Latest Opinion

Here at KUMB.com, the Editor is a hard taskmaster, dishing out assignments like confetti asking various contributors to knock up a few words on whatever the current hot topics of the week are in the West Ham United universe.

Paul Walker has written an excellent piece on the well-attended protest at Marshgate Lane organised by Hammers United and Crossed Hammers. Well done to all who organized and attended, evidence that protest can be done peacefully in a meaningful way.




But why were we there and why are we revolting? The answers can be found in the questions the Fan Advisory Board (FAB) asked the club's executives as they delivered the recent Vote of No Confidence. The FAB asked seven key questions to which they seek answers; you can read about them here.

We thought though that each of the key questions were such that they would merit some in depth comment. So, yesterday The Pink Palermo looked at strategy & PSR, while today bristolhammerfc, tackles the issue of heritage and culture.

4. Commercial & Stadium Strategy

The “Deal of the Century” on the London Stadium has saddled fans with a soulless environment and a poor matchday experience.

- The stadium concession deal; catering, stewarding and inability to make changes because of athletics

- The women’s team excluded from the stadium deal – a contradiction of the Club’s stated commitment to equality.

- Ticketing changes (concessions, ID checks, away schemes) undermine loyalty.

Question: How will the Club balance revenue generation with fan experience, inclusion, and equality?




I’ll be the first to admit, that this is not my area of expertise. However, it is safe to say that the club's Commercial and Stadium Strategy policies are an issue. The move from the Boleyn was meant to be a springboard to a new level. In reality, everything has been a bit of a mess.

The financial package between us and the LLDC was labelled the deal of the century when initially put in place. A 99-year lease, starting with paying an initial £2.5m a year in rent. Ticketing income was ours to keep, but catering revenue was to be divided, as would any income received from naming rights to the stadium.

In the short term, it did indeed look a good deal, financially. However, life moves on. Financial streams change. What was deemed favourable in 2016, ten years down the lines, with various disputes, complications and shortcomings, the deal of the century, doesn’t even resemble the deal of the week.

Though income streams on paper have increased, we're hampered by lack of foresight with an inability to evolve due to the constraints of the deal. Matchday hospitality at the London Stadium is limited and the actual experience leaves much to be desired.

At the outset, the Baroness wanted us to rival Arsenal in terms of culinary delights and executive experience. Our man on the inside at the posh level says otherwise.

Below par service, standards and patrons deserting in numbers, looking to offer their clientele executive service in hotels and restaurants nearby. The club themselves sought similar partnerships to meet client satisfaction. The choice to use Delaware North as hospitality partners has not brought success.




While other clubs have maximised commercial revenue to the maximum, we are held back by short-term choices, moving to a stadium with limited options and inability to expand offerings.

Despite our proximity to one of the world’s largest financial hubs, notching a European trophy and enjoying a major media presence, we still lag behind rivals in terms of commercial activity. The stadium is still without a sponsor and, as each year passes and the facilities become more weather beaten and unappealing, will struggle to attract one to match the price tag quoted.

Our sponsorship and kit deals are way behind our contemporaries and rivals. They may be record deals for us, but if you incorporated inflation and football's ever growing popularity, we sell ourself short in terms of stature and financial acumen. Still it is not as if we have one of the UK’s most famous bastions of entrepreneurship, earning a million a year at the head of the operation, is it?

We rank 17th in the Deloitte money league of European football teams. A lofty position maybe, but why is poverty regularly claimed? Why does our board fail to match the standards of those in and around us in that list? Why do we fail to attract blue chip backing?

Stadium-wise, we have also dropped the ball. Additional fixtures beyond the 25 we are allowed to play at the stadium per season incur a six-figure fee on each occasion. As a result, while the women’s game is booming and other WSL teams play fixtures at the male contemporary’s home stadium, often to very large crowds, our women side is forced to play solely at Victoria Road, Dagenham.

They have played one fixture at the London Stadium, pre-COVID and pre the Lionesses' double-trophy foundations for growth. A return, due to the financial implications of our tenancy, looks a long way off. As equality and diversity were not seemingly deemed relevant when the deal was drawn up, the aspirations of our women’s team suffer.




In 2015, number 8 on the board's 10-point plan for the club stated: "Continue our affordable football campaign. A season ticket will always offer the best value to anyone wanting to watch every West Ham game.

"We also want to make sure that everyone has the chance to watch top-flight football so will be building on our current promotions, such as the award-winning schemes like kids for a quid, when we move to the new stadium."

Whilst owning a season ticket is still the perceptive way to afford to go, for many both financially and logically it is not possible. The attempted decision to remove concessions was successfully campaigned against by Hammers United. The decision to charge universal banded prices across all age levels for match tickets, is contrary to the pledge made 10 years ago.

As indeed were points #4 - to "deliver a new stadium that exceeds fans' expectations" and point #9, namely to "make sure watching West Ham is enjoyable." However, that is another debate.

The whole deal of the century has left a sour taste, an almost irreparable stain on the club. Once stewards were friendly, trusted faces, where loyalty was acknowledged and rewarded; once we had control of our own ability to stage, host and deliver match day experiences on a consistent and policed, friendly manner.

Yet we are now at the mercy of a deal that offers no warmth, flexibility or consistency. Let’s be honest - if you sit in the Bobby or Sir Trev Lower. You cannot even be certain your seat will be in the same place after being dismantled and put back together again in the name of athletics.

* Like to share your thoughts on this article? Please visit the KUMB Forum to leave a comment.

* Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the highlighted author/s and do not necessarily represent or reflect the official policy or position of KUMB.com.