So, G&S, what are these exciting stadium plans of yours?

[Hampshire Hammer]

The main point here is the seats are just likely to be cordoned or screened off in the upper tiers.

They are unlikely to be taken away which means they can be utilised for other events, and no doubt even in football mode if so required.

True. Though if we assume the 49k is correct and it is in the planning application wpuld it not mean that another planning application would be required to increase it? It would be interesting to know what has changed to drop it from 54k.

[Rays Rock]

True. Though if we assume the 49k is correct and it is in the planning application wpuld it not mean that another planning application would be required to increase it? It would be interesting to know what has changed to drop it from 54k.

Wouldn't they still want use of those seats for other events such as world athletics finals, rugby World Cup and stadium concerts etc....
Therefore planning and licsencing would allow more than the 49k seat capacity that has been rumoured ?
Still 49 k is getting in to the region of questioning a move against increasing the Boleyn to say 43 k !

[brownout]

As Brady said that her biggest concern was the drop from 60,000 to 54,000 I wonder what she'll think about 49,000 (if that's the figure)?

[1mcavennie]

Hasn't Brady promised as part of the deal with the LLDC that 4,000 seats per game will be given away free - and the rest are meant to be cheaper than at the Boleyn. How is this going to work?

Is this just about selling the BG to pay off some debt with no real benefit of being in the OS?

[prophet:marginal]

At least we can look forward to the incredibly witty "Your ground's too big for you" at every home game.

That was funny at Cardiff last term. Locals most unimpressed!

[spyinthesky]

The main point here is the seats are just likely to be cordoned or screened off in the upper tiers. They are unlikely to be taken away which means they can be utilised for other events, and no doubt even in football mode if so required.

True. Though if we assume the 49k is correct and it is in the planning application wpuld it not mean that another planning application would be required to increase it? It would be interesting to know what has changed to drop it from 54k.

Dont think the actual total is too exact, I suspect there is considerable potential flexibility built in, it is probably quoted as the best set up initially to make sure the ground is pretty full on match days and that claims within the proposal as to distance from pitch can look most impressive et al. Not sure if it is used at greater capacities for other sports/events that there would be much argument later against incremental increases for West Ham as long as there is no 'behavioural' problems specific to the fans to hold against it. Its all about perception to suit circumstances both paper and real.

[mywhufc]

Not long according to this fella, nothing on Newham or LLDC planning portals yet

ExWHUemployee ‏@ExWHUemployee

Permission being granted by Newham council. It is on the committees next agenda I've been told. Capacity for the stadium is around 49000

It's not newhams to grant, it's down to the LLDC they do their own planning permissions.
Sounds like a load of crap to me.

[Rocketron]

My first thought upon reading that was that it meant plans for the Boleyn, which do need to go to Newham council.

[hammersk]

West Ham United move closer to securing Olympic Stadium deal with breakthrough agreementWest Ham moved one step closer to being handed the keys to the Olympic Stadium on Monday night after resolving the last of their major issues with London 2012 legacy chiefs.

Several weeks of intense negotiations between the two parties bore fruit on Monday when they reached an agreement on key areas of dispute, with a proposal expected to be put to the London Legacy Development Corporation’s board next Tuesday.

The big sticking point was the demand by Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London and the LLDC chairman, for a cut of any profit if West Ham were sold, something the club are understood to have conceded to.

Sources at Upton Park refused to comment on what had been agreed but there was optimism the approval of the LLDC board would be given, despite there being small hurdles still to clear.

An LLDC spokesman said on Monday night: “Things are going well but we’re not quite there yet.”

Any deal would allow West Ham to begin a thorough consultation process with their supporters, which could yet raise fresh issues of concern.

Monday’s successful meeting took place two years to the day since the club were first named preferred bidders to become anchor tenants of the £429million Olympic Stadium on a 99-year lease.

The bidding process was mired by controversy and legacy chiefs were forced to stage a fresh contest, which resulted in West Ham being awarded ‘highest bidder’ status in December.

That was because the LLDC was not completely satisfied with their offer, including their proposed £15million contribution to the £160million conversion budget required to install retractable seats and a full roof.

The majority of conversion costs are being covered by a mix of public funding, including a £40million loan from the local authority, Newham Council.

West Ham were caught off guard when Johnson made it clear he wanted a cut of any profit were the club to be sold after moving into the stadium.

An agreement in principle was reached over this, and although thrashing out the precise details took longer, West Ham are understood to feel Monday's offer represented fantastic value both for them and the taxpayer.

They were adamant selling up was not on the agenda of co-owners David Gold and David Sullivan, who claimed last month that the club were £100million in debt.

Moving to a new 60,000-seat stadium in the middle of a bumper new Premier League TV deal would certainly make them a more attractive acquisition.

Monday’s developments were also good news for organisers of the 2015 Rugby World Cup, who are keen to stage matches at the stadium.

An announcement on tournament venues is set to be made in the penultimate week of March and any further delay in West Ham being announced as tenants would have forced them to look elsewhere.

The club are unlikely to move in until the 2016-17 season, before which a series of other high-profile events have already been scheduled.

Last month saw the LLDC strike deals for the venue to hosts the Wireless and Hard Rock Calling festivals in July before announcing this year’s London Grand Prix — part of athletics’ elite Diamond League series — would move from Crystal Palace to the Olympic Stadium and be staged on the first anniversary of London 2012, July 27.

The arena will also host the 2017 World Athletics and IPC Athletics World Championships and there is an appetite for other major events to be held there.

[Pop Robson]

I suppose the debt is now back up to £100m due the the investments by the board, I guess the move should somehow bring that back down !

[gavrosh]

anyone know what proportion of West Ham's debt is owed to Sullivan and Gold, and what the interest rate is?

I have a sneaking suspicion that a deal to give the taxpayer a share of the profit might incentivise Gold and Sullivan to increase the clubs debt to them, and setting a high interest rate on that debt. They would by doing that increase their hold over the club as creditors (superior to shareholders) whilst extracting a healthy income, which at the same time would reduce the valuation of the club, to such an extent perhaps that it would not trigger a dividend to the taxpayer on sale of it. The new owner could then come to an agreement with G&S on paying off that debt, raising the valuation of the club post-sale. In this way they could circumvent payment to the taxpayer.

[Hammer83]

I suppose the debt is now back up to £100m due the the investments by the board, I guess the move should somehow bring that back down !

The debt is whatever they choose it to be here is two examples of what I mean

The transfer window has just closed without no proper fees being spent on players so it's a £100m.If they get interviewed about their time spent here they will get Karen to say we have done a great job getting our debt down from £100m plus to £70m.

[paulhs1]

anyone know what proportion of West Ham's debt is owed to Sullivan and Gold, and what the interest rate is?

When was the last time the clubs accounts was published?

[Pop Robson]

When was the last time the clubs accounts was published?

Surprisingly as The Pink Palermo predicted they are later than normal this year !

Previous


2011

http://www.whufc.com/articles/20120116/ ... 84_2578852" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2002-2011

http://www.whufc.com/page/FinancialRepo ... 62,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ForeverHammers]

Next Accounts Due: 28/02/2013

All in good time.

[Denbighammer]

Next Accounts Due: 28/02/2013

All in good time.

Or not, as is the case here.

[the pink palermo]

The accounts will be released a day or two after the decision to award the Athletics stadium to West Ham is announced .

Possibly the same day , in a coordinated effort to show "look , we're skint , we can't afford to pay much to the converting costs " etc etc etc ad ****ing infinitum .......

It's a well worked routine that cons the masses .

[Rocketron]

The accounts will be released a day or two after the decision to award the Athletics stadium to West Ham is announced .

Possibly the same day , in a coordinated effort to show "look , we're skint , we can't afford to pay much to the converting costs " etc etc etc ad ****ing infinitum .......

It's a well worked routine that cons the masses .

I'm very aware of your views on the OS, Pinky.
Don't you think the club should be reticent about payments for the refurbishment?
After all if we don't move in, what will become of the place?

[the pink palermo]

I'm very aware of your views on the OS, Pinky.
Don't you think the club should be reticent about payments for the refurbishment?
After all if we don't move in, what will become of the place?

Ron I'd like our owners to be honest and not to try and squeeze the last penny from every deal .The whole world can see their plan , and yet they persist in this silly game of pretending they are on their uppers .

It's laughable .

They bought the club knowing about all of it's debts .The price they paid Straumur for the shares reflects the level of debt .

They've since put in £24m of equity - in 3 years , and spent most of it sacking Managers, and dodgy players .

They keep telling the fans they are buying players out of their own pocket .........

Seriously , do they really think we're all stupid ? It's offensive .

As for the OS, I couldn't care less what happens to it .That's Lord Coes issue , not West Hams .

Now, if they release the accounts and they show they have injected sufficent equity to pay off our clubs debt , I'll pop back on here and eat an enormous slice of humble pie and apologise profusely .

Don't hold your breath .

[Rocketron]

I understand (and generally agree) with all that, Pinky.
My point is why should we have to pay for the LLDC/Government mistake in not ensuring the OS was suitable for use by the only entity inthe world that can stop it being a White Elephant?