# Taxpayers paying for West Ham's Stadium?



## Fish (Aug 6, 2015)

This is just unbelievable, quite a lot of the running costs for the stadium that West Ham are moving into are being met by taxpayers!

This amounts to a rent free scenario for them with running costs equaling or exceeding their rental agreement, this just shouldn't be allowed :angry: 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33780720


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2015)

I think it'll be a pretty dreadful place to watch football personally, but it looks like West Ham have scored big time.


----------



## pbrown7582 (Aug 6, 2015)

no real surprise not only very cheap rent but hardly any conversion costs. Noy exactly a prime example of  FFP is it? ...........


----------



## Tarkus1212 (Aug 6, 2015)

Sounds like the sort of deal Real Madrid have.


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 6, 2015)

Depends which figures/spin you believe. Potential costs of Â£1.4m against a rent of Â£2.5m... it would be nice to see actual figures instead of "between" this and that. Looks like its a little either, or cost neutral. Whatever, its way better than what its probably costing now.


----------



## brendy (Aug 6, 2015)

Allegedly going to have cheaper tickets so the paying public (fans) will benefit in the scheme of things. When you consider there is 1bn pounds being illegally claimed in sickness/unemployment benefits,  west ham getting assistance with 2.5m is absolutely not newsworthy.


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 6, 2015)

From the article; "Two separate football business experts told the BBC the value of the services amounts to between Â£1.4m and Â£2.5m a year."

Only Â£1.1m difference.

And again from the article; "West Ham, who received more than Â£76m in prize money for finishing 12th in the Premier League last season, are understood to be paying approximately Â£2m to Â£2.5m a year in rent."

Only Â£0.5m difference.

Lazy, sensationalist, inaccurate journalism, which when viewed superficially doesn't paint the LLDC in a good light. But if you really look at the figures, and maybe find out what its currently costing the local council who don't have a tenant, it if anything suggests that the BBC are inept in their reporting.


----------



## Khamelion (Aug 6, 2015)

Fish said:



			This is just unbelievable, quite a lot of the running costs for the stadium that West Ham are moving into are being met by taxpayers!

This amounts to a rent free scenario for them with running costs equaling or exceeding their rental agreement, this just shouldn't be allowed :angry: 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33780720

Click to expand...


Aww look on the bright side Fish, you can be a Hammer now, come out the closet, Fish's forever blowing bubbles


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 6, 2015)

Do West Ham have enough supporters to fill the stadium ?


----------



## Fish (Aug 6, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Do West Ham have enough supporters to fill the stadium ?
		
Click to expand...

No, which is why they are reducing ticket prices and inviting groups from schools and other establishments from every corner of the globe free entry to help create an atmosphere or there will an echo, echo, echo, echo..... :smirk:


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 6, 2015)

Until Abramovich exits, I don't believe any Chelsea supporter is really in a position to criticise any deal by any other club!

As for it being 'tax-payer funded' that's a load of rubbish imo.

And it would have been a damned sight bigger drag on taxpayers if there was no deal done!

Hobbit did an excellent job of analysing just exactly the rather sensationalist article was doing!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 6, 2015)

Fish said:



			No, which is why they are reducing ticket prices and inviting groups from schools and other establishments from every corner of the globe free entry to help create an atmosphere or there will an echo, echo, echo, echo..... :smirk:
		
Click to expand...

If they are reducing prices and giving schoolkids free passes surely that can only be good for the game.

60,000 paying a tenner is always miles better than 15,000 paying Â£40. Just think of the pie sales for starters.


----------



## Fish (Aug 6, 2015)

Foxholer said:



			Until Abramovich exits, I don't believe any Chelsea supporter is really in a position to criticise any deal by any other club!

As for it being 'tax-payer funded' that's a load of rubbish imo.

And it would have been a damned sight bigger drag on taxpayers if there was no deal done!

Hobbit did an excellent job of analysing just exactly the rather sensationalist article was doing!
		
Click to expand...

Should have gone to Spurs, doubt we'd have read such a deal then, and what the hell has Abramovich got to do with this, absolutely nothing, we/he pays his own way and we don't need taxpayers handouts!


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 6, 2015)

Fish said:



			Should have gone to Spurs, doubt we'd have read such a deal then...
		
Click to expand...

Spurs proposal involved ripping the Athletics track up! So that was never going to happen after commitment to 'legacy' Athletics presence!


----------



## c1973 (Aug 6, 2015)

Since athletics wanted the legacy they should have turned it over to whoever runs athletics. Let them take on the financial burden.

No such problem up here with the main commonwealth games stadium, that got handed over (sorry, handed back) to a bunch of smelly gypos. &#128521;


----------



## pbrown7582 (Aug 6, 2015)

Ripping the track up would of been for the best in reality. 

On the plus side they'll be no more chicken run........


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Aug 6, 2015)

Best stadium in the championship after next season


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Aug 6, 2015)

brendy said:



			Allegedly going to have cheaper tickets so the paying public (fans) will benefit in the scheme of things. When you consider there is 1bn pounds being illegally claimed in sickness/unemployment benefits,  west ham getting assistance with 2.5m is absolutely not newsworthy.
		
Click to expand...

Very cheap and un-newsworthy if you then consider the 6 Billion in unclaimed benefits or even the 125 Billion in unpaid Corporate taxes.


----------



## TheDiablo (Aug 6, 2015)

Fish said:



			No, which is why they are reducing ticket prices and inviting groups from schools and other establishments from every corner of the globe free entry to help create an atmosphere or there will an echo, echo, echo, echo..... :smirk:
		
Click to expand...

You do know that Chelsea had to advertise Champions League Last 16 tickets on Capital FM the week before the game last year.... and STILL didnt sell out :rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 7, 2015)

No European nights for the Hammers and Dons.

Looks like some of these new 'no name' clubs are pretty decent and the UK clubs are standing still.


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 7, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Do West Ham have enough supporters to fill the stadium ?
		
Click to expand...


The '50 year rule' is up for them next year also...

They'll have to stop telling us how the 'ammers won the World Cup for England...


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Aug 10, 2015)

Late to join this one but the cock up was by the Olympic legacy committee who did not sort this out before the stadium was built. If they had sorted out a football tenant, the only logical answer, then it would have been built in a way that needed minimum alteration, as per Man City's ground. Ideally they would also have got rid of the stupid running track, a killer for football stadiums, but I grasp that leaving the track was part of the deal for winning the Olympics in the first place. Once the games were finished London was left with a huge white elephant. A couple of years of an empty stadium meant it was a doddle to get the stadium for a song. Most Olympics are a drain to the taxpayers of the nations, despite the lies we are told beforehand. Ours was no different.

In the end it was probably the best deal for the taxpayer but it was also an awful deal for the taxpayer. Just less awful than it could have been. Whether it works for West Ham is dependent on how well they can fill the gaps and create atmosphere. It could be a stinker for them but I hope not. They sound as if they have their heads screwed on with regards to pricing so that is a good start.


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 10, 2015)

Bottom line is... Aside from the Olympics athletics isn't that much of a draw...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 10, 2015)

MegaSteve said:



			Bottom line is... Aside from the Olympics athletics isn't that much of a draw...
		
Click to expand...

And the World Championships , Diamond League both which will sell out plus Euro's which is planned in the Stadium


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 10, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And the World Championships , Diamond League both which will sell out plus Euro's which is planned in the Stadium
		
Click to expand...


Hardly week in week out income though is it...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 10, 2015)

MegaSteve said:



			Hardly week in week out income though is it...
		
Click to expand...

Hence why a lot of stadiums have multi use and the Olympic Stadium should stay exactly that. As with the other sports from the Olympics - the legacy must remain


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 10, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Hence why a lot of stadiums have multi use
		
Click to expand...

And, how many of those, having athletics, actually pay their way...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 10, 2015)

MegaSteve said:



			And, how many of those, having athletics, actually pay their way...
		
Click to expand...

Pay their way ? What do you mean ?


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 10, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Pay their way ? What do you mean ?
		
Click to expand...


Operate without outside financial assistance through grants etc...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 10, 2015)

MegaSteve said:



			Operate without outside financial assistance through grants etc...
		
Click to expand...

I'm struggling to see the point ? Yes a lot of athletes rely on money from UK Athletics and lottery etc - but what does that have to do with continuing with the sporting legacy of the Olympics and ensuring we still have a world class athletics venue in this country


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Aug 10, 2015)

The point MegaSteve is making, I think and happen to agree with, is that athletics can not justify a stadium as grand as the Olympic stadium. The income atheltics generates from the events it stages does not cover the costs of the stadium, I am excluding the building costs from that as that would just be silly. Large stadiums can only survive in the UK either via football or significant tax payer support. Athletics having this stadium is a luxury. People are entirely justified in questioning whether such a large stadium for a sport that can not pay its way is justified.

The Tottenham proposal of refitting Crystal Palace seemed a pretty good one as a stadium around 15-20,000 seats, set up for athletics only could be a real centre of excellence that would be more sustainable. A little like the cycling centre in Manchester. The Olympic stadium is simply too big and expensive to run for athletics to warrant.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 10, 2015)

Lord Tyrion said:



			The point MegaSteve is making, I think and happen to agree with, is that athletics can not justify a stadium as grand as the Olympic stadium. The income atheltics generates from the events it stages does not cover the costs of the stadium, I am excluding the building costs from that as that would just be silly. Large stadiums can only survive in the UK either via football or significant tax payer support. Athletics having this stadium is a luxury. People are entirely justified in questioning whether such a large stadium for a sport that can not pay its way is justified.

The Tottenham proposal of refitting Crystal Palace seemed a pretty good one as a stadium around 15-20,000 seats, set up for athletics only could be a real centre of excellence that would be more sustainable. A little like the cycling centre in Manchester. The Olympic stadium is simply too big and expensive to run for athletics to warrant.
		
Click to expand...

And as I said - hence why the stadium becomes a multi event for not just athletics - we couldn't hold the World Atheltics with a stadium of just 20,000 - that's not the legacy meant from the Olympics 

The Olympics were just the start of things - the stadia was built for more than just the two weeks - it was for the future as well , all the stadia is being used for the future of the sport. The Olympic stadium will be still used for athletics regardless of if it can fund - unfortunately not every sport gets helping hands from billionaire owners or multi billion telly deals - that doesn't mean that are shifted off into small stadiums so that the rich football teams can have the grand stadium - especially when it wasn't built for football


----------



## Twire (Aug 10, 2015)

All I'll say is it was a very unbalanced report. West Ham do have a cracking deal, but not quite as rosy as made out.


----------



## Farneyman (Aug 10, 2015)

c1973 said:



			No such problem up here with the main commonwealth games stadium, that got handed over (sorry, handed back) to a bunch of smelly gypos. &#128521;
		
Click to expand...


Remind me again who you are referring to as "smelly gypos"?


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 10, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			that's not the legacy meant from the Olympics
		
Click to expand...


Thought the legacy was to inspire folk up off their butts and to participate...

Not, leave behind an unaffordable white elephant...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 10, 2015)

MegaSteve said:



			Thought the legacy was to inspire folk up off their butts and to participate...

Not, leave behind an unaffordable white elephant...
		
Click to expand...

Part of the legacy was getting the best sporting events to the country - world championships for multiple sports. Enhance the exposure of sport in the country to encourage people to partake in many sports beyond the rich play ground of football


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Aug 10, 2015)

I haven't looked into this at all but surely one sensible answer would be to hold concerts in the same way Wembley Stadium did (saw the likes of Queen, Live Aid, Genesis etc). Would get regular use and income. Not sure what limitations there would be in terms of noise etc and how close the nearest accommodation is


----------



## Twire (Sep 3, 2015)

Twire said:



			All I'll say is it was a very unbalanced report. West Ham do have a cracking deal, but not quite as rosy as made out.
		
Click to expand...


Hmmm, I didn't see any of this mentioned in the BBC program.




Government responds to West Ham Olympic Stadium petition

A statement read: â€œWest Ham United has a concession at the Stadium and their contributions reflect that status. The contract, awarded after an open public competition, has been widely scrutinised and tested in court.

â€œFollowing the completion of its transformation programme the Stadium will be â€“ unlike so many previous Olympic Stadiums â€“ a world-class multi-use arena with a long-term future, and one that wonâ€™t require continuous support from the taxpayer. The stadium remains in public ownership (E20 Stadium LLP â€“ a joint venture between the London Legacy Development Corporation and Newham Council) and the profits from its multiple uses will flow to the taxpayer.

â€œAs a long-term concessionaire West Ham United will only access the full stadium facilities for and shortly ahead of home matches, anticipated to be an average of 25 games a year. The stadiumâ€™s other anchor concession-holder, British Athletics, has a concession for one month a year. The stadium will be available for commercial and other uses at all times outside of these existing commitments.

â€œThe Stadium is a multi-use venue, which has already hosted a major athletics meet this year, the Sainsburyâ€™s Anniversary Games, and will host a range of other events in 2015 including five matches during the Rugby World Cup this autumn, a Rugby League international between England and New Zealand and the Race of Champions motorsport event. In addition the Stadium will host elite athletics including the IAAF and IPC Athletics World Championships in 2017.

â€œA world class stadium operator has been appointed and it is part of the operator agreement that the Stadium will host concerts and other events.

â€œNone of these events will financially benefit West Ham United. All revenues from these events will be shared by the operator and the Stadium owners. The stadium operator has a proven international track record of success in managing and maximising revenue from multi-use stadia and is contractually incentivised to generate maximum income.

â€œThe agreement with West Ham United, including their contribution to transformation costs and rent, followed an open competitive process, which was delivered under EU rules, conducted visibly and exposed to significant scrutiny. The outcome has been tested in the courts and upheld. As the winning bid this constituted the best available return for the taxpayer and secures the commercial viability of a national asset for the next 100 years.

â€œThe European Commission (EC) is responsible for assessing whether public investment distorts the competitive market. The EC has considered this issue on more than one occasion and has done so with full sight of the contractual terms, comprehensive detail of the tender exercise and in depth legal opinion on compliance with UK and EU law. It has found no case to answer. Therefore we do not believe that a public inquiry is necessary.

â€œThe detail of the rental agreement between the Stadium owners and West Ham United is commercially sensitive. Disclosing details of the contract would undermine the future negotiating position of the Stadiumâ€™s operator, Vinci, who are working hard to bring in future events to get the greatest possible return and ensure that the Stadium is a commercial success.

â€œIt is important that the stadium owners and operator are able to negotiate future contracts in a way that derive maximum value and are not constrained by any one agreement. Such arrangements are standard practice and are designed to both protect the previous public expenditure and maximise the return on this investment.

â€œDepartment for Culture, Media and Sport.â€


----------



## Fish (Sep 4, 2015)

Still questions being asked..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34143614


----------



## Farneyman (Sep 4, 2015)

Fish said:



			Still questions being asked..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34143614

Click to expand...

At least its not keeping you awake at night


----------

