Olympic Stadium Discussion and Questions

[Mega Ron]

There is absolutely no business case whatsoever for building a new stadium. The increase in revenues it would provide would never be enough to recoup the initial cost of building it. It makes no sense for anyone to do it. We’re likely to be at the Olympic Stadium for the rest of our lifetimes.

Every stadium gets replaced.

[Up the Junction]

Apologies if already mentioned elsewhere, have just seen this pop up on Google:

'London Stadium owners sue law firm Allen & Overy over West Ham’s 99-year lease'

https://www.fnlondon.com/articles/londo ... e-20201006

Bit of a long shot, but is anyone a member of fnlondon.com and able to report the entire article?

[honkytonk]

Every stadium gets replaced.

Maybe, but its probably unlikely if its only 10-15 years old

[War Pony]

Bit of a long shot, but is anyone a member of fnlondon.com and able to report the entire article?

I have sent you a pm with it

[TonyV]

The owners of London’s former Olympic stadium have kicked off a legal fight with Magic Circle law firm Allen & Overy over its drafting of Premier League club West Ham United’s 99-year lease of the arena.

The stadium’s public sector owners – London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) and E20 Stadium LLP – have brought a professional negligence suit against the City law firm for its work on the 2013 concession agreement with West Ham, which has been the subject of a series of expensive lawsuits.

LLDC and E20 Stadium launched the High Court claim on 29 September, according to filings at the Commercial Court.

LLDC and E20 are set to argue that the law firm’s poor drafting of the agreement contributed to their difficult relationship with West Ham and a series of costly legal disputes over the interpretation of the agreement, a person with knowledge of the situation said.

“The whole case will revolve around the drafting of the concession agreement and the problems that has caused,” the person said.

West Ham and the stadium’s owners have fought several legal disputes stemming from disagreements over the contract that governs the club’s lease of the ground. The issues related to the colour of the materials surrounding the pitch, the number of draught beer pumps in the stadium’s bars and the number of televisions showing Sky TV in the ground.

Allen & Overy acted for E20 Stadium on the drafting of the 2013 concession agreement that governed West Ham’s lease of the ground. At the time, E20 was a joint venture between LLDC and Newham Council. It is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of LLDC.

The stadium’s owners have lost millions of pounds annually under the terms of the agreement, which a 2017 report – commissioned by London mayor Sadiq Khan – concluded represented poor value for taxpayers.

The report found that the concession agreement with West Ham would not cover the cost of running the stadium and would leave taxpayers with a hefty annual bill.

“The West Ham agreement... does not recover from West Ham by way of rent and other charges a sum sufficient to cover the associated running costs of the stadium,” it said.

“Presently, the investment by the public purse in the stadium transformation is not only unlikely ever to be recovered, it will on present figures be likely to worsen year by year at the rate of some £10m to £20m per year, due to expected operating losses,” the report added.

An LLDC spokesperson said: “We are in dispute with A&O over the drafting of the West Ham United concession agreement and despite our attempts to resolve this dispute with A&O have been unable to do so.

“We have a responsibility to protect taxpayers’ interests and so have had no alternative but to seek redress through the courts.”

A spokesperson for A&O said: “This claim is entirely without merit and we will defend it vigorously.”

The stadium’s owners and West Ham settled out of court in 2018 over whether the concession agreement allowed for the stadium’s match-day capacity to be increased from 57,000 to 66,000.

West Ham was contacted for comment.

[James P]

Every stadium gets replaced.

I’m nearly 40. I won’t live long enough to see the OS replaced

[War Pony]

If we get new owners and they lose that legal fight! You might get a new one sooner than you think! A loss of 20m a year is substantial, and every london mayor will be p!ssed they have to pay it!

[DaveWHU1964]

I could see it being abandoned. Not saying that would definitely happen of course but £2,5 million a year is likely to be small change for someone who could afford to buy us.

[James P]

If we get new owners and they lose that legal fight! You might get a new one sooner than you think! A loss of 20m a year is substantial, and every london mayor will be p!ssed they have to pay it!

Losing a legal battle won’t make someone pour a billion pound into a new stadium. We might end up groundsharing which I suppose counts as a new ground in fairness.

[James P]

I could see it being abandoned. Not saying that would definitely happen of course but £2,5 million a year is likely to be small change for someone who could afford to buy us.

It’s not the rental fee that’s the issue. It’s the buying acres of land in London and building a modern stadium on it that is the reason it won’t happen.

[War Pony]

Losing a legal battle won’t make someone pour a billion pound into a new stadium. We might end up groundsharing which I suppose counts as a new ground in fairness.

LLDC* could put it up for sale though! And what football team close to us will have the funds to buy it? Tottenham's ship has sailed now they have their new ground.

[WestHamIFC]

If we get new owners and they lose that legal fight! You might get a new one sooner than you think! A loss of 20m a year is substantial, and every london mayor will be p!ssed they have to pay it!

Why would our new owners be in a legal fight? LLDC / E20 are suing Allen & Overy.

[War Pony]

If west ham get new owners, and the LLDC lose their legal fight with Allen & Overy*

Sorry, my gramma is dog

[James P]

LLDC* could put it up for sale though! And what football team close to us will have the funds to buy it? Tottenham's ship has sailed now they have their new ground.

Huh?

If LLDC put the OS up for sale, how does that mean West Ham can spend a billion pound on a new stadium?

[War Pony]

If they buy it, they can knock the f'kin thing down!!

[Cellar-door]

If they buy it, they can knock the f'kin thing down!!

I'm not following this?

Who is buying the stadium to knock it down?

Also, the stadium as mentioned isn't the issue, it is the land, and the City is not selling that land so someone can knock down the OS and build something more profitable.

[Johnny Byrne's Boots]

Even if the stadium owners win the case, I can't see it impacting on WHU. Unless I'm reading it incorrectly, LLDC/E20 are suing their lawyers for, in their view, coming up with a rubbish contract.

It's basically lawyer suing brother lawyer.

Never ends well.

[James P]

If they buy it, they can knock the f'kin thing down!!

Why would they though? What is the business case for spending a large sum buying the OS and then spending another large sum knocking it down and rebuilding it. What does an owner gain from doing that? Revenues will not increase enough to ever pay back that level of expenditure.

The idea that some fairy godmother billionaire is going to drop hundreds of millions of pounds replacing the OS with The Emirates or the new Tottenham ground is pure fantasy. It’s not going to happen.

[WestHamIFC]

It's basically lawyer suing brother lawyer.

Exactly. Zero impact on whoever West Ham's owners are.

[WestHamIFC]

LLDC* could put it up for sale though!

If they did, whoever buys it would still be contractually obliged to honour the tenancy agreement with West Ham. The stadium owner might change, but WHU's contract that new Landlord would not.