HAMMERNH
1:26 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
So UP held 36,000 and in reality we are averaging 42,000 at the London Stadium. So we have gone through all this and torn the guts out of the club for 6,000?!!!!!
|
neilalex
12:54 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Any optimism regarding us acquiring the stadium and doing anything with it is pretty unfounded in my opinion. Even if it was capable of being transformed there is no way that they would spend the money to do it. It simply wouldn't make financial sense.
Their valuation of the club will be based on the belief that we have a fit for purpose stadium at minimal cost. In essence part of the cost of building a new stadium will be factored into the valuation of the club. Therefore anyone acquiring the club would have to pay for the existing stadium, then knock it down and build a new one, since the cost of redesigning it would probably be similar. It just ain't gonna happen.
|
Mike Oxsaw
12:47 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Johnson 9:04 Tue Sep 11
I accept that, but seem to recall that he was adamant that the stadium would be specifically designed from the off to prevent it becoming a football stadium after the games.
Even if he knew fuck all about football in general, I assume he knew the local geography and that if the stadium was in an area lacking in professional premiership standard clubs, he wouldn't have wasted his time coming up with that clause.
I also suspect that, had, say, West London offered up a suitable winning venue for the Olympics, post-games conversion to a football stadium would have been a must-have (to ensure continued use).
|
simon.s
12:23 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Let’s not kid ourselves.
If the owners had the option to buy it tomorrow, would they spend the wedge needed to make it look anything like a proper football stadium?
It’s the reason they took it on in the first place because it was the cheap option.
|
Rossal
12:21 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
why cant it be changed due to the roof?
|
boleynkid
12:12 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Collyrob
Anything's possible but it would cost tens of millions to do it properly and therein lies the problem. Why would the owners pay out that kind of money when they have already said they are happy with the stadium as it is and why would they do that when there are plenty of fans who think the stadium is ok.
As many of us have said all along they had permission to re-develop the Boleyn Ground and increase the capacity to 45,000 and that is what they should have done.
|
dax47988
11:51 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
we definitely should have stayed at The Boleyn.
The only thing that counters that is that the Olympic Stadium would waste away and end up being like the Millenium Dome in the years before it became the O2. I think it won't be long before we are given the option to buy the OS as it is haemorhaging money
|
Northern Sold
11:18 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
... in other words... we could and should have stayed at the Boleyn.....
|
BulphanIron
10:04 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45158878
“Newham council says the average attendance at West Ham was 42,779 based on the 12 games it attended - which is 12,530 fans fewer than the club's season average figure of 55,309.”
|
Johnson
12:44 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Not with the roof as it is, no.
It’ll never change. Don’t believe any of the day dreaming on here, we had all this bollocks when the plans were out years back.
It is what it is.
|
collyrob
12:40 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
But is it possible?
|
Johnson
12:30 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Because we don’t own it and there’s no business case to do so even if we did.
|
collyrob
12:19 Wed Sep 12
Re: The London Stadium...
|
I don’t know the dynamics at all. But I was just reading the discussion of hampden Park being renovated. And someone posted the transformation of Stuttgart’s stadium, why can’t we do that?
|
Northern Sold
10:52 Tue Sep 11
Re: The London Stadium...
|
`In July, it was revealed £450,000 of taxpayers' money had been spent on unsuccessfully searching for a sponsor for the venue`
I find it very... very... very hard to believe that anyone would not want to have their name splattered all over that Cesspit.... I mean...
|
Far Cough
9:06 Tue Sep 11
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Coe was just a fucking mouthpiece for the Olympics, fuck all to do with our deal
|
Johnson
9:04 Tue Sep 11
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Presumably because he had nowt to do with the commercial arrangement between our lying cunt board and the incompetent civil service.
|
Mike Oxsaw
7:05 Tue Sep 11
Re: The London Stadium...
|
How come Lord Coe is still under the radar on all this?
Does he have details of another Jimmy Savile type figure in the BBC and/or Westminster village?
|
Gavros
4:10 Tue Sep 11
Re: The London Stadium...
|
tey can go fuck themselves.
Its in the public record that the woman said "its mainly thanks to West Ham" that they were losing money,
That's demonstrably false, and the club was right to show her up for it.
|
BulphanIron
4:10 Tue Sep 11
Re: The London Stadium...
|
Mex Martillo 4:08 Tue Sep 11
Re: The London Stadium...
Not quite the deal of century anymore is it...
|
Mex Martillo
4:08 Tue Sep 11
Re: The London Stadium...
|
It is never ending snidy shit
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/45479380
I would love the see operators faces if we walked away. Useless cunts deserve it.
|
dicksie3
10:26 Thu Sep 6
Re: The London Stadium...
|
It's just fucking shit.
All of it.
|
| 
