[Football] What's the problem at West Ham

[Acker79]

I seem to remember one transfer window where they promised they were going to spend whatever it takes to bring in a top striker, then they offered a pitiful amount for Defoe from Sunderland (all the more pitiful given that Defoe was Sunderland's only goalscorer at the time), and a couple of other bids that by that time were the sort top championship sides were paying for their strikers no where near what a premier league side would expect to pay, and it felt like they didn't actually want to spend money, just wanted to say they tried. So it feels weird to see so many in this thread talk about how much they're spending.

The stadium move was always going to be an issue. They didn't need to move, they weren't homeless. So the fans were being forced out of their home. With us, the on-paper-awful Withdean stadium was a homecoming, so we embraced it and did what we could to make it a fortress. To West Ham, the on-paper-awful olympic stadium is an unnecessary change, and one they resent. I'm not entirely sure where the idea that you have to have crowds of 50,000 if you want to compete in the premier league comes from. You need massive financial backing. That premier winners get 50,000 is more an effect, rather than cause, of winning the premier league. It's (usually) the investment from rich owners/recent historical dominance that wins the title.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

What's the problem at West Ham

A sense of entitlement?

 

[BensGrandad]

To think that in our dark ages many saw Gold and Sullivan as our salvation.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

I seem to remember one transfer window where they promised they were going to spend whatever it takes to bring in a top striker, then they offered a pitiful amount for Defoe from Sunderland (all the more pitiful given that Defoe was Sunderland's only goalscorer at the time), and a couple of other bids that by that time were the sort top championship sides were paying for their strikers no where near what a premier league side would expect to pay, and it felt like they didn't actually want to spend money, just wanted to say they tried. So it feels weird to see so many in this thread talk about how much they're spending.

The stadium move was always going to be an issue. They didn't need to move, they weren't homeless. So the fans were being forced out of their home. With us, the on-paper-awful Withdean stadium was a homecoming, so we embraced it and did what we could to make it a fortress. To West Ham, the on-paper-awful olympic stadium is an unnecessary change, and one they resent. I'm not entirely sure where the idea that you have to have crowds of 50,000 if you want to compete in the premier league comes from. You need massive financial backing. That premier winners get 50,000 is more an effect, rather than cause, of winning the premier league. It's (usually) the investment from rich owners/recent historical dominance that wins the title.

Leicester holds 33k, case in point well made.

and it felt like they didn't actually want to spend money, just wanted to say they tried.

That's how CPFC have gone through their short existence (2010), promising stuff they know won't happen.

 

[Brovion]

I think the expression is "First world problems". If I could be given one football-related wish for Brighton it wouldn't be for us to win the Champions' League - it would be the hope that us as fans never become a whinging load of miserablists with an inflated sense of entitlement. So many PL clubs seem to be like this; listening to the Southampton fans you'd think they were on the verge of going bust as opposed to just being a rich club having a bad season. And being a top club is no protection from this as Arsenal have proved.

The WHU owners have admittedly over-promised and under-delivered, but so what? That's not just football, that happens all through life. And at least the players wages will get paid on time, the bank isn't threatening them, and WHU will definitely still exist in a few years' time. They ought to look down the road at Orient if they want to see what real problems look like. I hope Gold and Sullivan do sell and WHU get, say SISU taking over.

 

[Paris]

Entitlement.

Edit: Ditto Tom Hark, Preston Park.

 

[vegster]

Are the club making £ms profits,and taking as dividends rather than reinvesting some? They sold their,sole a while back ,not surprised it’s falling apart

I heard the owners are clawing back interest on the money they " Loaned " their own club to the tune of several million a year.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

I heard the owners are clawing back interest on the money they " Loaned " their own club to the tune several million a year.

Greg Stanley rings a bell.

 

[BensGrandad]

Not every owner is in the position or wants to just write off the debt/loans like ours.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Are the club making £ms profits,and taking as dividends rather than reinvesting some? They sold their,sole a while back ,not surprised it’s falling apart

Trouble is, they sold their sole to move to another plaice. Can't skate over it, they haddock comfortable ground of their own, but the board wanted bigger fish to fry.

 

[GT49er]

To West Ham, the on-paper-awful olympic stadium is an unnecessary change, and one they resent. I'm not entirely sure where the idea that you have to have crowds of 50,000 if you want to compete in the premier league comes from. You need massive financial backing. That premier winners get 50,000 is more an effect, rather than cause, of winning the premier league. It's (usually) the investment from rich owners/recent historical dominance that wins the title.

I'm sure I've heard it said/seen it written that for top clubs ticket revenue is just a drop in the ocean compared to their other revenue streams - even to the extent that it probably wouldn't affect them much if they stopped charging for admission (or at least could afford to hugely reduce prices).
So, the idea that moving from a 35K(?) stadium to a 50+K one will be a significant step towards becoming a super-club seems pretty flawed from the start. Plus, nobody will have any sympathy for the club when they blag their way into a stadium on the cheap at the taxpayers expense when everybody else has to pay for their own stadium.
Have they actually demolished the Boleyn Ground yet?

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Not every owner is in the position or wants to just write off the debt/loans like ours.

But some have an agenda. And when you think that WHUFC are paying 2 mill a year to reside in a stadium that cost the tax payer £700 mill, you have to ask questions about their end goal. They've sold the club away and are now wanting to make a mint out of it. Fortunately for WHU supporters, the owners can't sell them down the river twice as they don't own the stadium. But they are horrible, horrible people that are just sucking the life out of a once good club.

 

[Albion Dan]

I'm sure I've heard it said/seen it written that for top clubs ticket revenue is just a drop in the ocean compared to their other revenue streams - even to the extent that it probably wouldn't affect them much if they stopped charging for admission (or at least could afford to hugely reduce prices).
So, the idea that moving from a 35K(?) stadium to a 50+K one will be a significant step towards becoming a super-club seems pretty flawed from the start. Plus, nobody will have any sympathy for the club when they blag their way into a stadium on the cheap at the taxpayers expense when everybody else has to pay for their own stadium.
Have they actually demolished the Boleyn Ground yet?

An extra 15000 on the gate would be worth around £10m extra a year so a significant sum. Would be an extra 2 very high quality players wages over a season.

 

[GT49er]

Trouble is, they sold their sole to move to another plaice. Can't skate over it, they haddock comfortable ground of their own, but the board wanted bigger fish to fry.

Yes, they've got a whale of a problem now that they're in the wrong plaice - makes you wonder what the porpoise of the move was. Load of codswallop really....................

 

[beorhthelm]

Absolute mugs. Do they really think a friendly east end owner is going to come in and give them billions to spend?

they already have a friendly east end owner, doesnt suit them the fans that they aren't spending much.

the stadium is obviously a massive cause of resentment. they shifted out of their beloved but restrictive Boleyn Ground to the sterile Olympic park and dont see any dividend from this. reckon long term this will pay off for the club but the fans dont see that for now, losing double against little Brighton must sting.

 

[GT49er]

An extra 15000 on the gate would be worth around £10m extra a year so a significant sum. Would be an extra 2 very high quality players wages over a season.

If they sell them!

Even then, £10M is only a fraction of the £100M they get just for being in the PL, and that £100M is realistically just their starter for more. Yes, an extra £10M is a lot to you and me, and yes, it would make a difference, but not a huge one at the level that top PL clubs are currently operating at. It wouldn't even begin to pay Ozil's wages

 

[Hampster Gull]

Trouble is, they sold their sole to move to another plaice. Can't skate over it, they haddock comfortable ground of their own, but the board wanted bigger fish to fry.

Bottom feeder

 

[seagulls4ever]

It's all relative. If we were owned by Gold and Sullivan, who are obviously just in it for the money, and had that 'football' ground for a stadium, I wouldn't be happy either.

 

[Weststander]

The Board promised that losing their home for the much bigger stadium, would make them immediately able to compete with the big boys on transfers in.

In reality, that didn't happen.

 

[Weststander]

If they sell them!

Even then, £10M is only a fraction of the £100M they get just for being in the PL, and that £100M is realistically just their starter for more. Yes, an extra £10M is a lot to you and me, and yes, it would make a difference, but not a huge one at the level that top PL clubs are currently operating at. It wouldn't even begin to pay Ozil's wages

West Ham's total income for 2016/17 will be £175m:

Broadcasting £100m
Ticketing £40m
Commercial & retail £35m