Doc H Ball wrote:From a legal perspective though, I think the courts will take a different approach. It is not so much the market rate as 'did a private business benefit from State Aid?'
But the question now as then wasn't about did we receive state aid, it was did we receive state aid that wasn't available to anyone else, last time an argument (not one that I agree with) could have been made that yes we did as Newham were our partner, they were making available to our joint venture £40 million of public loans that Spurs or Orient couldn't access. This time any "state aid" is available to anyone who chose to make a bid so if we were the only bidders and bid a £1pa rent , there is not a lot anyone could do about it as they had the same opportunity.
Going back to my earlier comment about Man city, they took on a publicly funded stadium for an outlay of £20 million on a deal that I believe guaranteed no income to the council whatsoever ever, ie had their attendances not increased above the capacity of Maine road they would not have paid any rent, therefore there is a precedent.
Another point is if Orient win the bid with us....should they pay the same amount in rent and if not how should it be calculated? On revenue, on company accounts, on matches played on a straight 50/50 split....This is quite a canundrum that the bods at the LLDC must be wracking their brains over and this must also be the case for the other users.
I'd suggest that the fact that the Mayor of London said that a football club, very probably West Ham, may well be mentioned in court by a losing bidder at some stage.