leveller wrote:Yes it is. Name me a worse one for anyone who disagrees.
Watford's a contender.
|Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.
Always gonna be that way....
Big money investment or say £300 seats all around
Only two ways it was ever going to work and be full
Christ knows how bad it will be next year, reckon we will get a couple of attendances less than the Boleyn... Hull on a cold winter's night
They'll probably offer even more plus tickets for £99 and then spout on about having 20,000 kids attending. Quite a few of these "kids" wear all white flip down trousers.
The scaffolding exhibit clinched it.
Scaffolding of the year for sure, have you seen whats under those lower tiers?
No wonder it costs so much to do they have to build a 50ft Steel Black Widow to weave it every year.
Watching Chelsea's new stadium and the Spuds both being built on the existing plots makes me sick.
We could have done that.
Last edited by Up the Junction on Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited by moderator.
Edited by a moderator
Give up trying to moderate this forum with continual put downs
Just noticed that London Stadium beat this place for the accolade:
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3934/3244 ... 0dc5_b.jpg
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/768/33134 ... dd88_b.jpg
and there's all of us complaining about bent referees
http://sportsvenuebusiness.com/wp-conte ... nodar3.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It looks great. I wonder if it beats our "largest digital screen".
Does look better than ours, but that is still some gap from the Stand to the pitch in the 2nd photo down! I reckon it would have us complaining anyway.
While I am super excited about the new Spurs stadium it is quite scary to think it is going to cost something close to 800m. With all due respect to the Daves I don't think they could or would ever have done that.
I was actually in Moscow when Russia had their friendly with Costa Rica in Krasnodar. Remember thinking why they'd have it there ahead of Moscow as I wanted to go to it. I can see why now. Bring on the World Cup.
I agree , and I'm shocked Joe Lewis has done it for you lot .
Of course it's not a net figure is it ? By the time all the other side deals around your entire redevelopment get finished he will have made money from it , and possibly loaded your club up with a chunk of debt .
That sort of dough, and perhaps more crucially, that amount of time was never in the Daves capabilities .
Property is a long term game , Sullivan knows that , so does Lewis , the difference being one of them has a lot more reddies than the other .
That's what happens when you are run by a tax dodging scoundrel, the odd 800 million here and there means nothing.
Not that any of the money will come from his own pocket of course.
To be honest am just jealous we don't have our own Cayman Island beach bum to sort out the investment required.
Too bloody late now though.
The OS cost £798m, it's just we didn't pay for it, or not we as in West Ham anyway.
Last edited by leveller on Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
How much do you reckon Spurs have saved up over the last 5 years? £1m net spent on transfers in the that time.
With the squad they have now they could probably not spend a penny for the next 4 years and still push top 4 every season.
They'll make about £150m a season in TV rights alone won't they?
Yep Pinky it's net but Tottenham have said very recently that Brexit has pushed up costs by 20%. I think it is going to be a fair while before Spurs see substantially increased revenue as a result of the build. Be interesting to see how much additional income the OS is giving West Ham in a few years against the new WHL.
Users browsing this forum: Bamber Gascoigne, bengeo, blahblahblah, Colours never run, cthammer, geraldo, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Kentammer, Penfold711, sanchoz, scatts, screech, sjfrost1001, Sweeney Bod, The Boleyn Hound, Vdogg, Wembley1966, YorksHammer and 116 guests