Espanyol's Olympic Stadium

[Pop Robson]

Probably be the same for us, sell out v Man Utd, close to sell out v chelsea,spurs, liverpool, man city, kick off times, prices and tv depending.

Rest of the time, 30,000 empty seats

[IronMaiden123]

KB mentioned a number of venues she and DS were going to visit ahead of converting Stratford , one of which was Hertha's ground , another, from memory , was the Allianz Arena .

One of course has a track, the other does not - this was volunteered at the infamous SAB meeting .It was, to my ears, further confirmation of a lack of detailed plans for Stratford, as surely , had any detailed plans existed, there would be no need to visit anymore stadiums .

Stade de France may have been another ........

Sounds like a jolly up to me .

It would be laughable if it wasn't so serious for the future of the club.

[Iron-worx]

so your not trying to use Hertha in the Olympic stadium as a reason why it would work for west ham, because that's how I've read it.

How could you tell from Hertha Berlins move to the Olympiastadion 49 years ago whether a similar move would work for West Ham ?

There are definite similarities, Herthas old stadium 35'000 / Boleyn 35'000, both new stadiums designed for Olympic track and field with much higher capacities, but there are so many other factors that differ that it's not possible to reach any definite conclusion....

However it can be seen that there are no Hertha / Olympiastadion factors that raise an alarm....

Hertha have been there nearly 50 years, their smallest attendance this season was larger than the capacity of their old stadium, their average attendance was nearly 20'000 higher than the capacity of their old stadium, and they filled the ground on two occasions which is over twice as many as they would have got into their old stadium - It obviously works for Hertha Berlin fifty years down the line.

Doesn't mean that it would work for West Ham, but it does mean that there's nothing alarming in the comparison - A stadium designed for Olympic track and field has been successfully used for club football.

[Iron-worx]

Probably be the same for us, sell out v Man Utd, close to sell out v chelsea,spurs, liverpool, man city, kick off times, prices and tv depending.

Rest of the time, 30,000 empty seats

Yes I agree, the difference being that I don't see that as a bad thing....

The alternative is to lock 30'000ish out Vs Man U, Chelsea, Spurs, Liverpool etc.....

That's an awful lot of punters locked out...

And it's an awful lot of revenue not gained.

[James P]

I don't see anything untoward about any of that, and the stadium certainly isn't one that was either designed or built with it in mind to make it difficult to convert to football use.

It was specifically designed in order that it would be converted to a 25,000 seater permanent stadium following the Olympic Games. Ken Livingstone even specifically mentioned that West Ham would not be able to move into the stadium. This was done intentionally in order to uphold the legacy of athletiocs rather than football after the event.

Link

Once the Olympics are over, it will be turned into a 25-000-seater community venue and could also become home to a lower-league football or rugby club.

"It's a stadium that delivers on everything we said we would deliver on; a stadium with track and field as its primary legacy; a stadium that will be reduced from 80,000 seats in Olympic mode to a 25,000-seater community base," - Seb Coe

London mayor Ken Livingstone said major football clubs such as West Ham would not be able to become tenants.

He said: "We made a commitment there would be a permanent athletics facility and we have honoured that commitment.

"For West Ham, we have identified a site much better-suited to their needs."

[Tin Hat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0-0-TBU5rU

[Iron-worx]

It was specifically designed in order that it would be converted to a 25,000 seater permanent stadium following the Olympic Games. Ken Livingstone even specifically mentioned that West Ham would not be able to move into the stadium. This was done intentionally in order to uphold the legacy of athletiocs rather than football after the event.

Link

Once the Olympics are over, it will be turned into a 25-000-seater community venue and could also become home to a lower-league football or rugby club.

"It's a stadium that delivers on everything we said we would deliver on; a stadium with track and field as its primary legacy; a stadium that will be reduced from 80,000 seats in Olympic mode to a 25,000-seater community base," - Seb Coe

London mayor Ken Livingstone said major football clubs such as West Ham would not be able to become tenants.

He said: "We made a commitment there would be a permanent athletics facility and we have honoured that commitment.

"For West Ham, we have identified a site much better-suited to their needs."

You have actually included in your own post that: '...And could also become home to a lower league FOOTBALL or rugby club'.

I don't need to say anything else do I

[James P]

A lower league football stadium and a Premier League football stadium are two completely different things. It was specifically designed to be a 25,000 seater stadium and not a ground big enough for a Premiership football team, and certainly not one who currently reside in a 35,000 seater stadium and want to expand.

The fact the mayor at the time categorically stated that West Ham couldn't become tenants should tell you all you need to know. Keep pushing your argument on the basis of semantics if you wish, but it is clear as day the stadium was designed specifically to ensure it wouldn't be taken on by a Premiership football club after the Olympics.

[Iron-worx]

A lower league football stadium and a Premier League football stadium are two completely different things. It was specifically designed to be a 25,000 seater stadium and not a ground big enough for a Premiership football team, and certainly not one who currently reside in a 35,000 seater stadium and want to expand.

The fact the mayor at the time categorically stated that West Ham couldn't become tenants should tell you all you need to know. Keep pushing your argument on the basis of semantics if you wish, but it is clear as day the stadium was designed specifically to ensure it wouldn't be taken on by a Premiership football club after the Olympics.

I see, so it was designed specifically not to be easily convertable to a football stadium with the exception that it might be converted to a football stadium even when it was planned to be reduced to 25'000....

You've killed your own argument, I couldn't have done so better myself

[James P]

I don't know how to say it any clearer so I'll leave you to it.

[Iron-worx]

:eh:

I don't know how to say it any clearer so I'll leave you to it.

So the stadium with it's top tier removed is suitable as a 25'000 seat football stadium, but leave the top tier and hey presto it becomes designed not to be a football stadium...

Yes, I think you better had leave it to me don't you

[James P]

No, not a football stadium. A 25,000 seater athletics stadium which a small football club could move into.

[Iron-worx]

What they said was we are designing an 80'000 seat stadium for Olympic track and field, but it is our intention to take the top tier off after the Olympic games so as it reduces to 25'000 seats....

After doing that it won't be suitable for a premiership club because it wont seat enough, but it will be suitable for a lower league football club who don't need to seat as many....

That does not make it a stadium designed not to accommodate a football club, it makes it a stadium that can accommodate a football club, they stated lower league football club themselves so definitely not designed so as to exclude football.....

Further down the line they changed their mind about the top tier and it stays, it doesn't have to go staying was always a possibility if not an intention....

That does not make it a stadium designed not to accommodate a football club either, it still makes it a stadium that can accommodate a football club but because there's more seats it can accommodate a bigger club....

Its a stadium designed for Olympic track and field with nothing done to it to make it specifically unsuitable for football.

[James P]

Its a stadium designed for Olympic track and field with nothing done to it to make it specifically unsuitable for football.

So what about the lack of concourses for the upper tiers as they were designed to be removed? Currently all the toilets and food drink facilities are outside the stadium. Do you think 40,000 people will be able to make the equivalent journey of the top of the Bobby Moore Upper to the supporters club and back to take a piss at half time during a football match?

What about the lack of corporate facilities? Not just boxes but lounges, bars, dining rooms, conference rooms etc? You can't move a Premier League football team into a new large stadium and not have these available? Is the current Olympic Stadium design suitable to allow for these facilities?

Not taking off the scaffold upper tier does not make the stadium suddenly suitable for a larger football club because there are now more seats. The stadium was specifically designed not to be suitable for a Premiership football club.

[uptonparkhurst]

Not taking off the scaffold upper tier does not make the stadium suddenly suitable for a larger football club because there are now more seats. The stadium was specifically designed not to be suitable for a Premiership football club.

Yes, indeed.
In fact, Coe never wanted a professional football club anywhere near the OS:

"You cannot just leave an 80,000-seater stadium in a lunar landscape without any thought of how the legacy will pan out over the years to come.
We will be constructing a permanent 25,000-seater stadium with temporary seating for 50,000. It is a very well-thought-out legacy.'"
But he maintained: "It doesn't stop us talking to local rugby clubs and amateur football clubs."

Full article:
http://www.metro.co.uk/sport/extra/69928-olympic-stadium-wont-become-a-football-ground

[Sweeney Bod]

I do tend to miss out on the OS threads as little changes. But it is good to see my beloved, "We could be them" Berlin still get a mention.

I would just like to say, Berlin is the Capital of the only European Country that has a top tier average attendance higher than the EPL, and Hertha is the only MAJOR club in a city with a Metropolitan population over 4.5 million.

[Sweeney Bod]

What they said was we are designing an 80'000 seat stadium for Olympic track and field, but it is our intention to take the top tier off after the Olympic games so as it reduces to 25'000 seats....

After doing that it won't be suitable for a premiership club because it wont seat enough, but it will be suitable for a lower league football club who don't need to seat as many....

That does not make it a stadium designed not to accommodate a football club, it makes it a stadium that can accommodate a football club, they stated lower league football club themselves so definitely not designed so as to exclude football.....

Further down the line they changed their mind about the top tier and it stays, it doesn't have to go staying was always a possibility if not an intention....

That does not make it a stadium designed not to accommodate a football club either, it still makes it a stadium that can accommodate a football club but because there's more seats it can accommodate a bigger club....

Its a stadium designed for Olympic track and field with nothing done to it to make it specifically unsuitable for football.

It was not designed to be anti football, but it was designed with no regards to Football being played at the venue. That was the brief, and that is what the architects worked towards.

[Iron-worx]

The stadium was specifically designed not to be suitable for a Premiership football club.

Ah I see....

Put your foot in your own mouth by posting that a lower league football club was definitely foreseen as a possible tenant in a post supposedly proving that the stadium was specifically designed not for football.....

Then realise that what you were arguing is a complete dead end because a football club was certainly considered....

So change it to the stadium was specifically designed not to be suitable for a PREMIERSHIP football club....

Note the change folks, from was designed not to be suitable for football, now changed to designed not to be suitable for premiership football......

Again it's nonsense isn't it, and the evidence is again in what you posted yourself.....

Given that the stadium was foreseen suitable for a football club up to 25'000 seats then does it become unsuitable at 25'001 seats ?

All the points that you raise as applicable to a premiership club are also applicable to a club seating 25'000.

At what point does it sink in that its as simple as the stadium was designed for Olympic track and field and the more that you switch goalposts the more you get yourself in a tangle.

[Iron-worx]

It was not designed to be anti football, but it was designed with no regards to Football being played at the venue. That was the brief, and that is what the architects worked towards.

Yes, that's about it, they designed a stadium for Olympic track and field

[Hammer110]

What about the lack of corporate facilities? Not just boxes but lounges, bars, dining rooms, conference rooms etc? You can't move a Premier League football team into a new large stadium and not have these available? Is the current Olympic Stadium design suitable to allow for these facilities?

What about them, they weren't needed in an Olympic Stadium nor in a 25,000 seat athletics.stadium, so why spend money on including them. Can they be added, I believe so and as the club planned to add them their advisor (whom I believe were Populus the stadium architects) obviously believed so. The top level is just a meccano set reconfiguration cant be that hard and the under-croft is largely empty space.