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 mushy on Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:36 pm

Thanks Mr Palermo,
A concise and in depth reply as ever, I appreciate the time you have taken.
You are correct I did confuse the term kumb representatives with posters, it maybe none of my business to be honest how they all voted, but am interested as to the 'yes' vote, purely on the fact that not many of the people I talk to and also 2 of the 3 votes on here favoured the 'no' camp.
So, what I am asking is (and I guess this is not a question you yourself can answer), what was it either about the presentation, or their own thoughts or their own straw poll that made them go with a 'yes'.
So if any kumb posters were at the meeting and voted yes, can you supply your reasons?.
To be honest without knowing the full facts surrounding the reconfig and the state of the place once we go there, I guess it would be a little difficult to decide either yes or no, hence my surprise that there seemed to be quite a swing in favour of the yes camp.
I mean surely this could be turkeys voting for Christmas?
These decisions are probably the most important decisions made in the clubs history, and as such we are all keen to take an interest in both the outcome and those that have an influence on that outcome, we as fans would be foolish to not want to know the why's and wherefores.
So, to repeat, we have heard from at least two posters that did not vote 'yes', can anyone that did vote 'yes' kindly explain their reasons please, you never know they maybe reasons some of us had not thought of yet.
mushy
 
Posts: 6633
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 5:48 pm

Edit .
Last edited by the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 25047
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 Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:49 pm

WHUTerry wrote: 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.


They were always going to be economical with that though. A 'yes' is a 'yes' is a 'yes' to them and will be used as such as a reference to their consultation and point 10 of the pledge, if you get me.

mushy wrote:So, what I am asking is (and I guess this is not a question you yourself can answer), what was it either about the presentation, or their own thoughts or their own straw poll that made them go with a 'yes'.
So if any kumb posters were at the meeting and voted yes, can you supply your reasons?.


This is what I am also trying to ask, if it is possible to answer that is.
User avatar
hadleighhammer
 
Posts: 8090
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 hadleighhammer on Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:53 pm

the pink palermo wrote:The problem is the day will come when fans are all pointing the finger at other fans, accusing them of having sold out , and blaming them for the move to Stratford , all because of a brief show of hands that will have had no influence whatsoever on whether the club decided to bid or not .


It may have no influence, but it will be publicised as G&S&B's consulation with the fans and our subsequent agreement.
User avatar
hadleighhammer
 
Posts: 8090
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 beckton on Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:04 pm

mushy wrote: 2 of the 3 votes on here favoured the 'no' camp.



There's now been 4 polls and it's 2-2.

I mentioned this before when a few months ago you said there'd been 2 polls and there'd actually been 3 at that time.
User avatar
beckton
 
Posts: 11730
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:41 pm
Location: The rose of the shires

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby brownout on Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:42 pm

POlls a year old that were influenced by the Spurs factor are no longer relevant.
The current poll shows a clear against the move.
User avatar
brownout
 
Posts: 6331
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 9:26 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby beckton on Mon Mar 26, 2012 7:15 pm

Not relevant because it's an old poll or not relevant as the vote didn't go your way? I don't remember you conceding to the will of the people back then.



Anyway let's throw in the SAB show of hands.

That makes it 3-2. :lol:
User avatar
beckton
 
Posts: 11730
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:41 pm
Location: The rose of the shires

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Pop Robson on Mon Mar 26, 2012 8:47 pm

Don't forget the Newham Recorder poll that was 87% against, although that disappeared sharpish !!
User avatar
Pop Robson
 
Posts: 12774
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 9:12 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Doc H Ball on Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:23 pm

One things for sure - the SAB meeting, a meeting with WHU's View? and the SAB Report constitute what the Club have defined as their 'consultation' with the fans before deciding to bid. It has all been laughably inadequate and bound in secrecy. So much for transparency.

I don't mind the Club pressing on with a bid, what I do mind is the pretence that this has followed the consideration of fans' opinions.

2 years 3 months now and still no plans.... :asleep:
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 4654
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby mywhufc on Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:21 pm

the pink palermo wrote:I very much doubt there was anything said in that meeting that would have persuaded them though .I repeat, again, there was nothing of any real note said or shown in the meeting imo .

Realy, if thats the case then why did we have to sign what was akin tothe official secrets act, and receive a pm on here to not mention what I'd seen in the meeting. We differ on our view over the vote, I took a good look round that room sat on the back row facing KB, nearly every hand went up,you can't deny that, that result was IN MY VIEW down to the images shown on the display at the start.
As you know members of WHUs view were outside. They spoke to many going in and they believed that nearly all they spoke to we're against, something changed their minds then?
The club would have been very pleased with the vote, possibly giving them the confidence that the could sway a dam sight more if push comes to shove and they have too.
User avatar
mywhufc
 
Posts: 2439
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:25 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby upton girlie on Mon Mar 26, 2012 11:33 pm

mushy wrote:So, to repeat, we have heard from at least two posters that did not vote 'yes', can anyone that did vote 'yes' kindly explain their reasons please, you never know they maybe reasons some of us had not thought of yet.


I voted 'yes' mushy.

I believe, that in order for WHUFC to progress, we need to move to a stadium that will meet the demand of our future fans as well as the current ones.
I do not believe that we can do that at the Boleyn for various reasons.
I have spoken to fans both young and old and the majority of our younger fans, including the age group 10-20, are positive towards the move. The elders are more hesitant and wary but willing and patient to see what the plans will reveal.
I believe that KB, DG and DS do know and understand what we, as the clubs supporters, want from a stadium and I think they will do their utmost to meet our needs.
I have been to the Olympic Stadium and am currently working on a couple of projects there, within the park. I do have hesitations, as do others, naturally, and have spoken to both people within the Olympic Park as well as people connected with WHUFC to clarify certain issues.

Our club cannot progress at the Boleyn, both financially or physically. The facilities are poor, the transport is appalling and the cost to upgrade the stadium to a more modern, suitable venue for a (fingers crossed) Premiership Football Club would have to be taken from our owners pocket. Why should they do that when accessibility issues will never be resolved?

Feedback from people I have spoken too, both ST Holders and others, has been 60/40. The majority of those people do not post on KUMB or any other internet forum.

My feelings, after the SAB meeting, were more positive but then I went into the meeting with a positive attitude in the first place.

Of course I have emotional feelings about leaving the Boleyn, should we be successful in our bid and the relevant needs and desires are most definitely met, as it is a place that my Grandfather first took me to watch WHUFC when I was 4. He was a ST holder for many a year but a man that liked to see progression rather than be held by emotional ties.

Maybe a few others should let go a little, think of our future as a modern club rather than the persistent negative vibes and attitudes from many on here.
Do you really, really think that we would move to a stadium that would not be beneficial for the club with our owners putting their own money into it?
Do you really think they haven't thought about the sight lines, atmosphere etc etc?

All those that are totally against the move, tell me the positives about staying at the Boleyn without expressing any emotions involved in the process...
User avatar
upton girlie
Purveyor Of Half-Time Confectionery
 
Posts: 7267
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 8:02 pm
Location: "Reality is an illusion created by a lack of alcohol."

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Doc H Ball on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:06 am

upton girlie wrote:Our club cannot progress at the Boleyn, both financially or physically. The facilities are poor, the transport is appalling and the cost to upgrade the stadium to a more modern, suitable venue for a (fingers crossed) Premiership Football would have to be taken from our owners pocket. Why should they do that when accessibility issues will never be resolved?.

Feedback from people I have spoken too, both ST Holders and others, has been 60/40....

All those that are totally against the move, tell me the positives about staying at the Boleyn without expressing any emotions involved in the process...


In relation to your first question, the answer is that it would be unlawful otherwise and a possible breach of the FFP rules. If the club financially benefit from tax payers' money that is a breach of EC anti competition laws. If you don't believe me on that, ask Steve Lawrence.

Is that 60/40 spread reflected in the SAB Report submitted? Honest question.

I will try to list some unemotional reasons for staying at The Boleyn after a cuppa (even although I am not totally against the move). I do not agree that it's 'negative' to question the move or to be against it - some people I know think that the negative ones are the people slagging off the BG, willing to jettison the old supporter base etc. What is positive and what is negative depends from where you set out from.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 4654
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Doc H Ball on Tue Mar 27, 2012 1:17 am

Rising to UG's challenge:

1. 100 year history. Not just an emotional tie but a marketing/good will asset.

2. Freehold not leasehold.

3. Accessibility? I don't buy the OS access good v BG access bad argument. I suspect most fans come down the Thames corridor more than the A12/Liverpool St-Chelmsford route and there will be lots with longer journeys. The OS is also a 20 min walk from Stratford (disabled access?) and there is no parking in the Olympic Park I believe.

4. The BG already has seats close to the pitch, the correct rake and a full roof.

5. Sole use not Shared use.

6. The ground is run by the Club not a Govt Quango or, if management rights sold, a private company.

7. The ground has the right capacity for our club. That's why it evolved to the size it is over a century. It is better to be in a full or near full ground than a half empty one.

8. I like away supporters, but not 15,000 of them on a piss taking jolly up a la Wigan. The away team should feel intimidated not as though they are on a shopping excursion.

9. It is painted claret and blue.

10. There are a wide choice of family run cafes, pubs stalls etc around the BG ground. At the OS there will be concessionaires. Aunties Bakery v McD etc.

11. The Supporters' Club and East Ham Working Mens' Club are a short distance from the BG. There are no present plans to relocate them.

12. It is called the 'Boleyn Ground' for a historical reason, a tangible reminder of our identity. The 'Visa Stadium' means nothing to me. Again that's not just emotional but an issue of market stability.

13. Staying at the BG does not risk the business being torpedoed by a Judicial Review, a complaint to the Commission, a change in Mayor etc etc. It's already been a rough road and I suspect I may still get rougher....

14. Finally (cos it's late), one overriding reason we should stay at the BG is because the Club's supporter base has not been
shown any concrete plans and there has been no meaningful consultation with them about the move. That breaches pledges made by the owners, the 'requirement to consult' (their words), the FA rules on selling grounds without consultation and the Govt's own guidance on football governance. That's not just an emotional argument either - the rules are there for a reason.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
 
Posts: 4654
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: in nick

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 1:40 am

Edit .
Last edited by the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 25047
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 the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 1:52 am

Edit .
Last edited by the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 25047
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 the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 2:12 am

Edit .
Last edited by the pink palermo on Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 25047
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 beckton on Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:31 am

Pop Robson wrote:Don't forget the Newham Recorder poll that was 87% against, although that disappeared sharpish !!





Yeah but you seem to be one of the few who knew about that one.

How many times did you vote? :lol:
User avatar
beckton
 
Posts: 11730
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:41 pm
Location: The rose of the shires

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby Pop Robson on Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:49 am

beckton wrote:
Yeah but you seem to be one of the few who knew about that one.

How many times did you vote? lol


4387 times :oops:




Actually is was discussed on here, anyway why you up so early !!
User avatar
Pop Robson
 
Posts: 12774
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 9:12 pm

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby beckton on Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:04 am

Pop Robson wrote:Actually is was discussed on here, anyway why you up so early !!



I couldn't sleep thinking about tonight's game. All out attack from BFS and we win 6-0! :raver:
User avatar
beckton
 
Posts: 11730
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:41 pm
Location: The rose of the shires

Re: 23/2/12 SAB Olympic consultation

Postby mushy on Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:14 am

upton girlie wrote:
I voted 'yes' mushy.

I believe, that in order for WHUFC to progress, we need to move to a stadium that will meet the demand of our future fans as well as the current ones.
I do not believe that we can do that at the Boleyn for various reasons.
I have spoken to fans both young and old and the majority of our younger fans, including the age group 10-20, are positive towards the move. The elders are more hesitant and wary but willing and patient to see what the plans will reveal.
I believe that KB, DG and DS do know and understand what we, as the clubs supporters, want from a stadium and I think they will do their utmost to meet our needs.
I have been to the Olympic Stadium and am currently working on a couple of projects there, within the park. I do have hesitations, as do others, naturally, and have spoken to both people within the Olympic Park as well as people connected with WHUFC to clarify certain issues.

Our club cannot progress at the Boleyn, both financially or physically. The facilities are poor, the transport is appalling and the cost to upgrade the stadium to a more modern, suitable venue for a (fingers crossed) Premiership Football Club would have to be taken from our owners pocket. Why should they do that when accessibility issues will never be resolved?

Feedback from people I have spoken too, both ST Holders and others, has been 60/40. The majority of those people do not post on KUMB or any other internet forum.

My feelings, after the SAB meeting, were more positive but then I went into the meeting with a positive attitude in the first place.

Of course I have emotional feelings about leaving the Boleyn, should we be successful in our bid and the relevant needs and desires are most definitely met, as it is a place that my Grandfather first took me to watch WHUFC when I was 4. He was a ST holder for many a year but a man that liked to see progression rather than be held by emotional ties.

Maybe a few others should let go a little, think of our future as a modern club rather than the persistent negative vibes and attitudes from many on here.
Do you really, really think that we would move to a stadium that would not be beneficial for the club with our owners putting their own money into it?
Do you really think they haven't thought about the sight lines, atmosphere etc etc?

All those that are totally against the move, tell me the positives about staying at the Boleyn without expressing any emotions involved in the process...

Mrs Girlie,
An excellent reply and was just what I was looking for, it answers a lot of my questions, I hope you dont feel like you will be 'blamed' (as Pinky put it) by either myself or anyone else for that matter, not just on this forum but elsewhere.
It should not be like that.
The problem is as I see it is that because there has been a signing of what appears to be the equivelent of the official secrets act signed by members of the SAB, and the fear of reprisals from 'no' voters it all looks a bit sort of clandestine to those of us not at the meetings. This I think you will agree makes people naturally suspicious, us supporters believe we have a right to know whats going on and the reasons why, this is all I am asking.
Can you tell me (if you know) what is the reason the club asked you to sign the non-disclosure forms and their purpose? It cant be that it will give our competitors in the bidding process a heads-up as we as far as I can tell are the only football club going for it.
It maybe that because you have signed that form you are even unable to answer, did the club ever explain why you were asked to sign it, and was it a condition of joining SAB?
As for your reasons for the move, I cant and wont argue with any of that, to me its just a matter of wait and see though, see what the plans are and what we are going to get, this sort of makes a yes or no vote at this stage not quite right.
Its like those who vote labour or Tory at a general election, not because of the party policies and what they have said they will do but because they always vote that way.
Anyway I digress.
My fear (its the only word I can think of) is this word 'progress' that you use, will we progress or will we fade and die?
I just have not seen enough yet to convince me that we will actually progress,if the fans leave this club in their droves then where does it leave us all?
Anyway please continue to keep us updated, and please all of you 'yes' voters, feel free to express your views without fear of lynching, I rather feel that all of this has become a little too melodramatic.
mushy
 
Posts: 6633
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: No registered users and 3 guests