of State Aid which is the big problem.


Man Citteee rent there stadium surely a precedent?
MEM
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby MEM on Fri May 18, 2012 1:25 am

adie wrote:MEM you say you trust David Gold more than his dad even though he has said on twitter we have 20,000 members yet the ticket office say we only have 10,000, he said there would be a full consultation of fans about moving and there wasn't, he said he played for West Ham youth but no one remembers him, he told Brum fans he would cut the ticket prices and didn't, he said he respects and honours our traditions yet Ron Greenwood and Johnny Lyall's families had their complimentry tickets taken off them. The bloke is a master of PR unlike his dad. When are people gonna wake up and smell the coffee, the bloke is a fraud, how can anyone trust him


Sorry chaps couldn't resist it :


Adie : We get in through the newly installed underground heating system here... up through retractable seating above the running track here and into to the main hospitality suite just under the new roof here... and Brady’s office is here. Having grabbed Brady, we inform the two Dave’s that she is in our custody and forthwith issue our demands. Any questions?

Doc H : What exactly are the demands?

Adie: We're giving the two Dave’s two Days to dismantle the entire Olympic Stadium if they don’t agree immediately we execute her.

Cut her head off? Cut all her bits off, send 'em back every hour on the hour... show them that the West Ham View are not to be trifled with.

Doc H : What? They'll never agree to that, Aide.

Aide : That's just a bargaining counter. And of course, we point out that they bear full responsibility when we chop her up, and... that we shall not submit to blackmail.

(Applause) No blackmail!

Pinky : They've bled us claret and blue , the bastards. They've taken everything we had, Green Street, Upton Park, Pie n Mash, The Trevor Brooking stand, the Two Towers and the Chicken Run and not just from us, from our fathers and from our fathers' fathers.

Doc H: And from our fathers' fathers' fathers.

Aide: Yes.

Doc H: And from our fathers' fathers' fathers' fathers.

Aide: All right, Doc. Don't labour the point. And what have they ever given us in return?

Paul: Well they did buy us and save us from administration.

Aide: Oh yeah, yeah they gave us that. Yeah. That's true.

Pendant : And they did put in £30 million of their own money this year to keep us afloat!

Pinky : Oh yes... keeping us afloat , Aide, you remember what it was like last time we went down and had to sell all out best players.

Aide: All right, I'll grant you that they kept us out of administration and put in £30 million of their own money are two things that the two Dave’s have done...

Hadleigh : And Captain Kevin Nolan they brought him.

Aide: (sharply) Well yes obviously Captain Kevin ... Captain Kevin Nolan goes without saying. But apart from keeping us out of administration, the £30 million investment and Captain Kevin Nolan...

Hammer 110 : ...Keeping hold of Green, Reid, Noble, Cole, O'Neil and Tompkins, and buying Taylor, Baldcok, Faye, Diop, McCartney and Lansbury…..

Aide: Yes... all right, fair enough...

Pinky : And David Gold’s Tweets and the SAB

Hadleigh: Oh yes! True!

Pinky: Yeah. Tweeting that's something we'd really miss if the Two Dave’s left, Aide.

Brownout : Guy Demel! And I am proud to wear the shirt walking in the streets at night now.

Persil : Yes, they certainly know how to keep our heads above water financially and in the league by buying Nicky Maynard and Ravel Morrison ... (general nodding)... let's face it, they're the only ones who could in a place like this.

(more general murmurs of agreement)

Aide: All right... all right... But apart from keeping us out of administration, the £30 million investment and Captain Kevin Nolan... Keeping hold of Green, Reid, Noble, Cole, O'Neil and Tompkins, and buying Taylor, Baldcok, Faye, Diop, McCartney and Lansbury….. Guy Demel Gold’s tweets the SAB, Walking out at night proud to be in your West Ham shirt, Maynard and Ravel Morrison... and working their b*llocks off!!

WHAT HAVE THE TWO DAVE’S EVER DONE FOR US!!!!

Mem: They did buy Vaz Te!

Aide’: (very angry, he's not having a good meeting at all)

Aide : What!? Oh... (scornfully) Vaz Te, yes Vaz Te... shut up!

And not a word about appointing Big Sam, Bringing in Carew, sacking Zola and the Grant the Grim Reaper :D
Last edited by MEM on Fri May 18, 2012 2:04 am, edited 4 times in total.
MEM
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:41 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby adie on Fri May 18, 2012 1:43 am

how did that get leaked ? I made everyone sign a confidentiality form !
adie
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:30 pm

Re: Decision on stadium likely to be delayed

Postby hammer on Fri May 18, 2012 2:43 am

:lol: MEM Image
User avatar
hammer
Strangely fascinated with Bonehead's arse.
 
Posts: 22216
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 12:05 am
Location: 我支持西汉姆联队

PreviousNext

Return to The Olympic Stadium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests