Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Aye the whole deal stinks, particularly the Brady/Boris link. Tags on nicely to the conversation in the politics thread recently about the risk/reward being shared unevenly between taxpayers and private companies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We all knew that this was a poor deal for the taxpayer and even inflation in costs would outstrip any profit.

 

I can see this being a case of West Ham winning even more though. They will be given a huge loan/grant from the government to make it a permanent 60k seater football stadium. The athletics will move out, probably to nowhere, and the council’s will be given their money back through the government grant/loan and West Ham will be given sole ownership.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We all knew that this was a poor deal for the taxpayer and even inflation in costs would outstrip any profit.

 

I can see this being a case of West Ham winning even more though. They will be given a huge loan/grant from the government to make it a permanent 60k seater football stadium. The athletics will move out, probably to nowhere, and the council’s will be given their money back through the government grant/loan and West Ham will be given sole ownership.

 

Have I missed something? What has changed to the commitment to maintain it as an athletics stadium, at least in part? Genuine question. Levy made pretty sure that was nailed down.

 

Also: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5136191/Sadiq-Khan-control-West-Hams-London-Stadium.html

 

The mistakes belonged to Khan's Labour predecessor Ken Livingstone and the Blair government. Signing off on a stadium fit only for athletics was a massive error. The only option for Boris was conversion to a multi-use venue...

 

The only option? Bull, and furthermore, s***.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We all knew that this was a poor deal for the taxpayer and even inflation in costs would outstrip any profit.

 

I can see this being a case of West Ham winning even more though. They will be given a huge loan/grant from the government to make it a permanent 60k seater football stadium. The athletics will move out, probably to nowhere, and the council’s will be given their money back through the government grant/loan and West Ham will be given sole ownership.

 

Have I missed something? What has changed to the commitment to maintain it as an athletics stadium, at least in part? Genuine question. Levy made pretty sure that was nailed down.

 

Also: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5136191/Sadiq-Khan-control-West-Hams-London-Stadium.html

 

The mistakes belonged to Khan's Labour predecessor Ken Livingstone and the Blair government. Signing off on a stadium fit only for athletics was a massive error. The only option for Boris was conversion to a multi-use venue...

 

The only option? Bull, and furthermore, s***.

As time goes on you will just hear the West Ham owners complain of how the athletics gets in the way of their season. We have already heard the excursus of West Ham’s first few games being moved to away games as an excuse. You will then get people asking if we need an athletics stadium so big. We already have people commenting on how it’s a poor football stadium.

 

To satisfy everyone I think remodelling to a football stadium (like the Moscow stadium) where there is more space for services under the stands which are closer to the pitch is the best outcome. Athletics should be given it’s own dedicated stadium, though I think we all know that it will end up being shafted once again.

West Ham should be made to buy the stadium or lease it at a reasonable price.

 

We all knew sooner or later the authorities would realise that they have been shafted and that ultimately Gold and Sullivan would end up getting a football stadium out of it either for free or at a reduced rate, if they hadn’t already sold them club (and problem) off to someone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...