West Ham to move into the Olympic Stadium in 2016

[5mins-from-amex]

Feel sorry for West ham fans, the olympic stadium will be a horrible place to watch football, will they leave Binoculars on the seats behind to goals?

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Feel sorry for West ham fans, the olympic stadium will be a horrible place to watch football, will they leave Binoculars on the seats behind to goals?

The stadium is being adapted so that it can be alternated between athletics and football. The process takes a couple of days at a time.

For football, the seats will be moved forward, over the athletics track, and into a more traditional football-style arena.

 

[Rookie]

Think the government will be very relieved that they have a tennant liek West Ham. What do you think they would do with teh stadium otherwise? And if you are supporting the moneygrabbing slimball Hearn who just wants to Sell Brisbane Rd so he can get his money out and royally roger O's fans then you must have been an advocate of Bellotti's tenure of Brighton!

What?!?

So do you think West Ham are in it for the good of the area then? They are getting a brand new football stadium for £15 million + a minor rent payment while selling their stadium for god knows how much. If they want it they should have to pay for it not get a government and local council handout.

I will leave the Bellotti comment out of my response though.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The stadium is being adapted so that it can be alternated between athletics and football. The process takes a couple of days at a time.

For football, the seats will be moved forward, over the athletics track, and into a more traditional football-style arena.

So the seats behind the goals move up to the pitch? What about the stand roof? Is the whole stand physically moving?

I know you possibly don't know the details, but I'll be surprised if the solution they get to is really any good.

 

[Triggaaar]

Likewise, somebody please explain this to me:

Honestly don't get why Gov are putting up £60 mill and West Ham only £15 mill + £2 mill a year. If they want it they should have to pay the whole thing (conversion costs and the rent), personally think it is very wrong that they are getting a brand new 60,000 stadium for a minimal amount while all other clubs have to pay huge amounts.

Sure we want someone to use the stadium, but not at a cost to the taxpayer of £60m. And if (when) the cost of conversion turns out to be more than £75m - does West Ham pay the extra, or the tax payer? Shall we guess.

 

[Lethargic]

And the upstanding Gold & Sullivan aren't in it for their own ends? I think you should broaden your knowledge base if you think Wet Spam's intentions are all sweetness & light.

Agree with you just because the Government screwed up in the first place with the whole legacy bit is not an adequate arguement for throwing more of our money at it for private gain. I couldnt care less whether WHU move to the stadium but the fact that the tax payer is paying for it is a disgrace. At least with bailing out the banks there is some chance of getting our money back but with this we are financing the porn brothers - they must think they have found the end of the rainbow.

 

[Triggaaar]

Feel sorry for West ham fans, the olympic stadium will be a horrible place to watch football, will they leave Binoculars on the seats behind to goals?

The stadium is being adapted so that it can be alternated between athletics and football. The process takes a couple of days at a time.

For football, the seats will be moved forward, over the athletics track, and into a more traditional football-style arena.

So the seats behind the goals move up to the pitch? What about the stand roof? Is the whole stand physically moving?

I know you possibly don't know the details, but I'll be surprised if the solution they get to is really any good.

Indeed, they can put some moveable stands on the tracks, but surely that'll only be one tier. They can't move the top tiers, so if it's to take 60k, many fans will have to sit on the existing seats.

The whole thing just looks like a money grab.

 

[screamadelica]

Indeed, they can put some moveable stands on the tracks, but surely that'll only be one tier. They can't move the top tiers, so if it's to take 60k, many fans will have to sit on the existing seats.

The whole thing just looks like a money grab.

The owners may benefit short term but long term the club will be financialy unstable.Upton Park is what 3 acres whats that worth ,i don`t know but they do appear to have a 91 million pound debt and are losing around 18 million a season.

 

[Cat Fish]

And the upstanding Gold & Sullivan aren't in it for their own ends? I think you should broaden your knowledge base if you think Wet Spam's intentions are all sweetness & light.

I think I know enough about their intentions thats not the point-
The Olympic Stadium is in Newham as is West Ham - Orient is in Waltham Forrest
West Ham are renting the stadium for £2 million a year and Leyton Orient want tp play there for free!

 

[Cat Fish]

What?!?

So do you think West Ham are in it for the good of the area then? They are getting a brand new football stadium for £15 million + a minor rent payment while selling their stadium for god knows how much. If they want it they should have to pay for it not get a government and local council handout.

I will leave the Bellotti comment out of my response though.

So rookie what should teh government do with the stadium? Make someone buy it?

 

[Cat Fish]

So the seats behind the goals move up to the pitch? What about the stand roof? Is the whole stand physically moving?

I know you possibly don't know the details, but I'll be surprised if the solution they get to is really any good.

A new roof is being built to cover all seats -= The governmet have thrown money at a conversion as they know without West HAm it will rot - look at the Birds Nest in China. Do you know what its being used for? Segway racing - is that the legacy we would want?

 

[Paris]

You don't say.


#Herewegoagain

Twinkle Toes aka The Oracle

 

[Triggaaar]

The owners may benefit short term but long term the club will be financialy unstable.Upton Park is what 3 acres whats that worth

Down in their book as £70m+ I think.

they do apear to have a 91 million pound debt

But is any of that money that they owe themselves - ie, West Ham could owe it's owners a lot of money?

and are losing around 18 million a season.

Could that not have been as they paid their way to the premiership? And taking into account the legal costs for getting the olympic stadium? They might not be losing that going forward.

 

[Rookie]

So rookie what should teh government do with the stadium? Make someone buy it?

Not pay a football club (which is what they are doing in reality) to move into it would be a start. If it is a loan then fair enough but its not is it.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Likewise, somebody please explain this to me:
Sure we want someone to use the stadium, but not at a cost to the taxpayer of £60m. And if (when) the cost of conversion turns out to be more than £75m - does West Ham pay the extra, or the tax payer? Shall we guess.

It was put out to tender wasn't it? I don't think there were any other more attractive offers put forward were there?

 

[Cat Fish]

Not pay a football club (which is what they are doing in reality) to move into it would be a start. If it is a loan then fair enough but its not is it.

They are not paying West Ham to go there - If you were a landlord and owned a house that no one wanted to rent because it had no bathroom in it you would pay for a bathroom to be installed so you could rent it out. The government messed up big time with its design - thats the crime! Cant blame West HAm for getting a good deal - good luck to them.

 

[Cat Fish]

It was put out to tender wasn't it? I don't think there were any other more attractive offers put forward were there?

Exactly right! Including Orient whose tender was sharing with West HAm but not paying anything at all in rent or conversion costs.

 

[Triggaaar]

It was put out to tender wasn't it? I don't think there were any other more attractive offers put forward were there?

According to a bunch of halfwits, you are quite correct.

 

[Triggaaar]

They are not paying West Ham to go there - If you were a landlord and owned a house that no one wanted to rent because it had no bathroom in it you would pay for a bathroom to be installed so you could rent it out.

Yes, but you'd rent it out at a fair rate to yourselves - ie, it's worth some money now, plus the £60m you're spending on it - you're not then going to rent it out for £2.5m / year (ie, just 4% of the cost of the bathroom).

I'm having deja vu here.

So even ignoring the original cost of the stadium, the stadium's costing about £180m. £9m/yr rent on that in 5%, which sounds fair enough. That won't pay of the cots though, that will just service the debt. Money isn't free is it. But after 17 years, they only have to pay £2.5m (1.5%, even ignoring the current valuation of the stadium). That's crazy.

This is like looking to rent a £300k house, and asking the owner to install a swimming pool, new basement with cinema, etc costing £100k. And For this, you want to pay £10k up front, then £5k a year rent (5% of the cost), which is less than the rent of the original house. Oh, and after 18 years, you want your rent to drop to £1,500 per year.

If the government just scrapped it as is, how would that cost more than spending £160m, and getting a 5% return for 17 years, followed by a 1.5% return (ie, a loss) for 82 years?

 

[Rookie]

They are not paying West Ham to go there - If you were a landlord and owned a house that no one wanted to rent because it had no bathroom in it you would pay for a bathroom to be installed so you could rent it out. The government messed up big time with its design - thats the crime! Cant blame West HAm for getting a good deal - good luck to them.

I disagree. I was not privy to the whole tender process so no idea if West Ham was really the best deal for the stadium and area as a whole so will leave that there. However, if West Ham really wanted the stadium they would have been willing to pay a far bigger proportion of the cost to transfer it to a workable football stadium (if a loan was needed from the Government/Local Authority then fair enough but at least something would have been given back). The analogy with the Landlord is fine but a Landlord would more than cover the cost of the bathroom over time through rent payments, West Ham are only paying £2 million a year which will be a hell of a long time (if ever) before it covers the costs of works to the stadium. Yes West Ham are getting a criminal good deal and that is not their fault but somewhere along the line something has gone very wrong.