West Ham beat Tottenham to win Olympic stadium backing

[john68]

ANAGRAM:

W.(6)..E.(3)..S.(7)..T.(1)..H.(2)..A.(9)..M.(13)..U.(12)..N.(4)..I.(11)..T.(8)..E.(5)..D.(10).

THE NEW STADIUM....WORRA COINCIDENCE.

[walmai]

What a disaster, more like.

Relegation I can cope with, but I am not paying for 19 games and a pair of binoculars. Even against the top 4, we'd attract a crowd of only 35-40,000.

Rattling around in an unfit for purpose athletics stadium, 30 or so metres from the pitch? No thanks.

I am resigning my season ticket in protest.

[john68]

What a disaster, more like.

Relegation I can cope with, but I am not paying for 19 games and a pair of binoculars. Even against the top 4, we'd attract a crowd of only 35-40,000.

Rattling around in an unfit for purpose athletics stadium, 30 or so metres from the pitch? No thanks.

I am resigning my season ticket in protest.

Hi Walmai mate,
I understand your concerns mate but could you clarify a few points?

1...As it was either yourselves or Spurs who were going to get the stadium, would there not be a real danger that by letting them into your backyard, should they remain more successful than you, that they could steal some of fanbase in the future by becoming local? Though not quite the same but siimilar, this happened to city when the rags were allowed to play at Maine Road. We never recovered our fanbase level.
2...Does the Boleyn need regenerating, if so by how much and roughly what cost and future financial burden to the club?
3...Could any future financial burden caused by paying for any regeneration of the Boleyn, cause WHU hardship and diminish the funds to regenerate the playing strength?
4...Is the new stadium (financially) freely available to WHU, if not, what costs will WHU incur by moving to it?
5...Whilst understanding your concerns about atmosphere and fans' views of the game, Has anything been suggested to alleviate this problem?
Regards mate.

[Arjan Van Schotte]

I definitely think WHU deserved it, both because of the location and because they're keeping the track.

they're talking about "innovative" ticket pricing (worra fuckin laugh...they mean CHEAP FFS) which will draw in the families, sanitize whatever atmosphere is left and then milk the merchandise. if it works - they'll be getting 60K week in week out whilst playing decent PL football. if it fails - they'll drive away the hardcore support, not replace them with enough family and tourist types and have 15k or so rattling around watching div 2/ div 3.

quite a gamble i reckon.

spurs would have sold out to season ticket holders from the off.

[Chinners]

[lets all have a disco]

Meccano ground.


Should have bulldozed it and let Spurs have the land and pump some money back into the area.

[Dameerto]

I'd like to see how they intend to impliment the retractable seating over the running track before I start slagging them off.

[walmai]

What a disaster, more like.

Relegation I can cope with, but I am not paying for 19 games and a pair of binoculars. Even against the top 4, we'd attract a crowd of only 35-40,000.

Rattling around in an unfit for purpose athletics stadium, 30 or so metres from the pitch? No thanks.

I am resigning my season ticket in protest.

Hi Walmai mate,
I understand your concerns mate but could you clarify a few points?

1...As it was either yourselves or Spurs who were going to get the stadium, would there not be a real danger that by letting them into your backyard, should they remain more successful than you, that they could steal some of fanbase in the future by becoming local? Though not quite the same but siimilar, this happened to city when the rags were allowed to play at Maine Road. We never recovered our fanbase level.
2...Does the Boleyn need regenerating, if so by how much and roughly what cost and future financial burden to the club?
3...Could any future financial burden caused by paying for any regeneration of the Boleyn, cause WHU hardship and diminish the funds to regenerate the playing strength?
4...Is the new stadium (financially) freely available to WHU, if not, what costs will WHU incur by moving to it?
5...Whilst understanding your concerns about atmosphere and fans' views of the game, Has anything been suggested to alleviate this problem?
Regards mate.

Hello John

I'll be as brief as I can!

West Ham kind of changed hands in Jan 2010, when those now taken to be our present owners bought a half-share from a court appointed consortium (our previous owner having been declared bankrupt). They have since upped their stake, but only own 65 or so % of the club, which of course includes the freehold to the ground/land.

Since day one of their 'reign' the Olympic Site (OS) has been on the agenda - having never been seriously linked to us beforehand.

Its obviously not going to be mothballed after the Olympics, but the reason for our 'victory' in securing it is that WHU have - without any consultation worthy of the name - pledged that they will retain the running track. Its not just a running track, but other areas for track and field are to be retained.

Thus, football is one of the activities to be undertaken there. Concerts and other forms of sport (even cricket apparently) are under consideration. That should give you some idea as to the distance between stands and pitch. Contrast it with our present home and it begins to take on an alien sense of unease, not for our visitors any more, but for our own fans.

The OS is presently not fit for the purpose of week in week out football (no corporate section / no permanent facilities, even toilets) so a lot of money will be needed to bring it into shape, even if the running track stays and other matters can be resolved. That money is from a loan of a sum minus the value of the land on which we presently play our games. The council gets the land and a loan, we get the money to make it fit for purpose for football and the athletics legacy.

Spurs coming into the equation happened long after our pledges to retain the running track. They were a side issue that engulfed rational thought about it. We had to beat them to it, or we would slowly decline. That I can see, but we've beaten them to a temporary stadium, massive costs in refurbishment etc when we're a club recently on the brink of insolvency and what to me seems likely to be a soulless bowl devoid of the qualities we had at our ground, even in the present day.

Nobody would loan us the money on decent rates, to extend the ground at two corners - i.e. round off the east stand - but I fear that our rash and foolish 'owners' have made a big mistake, which will unfurl over decades, in making the deal they have.

Having not been consulted in any way shape or form, my wish to keep opening my wallet to them has dried up.

[lets all have a disco]

Walmai i feel your pain.

What got me in the whole process was the fact we got Eastlands after the Commenwealths and how it was the blueprint for the future.
It WASNT,when Manchester went for the games the stadium was always built with footy in mind while the athletes were tearing it up round the track 25 metres bellow was the lower tier you now see in our ground.

Bad planning all round.

Does look good for gigs though.