Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

[Samba]

Don't think I have heard the oppo fans singing the praises about the stadium? They might be singing that we are not West Ham anymore. I only hear about rubbish distance to pitch, no atmosphere, gaps in the stands, soulless wasteland around the stadium. I may have missed the praise.

There hasn't been any from oppo fans.
They either pity us or take the piss out of us.

[Corney Beal]

We did this because newham council said you can’t take out priory road because of the bus station.

The bus station is no longer there.

Bus garage/ depot. Not a bus station.

[Albie Beck]

Can I add my two penneth worth.

As much as the move was down to them pair of helmets getting a deal beyond belief, just look at it from Newham councils perspective.
We built the Rio stand closer to green street so that the footprint of the east stand would never go back further than where it stood.
We did this because newham council said you can’t take out priory road because of the bus station.

The bus station is no longer there. It now has houses being or been built.

We were after the old parcel force site that was denied because of listed stuff being on there.
This site is now having homes built on it.

This is what grinds my gears, we had no need to leave, but outside influences decided our fate.
The day that this country won the olympics was the first nail in West Ham’s coffin as we know it.

…

Good post, however:

I don't believe Newham Council were ever going to allow any further development of the BG, despite any prior or pending planning decisions. Nor that they were going to allow the Parcel Force site to be developed, not by WHU anyway. Newham had an enormous White Elephant on their hands in the shape of the OS, and WHU were the only solution. So whether it was a bus depot (that isn't there now) or listed gasometers (that can now be built around) those were just excuses.

We were always going to have the OS. It's just that the original Coe/Livingstone/Jowell concept was fatally flawed as it discounted football as a genuine legacy when it was the only realistic option, and then Brady and Co made such a pig's ear of the subsequent deal it meant us ending up with something totally unsuitable for football.

It could have been ok. Many of us thought it would.

More fool us.

[Croydon]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... e-51566025

Everton progress with new stadium

[Jumby]

I said it after Domzale and I'll it again and again, this is s**t. I haven't been back since and I'll never go again. Awful stadium lining the pockets of awful people. Regardless of whether we stay up or not I hope there are nasty scenes in every home game from now until the end of the season, nobody getting hurt but fans properly kicking off, Burnley all over again, it's the only way.

[Believer]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... e-51566025

Everton progress with new stadium

If only...

[Samba]

Good post, however:
I don't believe Newham Council were ever going to allow any further development of the BG, despite any prior or pending planning decisions. Nor that they were going to allow the Parcel Force site to be developed, not by WHU anyway. Newham had an enormous White Elephant on their hands in the shape of the OS, and WHU were the only solution. So whether it was a bus depot (that isn't there now) or listed gasometers (that can now be built around) those were just excuses.
We were always going to have the OS. It's just that the original Coe/Livingstone/Jowell concept was fatally flawed as it discounted football as a genuine legacy when it was the only realistic option, and then Brady and Co made such a pig's ear of the subsequent deal it meant us ending up with something totally unsuitable for football.
It could have been ok. Many of us thought it would.
More fool us.

That's an interesting post, Albie. I totally agree that they were all just excuses & absolutely not insurmountable.
We must remember though that 'in 2009, club CEO Scott Duxbury announced West Ham had obtained planning permission to expand the East Stand; this would have brought the stadium's capacity over 40,000'.
'Then, in 2010, new club owners David Gold and David Sullivan announced West Ham would move to the Olympic Stadium after the 2012 Olympics after all. On 23 March 2010, the club announced it was working on a joint bid with Newham London Borough Council to move into the Olympic Stadium'.

So, at some point between 2009 & early 2010, Newham went from saying yes to further building at Upton Park, to going all in for the move.
In other words, in 2009 the future OS wasn't deemed by Newham to become an enormous white elephant but by early 2010, it suddenly was.
I guess that GSB used all of their 'charm' on Newham..

The question is though, would it have been such a white elephant specifically for Newham council? They hadn't paid for it to be built. They had already been gifted the massive regeneration of Stratford.
However, it might well have been a white elephant for the Government & the then London Mayor & Seb Coe..

[Paolo's Piranhas]

Sullivan was still talking about expansion being an option in 2012. Though maybe just as a bargaining tool re the OS?

"ID: A lot of fans who used to support a move to Stratford are now having second thoughts and wonder whether we shouldn’t just stay put and redevelop our existing ground.

DS: We have a stadium that could have a 45,000 capacity. We have a hotel. We have 3,000 corporate hospitality guests, a stadium we own. We say how/when and who, so to give that up we have to be 100% sure the deal is right for the club.

ID: I can see you’ve got to tread carefully, given the timing of this interview, so let’s imagine a scenario where for whatever reason the Olympic Stadium doesn’t go ahead, what would you preference be then – to redevelop or find a new site for a new ground?

DS: I think it makes more sense to redevelop Upton Park.

ID: You wouldn’t look for another site elsewhere?

DS: Economically I don’t think it would work. Maybe long term, but short term you’d want to fill up the ground consistently and have a waiting list of season ticket holders, then you’d build the East Stand bigger and better. There’s a big part of us that wants to stay at Upton Park. It’s a very difficult decision."

Extracted from a long and detailed interview, covering a variety of WH related topics..

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footb ... -owns.html

[Pop Robson]

Originally they were up for taking the OS as it was with the seats behind the track, cheapstakes

[Colours never run]

I said it after Domzale and I'll it again and again, this is s**t. I haven't been back since and I'll never go again. Awful stadium lining the pockets of awful people. Regardless of whether we stay up or not I hope there are nasty scenes in every home game from now until the end of the season, nobody getting hurt but fans properly kicking off, Burnley all over again, it's the only way.

Its looking increasingly ever so likely the way we are carrying on both on and off the pitch my friend. :twisted:

[Francoisvander or else]

I'm sure this had no bearing whatsoever on Newham's decisions https://forestgate.net/?s=Hospitality+&submit=Search

[Georgee Paris]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... e-51566025

Everton progress with new stadium

Could we not buy Everton’s old stadium and rebuild it brick by brick inside the OS?

[Kialos]

I'm sure this had no bearing whatsoever on Newham's decisions https://forestgate.net/?s=Hospitality+&submit=Search

I'm sure it doesn't

I definitely do not recall being told that pressure from upon high was sometimes put on regulatory departments within LB Newham to dismiss complaints made to them about the club...

[SEAHammer]

We have a lease that confers our rights until 2112 that a new owner would have to accept - we can prevent a sale if a new owner wanted to unilaterally change the terms of our lease. A new owner taking over from E20 would not own the land that the stadium sits on - that is owned by LLDC.

Any new owner would have to accept the terms of the lease but not necessarily any management agreement unless that formed part of the lease conditions, not sure how that's written, we've already been to court several times over what is and isn't covered.

There is a question of what happens if the London Stadium 'owners' E20 STADIUM LLP declare bankruptcy. Under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 we would have a first right of refusal to buy the stadium, as would any other leaseholder singularly or collectively.

If the 'owner' disclaims the freehold, basically says it's more trouble than it's worth and gives it away the stadium would pass to the Crown, our lease would remain in place and pass to the Crown as well. The Crown would not be obligated to maintain the stadium, we would need to apply to the FTT to have a manager appointed, that would be be at our and the other tenants cost.

Highly unlikely scenario but correct under current UK law.

[Wembley1966]

^^^ My apologies - my terminology was wrong - we have a "Concession" agreement rather than a Lease agreement (although we do have sub-leases for the shop and our office areas). A new owner would have to accept the terms of the Concession Agreement. The concession basically gives us the right to provide football matches at the stadium and to be the primary concessionaire during the football season.

[Aceface]

Originally they were up for taking the OS as it was with the seats behind the track, cheapstakes

I've often asked what was the logical endgame for them had the legal intervention not come and made them tenants instead of owners. Given their protests of utter poverty, how on earth would they have financed...anything? I know there was some provision from the government for conversion costs but that would only have got them so far. Bizarre to think that the current set-up is actually the absolute best case scenario for how it might have been set up.

[Mega Ron]

I've often asked what was the logical endgame for them had the legal intervention not come and made them tenants instead of owners. Given their protests of utter poverty, how on earth would they have financed...anything? I know there was some provision from the government for conversion costs but that would only have got them so far. Bizarre to think that the current set-up is actually the absolute best case scenario for how it might have been set up.

The original plan was for us to play in the stadium as it was for the olympics. With the seats where they were/sort of still are, and with the roof hardly covering anyone.

[Albie Beck]

So, at some point between 2009 & early 2010, Newham went from saying yes to further building at Upton Park, to going all in for the move.
In other words, in 2009 the future OS wasn't deemed by Newham to become an enormous white elephant but by early 2010, it suddenly was.

Yes, apologies Samba - that was a bit of a shorthand post. It wasn't "always going to be..." - there was a point when I think Eggy and co made a polite enquiry about whether West Ham could be future owners, as had been done with Man City. That was probably around 2008/9 I'd guess. However Coe, Jowell and Livingstone between them shut that line down in favour of the "Athletics Legacy". Livingstone was particularly scornful of a football team having it. Sometime later it dawned on them that Athletics alone would not sustain it but by then it was too late. That all ties in with your post.

[Wembley1966]

Personally I’d petrol bomb the whole thing until it collapsed.

If this is true then it could happen:
https://www.hammers.news/club-news/what-date-west-ham-might-play-rangers-in-historic-london-stadium

West Ham United are reportedly lining up an historic pre-season friendly against Scottish giants Rangers this summer.

[Paolo's Piranhas]

I've often asked what was the logical endgame for them had the legal intervention not come and made them tenants instead of owners.

David Sullivan in January 2010, the month he and Gold bought 50% of WH. I think quoted from an interview with Sky.

"We don't want to buy (the Olympic Stadium), we want to rent it. The Government promised to keep it alive for 30 years, it's going to cost them more to keep it alive. With us it's going to cost them nothing - we would pay all the running costs."

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... =1&vwsrc=0