West Ham, the new stadium and Boris

Garry Nelson's teacher · Nov 2, 2016

It now looks as though the tax payer will be picking up a massive and unanticipated tab to subsidise the move from Upton Park. Given that this was negotiated by the Boris (London) administration it does tend to throw some doubt (to put it mildly) on his negotiating ability as a Foreign Secretary and mastermind of Brexit which, whether you are for or against, will feature some rather more complex and important matters for negotiation. Just a thought.

Dorset Seagull · Nov 2, 2016

Garry Nelson's teacher said:
It now looks as though the tax payer will be picking up a massive and unanticipated tab to subsidise the move from Upton Park. Given that this was negotiated by the Boris (London) administration it does tend to throw some doubt (to put it mildly) on his negotiating ability as a Foreign Secretary and mastermind of Brexit which, whether you are for or against, will feature some rather more complex and important matters for negotiation. Just a thought.

Don't these politicians have teams of people doing the negotiation and they are just the figurehead who gets all the credit or otherwise

Simster · Nov 2, 2016

So it turns out Johnson is a fat incompetent buffoon. Who knew?

Steve in Japan · Nov 2, 2016

The Spurs proposal to level it and build a new football stadium on the site might have proved less costly to the taxpayer in the long run.

studio150 · Nov 2, 2016

In other shock news the sun rose this morning

Deleted member 22389 · Nov 2, 2016

It doesn't matter if it was the Tories, Labour or lib Dems, they always cock things. Every single building project is always underestimated.

The money it has cost to renevate could have built a brand new stadium.

knocky1 · Nov 2, 2016

Steve in Japan said:
The Spurs proposal to level it and build a new football stadium on the site might have proved less costly to the taxpayer in the long run.

The West Ham fans are doing a good job on the demolition.

BUTTERBALL · Nov 2, 2016

Brady, Gold and Sullivan rubbing their hands together with glee at Boris & Co's ineptness and will be feeling the financial benefit for years to come. Just a shame they have subjected their supporters to such sterile surroundings.

beorhthelm · Nov 2, 2016

its not Boris or West Ham, it was the refusal of the Olympic committee to sanction design changes to accommodate football, and their insistence of keeping the stadium for one or two athletics events afterwards.

Steve in Japan · Nov 2, 2016

beorhthelm said:
its not Boris or West Ham, it was the refusal of the Olympic committee to sanction design changes to accommodate football, and their insistence of keeping the stadium for one or two athletics events afterwards.

I think they did not want to renege on their bid commitments made when they were awarded Olympics. But everybody does that. Look at Tokyo....

Green Cross Code Man · Nov 2, 2016

beorhthelm said:
its not Boris or West Ham, it was the refusal of the Olympic committee to sanction design changes to accommodate football, and their insistence of keeping the stadium for one or two athletics events afterwards.

Yes, I agree, from what I've read, the Olympic committee were very intractable. However, it is ever more apparent that the venue in its current state is wholly unsuitable for football.

Paul Fletcher, former chief executive of Burnley had a hand in the original stadium plans. He has a lot to say about it:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ding-says-West-Ham-s-new-home-demolished.html

Simster · Nov 2, 2016

bashlsdir said:
It doesn't matter if it was the Tories, Labour or lib Dems, they always cock things. Every single building project is always underestimated.

The money it has cost to renevate could have built a brand new stadium.

If you were saying that the political party is unimportant and that it is all about the level of competence of the people running the project then I'd agree with you, but you're not. It isn't true that "every single building project" is underestimated. This country has a proud record of not doing that. The London 2012 Olympics are the most recent example - bang on times and under budget:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/london-2012-to-be-delivered-on-time-and-set-to-be-under-budget

Cross rail is another:
http://www.civilserviceworld.com/ar...et-how-get-major-infrastructure-project-right

Same goes for the various millenium projects.

But ultimately, someone is accountable and seemingly this project converting the stadium to a football stadium has not been managed at all. It was on Boris's watch, and he's proven to be a shambles. If we must go through Brexit, I hope to God this fat simpleton is nowhere near the negotiating table. It's the best chance you Brexiters have of being proved right.

Doc Lynam · Nov 2, 2016

So the question is how much should the West Ham owners be expected to pay for future conversions? To date they have spent 15m with the rest an odd 250m covered by our taxes. The owners clearly thought they were getting an elite football stadium for next to nothing, how could they lose! Instead they've sold their home and signed a lemon which they don't even own!

carlzeiss · Nov 2, 2016

Doc Lynam said:
So the question is how much should the West Ham owners be expected to pay for future conversions? To date they have spent 15m with the rest an odd 250m covered by our taxes. The owners clearly thought they were getting an elite football stadium for next to nothing, how could they lose! Instead they've sold their home and signed a lemon which they don't even own!

I wonder what happened to the 35mil from the sale of Upton Park ?

Easy 10 · Nov 2, 2016

Doc Lynam said:
So the question is how much should the West Ham owners be expected to pay for future conversions? To date they have spent 15m with the rest an odd 250m covered by our taxes. The owners clearly thought they were getting an elite football stadium for next to nothing, how could they lose! Instead they've sold their home and signed a lemon which they don't even own!

They've also gone from a 35k stadium to a 60k stadium and have sold 52,000 season tickets, in addition to a huge expansion on the corporate side of things compared with Upton Park, so I don't think Brady/Gold/Sullivan will be OVERLY concerned with the current teething problems there. The "brand" is in very rude health now, which is all they'll be bothered about.

Kinky Gerbil · Nov 2, 2016

Gutted Spurs didn't get it. Gutted.

Doc Lynam · Nov 2, 2016

Easy 10 said:
They've also gone from a 35k stadium to a 60k stadium and have sold 52,000 season tickets, in addition to a huge expansion on the corporate side of things compared with Upton Park, so I don't think Brady/Gold/Sullivan will be OVERLY concerned with the current teething problems there. The "brand" is in very rude health now, which is all they'll be bothered about.

But just imagine if the they were religated or just stayed up, those season ticket sales will only go one way! For me their success if build on a very brittle foundation. Again they don't own their home, with the volatility involved in football i think this will always come back to bite them, but the owners would have sold up by then!

DarrenFreemansPerm · Nov 2, 2016

I may have misheard, but this morning on the radio I thought I heard them say that the 'retractable' seats have to be dismantled and and moved manually each time the venue is used for an alternative event, also, the cost of installing such a design was estimated to be 300k, but is now in excess of £8m :lol:

hans kraay fan club · Nov 2, 2016

DarrenFreemansPerm said:
I may have misheard, but this morning on the radio I thought I heard them say that the 'retractable' seats have to be dismantled and and moved manually each time the venue is used for an alternative event, also, the cost of installing such a design was estimated to be 300k, but is now in excess of £8m

Not quite. The £8m was not the cost of installing the system - that is the quoted ANNUAL cost, of moving them off the athletics track at the end of each season, then back again.

Seems outlandishly high, for what is effectively a big team of scaffolders for two weeks.

Official Old Man · Nov 2, 2016

DarrenFreemansPerm said:
I may have misheard, but this morning on the radio I thought I heard them say that the 'retractable' seats have to be dismantled and and moved manually each time the venue is used for an alternative event, also, the cost of installing such a design was estimated to be 300k, but is now in excess of £8m

SEATS
The 'retractable' seats were put in by a company who quoted £300K every summer to remove and replace. This company, unsurprisingly, have gone bust. Another company have looked at the system and said it will take £8 million and at least two weeks to remove the seats and another two weeks to replace them. This four weeks means that the venue cannot be used for four out of the ten weeks it is meant to be empty in the summer, thus losing revenue from athletics and live music.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

West Ham, the new stadium and Boris

Well-known member

Once Dolphin, Now Seagull

"the man's an arse"

Well-known member

Well-known member

Deleted member 22389

Guest

Well-known member

East Stand Brighton Boyz

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Well-known member

Wunt be druv

"the man's an arse"

I hate the Daily Mail

Well-known member

Brain dead MUG SHEEP

Im The Scatman

I hate the Daily Mail

⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

The voice of reason.

Uckfield Seagull

Share this page