Our number 8, presumably Valencia or Sakho, is stood offside - so they got that bit rightdavids cross wrote:
This image is so fake...
We appear to be on the attack.....
OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Moderators: Gnome, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks
- bubbles1966
- Posts: 66972
- Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
- Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
- Has liked: 2437 likes
- Total likes: 4293 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
- Tommy Taylor's Jockstrap
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 11:14 am
- Location: Armenia City in the Sky
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Is the right answer.Believer wrote:The ironic thing is that had Spurs and Orient etc not made such a song and a dance about our "state aid" resulting in us not being allowed to own the OS, they might have had a case here. As it now stands, we are purely tenants paying an agreed rent to a landlord. Whatever penalties have to be endured will not fall on the tenant if I'm correct in my thinking.
Strikes me that Levy has been on the drink with one of his Fleet St cronies......
Under the original agreement that would have seen us buy the site, we could have left our arses hanging out the window here, but as tenants I can't see it costing us anything...
- Believer
- Posts: 9150
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:35 pm
- Has liked: 1389 likes
- Total likes: 735 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
the pink palermo wrote:Oh dear .Would now be a good time etc
What exactly have we as a club done wrong ? Have we done anything different to City ? Did Liverpool, Bolton, Crewe, any Northern team make the huge complaints being made down here ?
Let's face it, the main complaints are coming from spurs and levy and they're just worried at the fact that we can become as big if not bigger than them.
As you quite rightly state, Spurs have got legal aid for their ground and yet have the hypocrisy to moan at us. This said same team who lied, spied and god knows what else to try and win the stadium for themselves and at the same time jeopardise our move.
It's about time our club came out fighting about this. Point out the positive effects to the community etc. I'm getting more than a bit sick of the constant bitching aimed at our club. Had Spurs won the bid and got the OS, there'd be nothing but positive spin in the press every week about how they've stepped in to save the white elephant etc etc. we just appear to be sitting back letting the bullies take our sweets.....
Online
- Big George
- Posts: 13291
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:59 pm
- Location: ENFP-T
- Has liked: 133 likes
- Total likes: 274 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Like Manny Omoyimni, like Tevez, we didn't do the proper paperwork and thought we could get away with it. It was never in the best interests in the club and now it's not even in the best interests of the owners. We should never have gone near it
- Believer
- Posts: 9150
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:35 pm
- Has liked: 1389 likes
- Total likes: 735 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
What paperwork ? I'm confused.Big George wrote:Like Manny Omoyimni, like Tevez, we didn't do the proper paperwork and thought we could get away with it. It was never in the best interests in the club and now it's not even in the best interests of the owners. We should never have gone near it
- sicknote
- Plumbing the depths
- Posts: 30684
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 9:34 pm
- Has liked: 99 likes
- Total likes: 154 likes
- Contact:
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Believer
It was never a law when city took over the coms
So yoj have to forget bringing there stadium into it
This was instigated by the E U to counter the state aid Barcelona and real madrid seem to have got regarding odd land deals,
And a fair few have warned about this for a long time
As for spurs and orient not going for that angle, they couldn't until there are figures and actual costs to adjudicate on, this can only be levied as a tax and on accounts, so spurs and the O's knew they couldn't
Its been an issue put down on here as rubbish but trust me its unfair competition and badly drawn up contracts will and always were an issue for a lot of parties, the tax payer has every right to be aware where his/ her moneg goes and if it helpong a business make profits then they will rightlh be up in arms over it, any business not just football, competition laws and state aid are dangerous things to play with
It was never a law when city took over the coms
So yoj have to forget bringing there stadium into it
This was instigated by the E U to counter the state aid Barcelona and real madrid seem to have got regarding odd land deals,
And a fair few have warned about this for a long time
As for spurs and orient not going for that angle, they couldn't until there are figures and actual costs to adjudicate on, this can only be levied as a tax and on accounts, so spurs and the O's knew they couldn't
Its been an issue put down on here as rubbish but trust me its unfair competition and badly drawn up contracts will and always were an issue for a lot of parties, the tax payer has every right to be aware where his/ her moneg goes and if it helpong a business make profits then they will rightlh be up in arms over it, any business not just football, competition laws and state aid are dangerous things to play with
- Believer
- Posts: 9150
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:35 pm
- Has liked: 1389 likes
- Total likes: 735 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Thanks Sicknote. However, we are going to have the use of the stadium for about 25 days a season. We are sharing stadium naming rights, the corporate boxes being installed will be used by athletics, rugby, concerts etc. we will not make any money from that. We offered to buy the stadium before one pile was driven in and were knocked back. Once they realised that they'd dropped a clanged, an open bid was allowed which we won. We are paying money from the sale of our ground towards the remodelling costs. We will be paying rent every year for the next 100 years. The money that the Govt or state will make from West Ham will far outweigh what's been paid (in time granted but we didn't level the rent costs to my knowledge). We have been told what to pay and will pay it.sicknote wrote:Believer
It was never a law when city took over the coms
So yoj have to forget bringing there stadium into it
This was instigated by the E U to counter the state aid Barcelona and real madrid seem to have got regarding odd land deals,
And a fair few have warned about this for a long time
As for spurs and orient not going for that angle, they couldn't until there are figures and actual costs to adjudicate on, this can only be levied as a tax and on accounts, so spurs and the O's knew they couldn't
Its been an issue put down on here as rubbish but trust me its unfair competition and badly drawn up contracts will and always were an issue for a lot of parties, the tax payer has every right to be aware where his/ her moneg goes and if it helpong a business make profits then they will rightlh be up in arms over it, any business not just football, competition laws and state aid are dangerous things to play with
Whether anyone likes the move for whatever reason or not, we would in this case appear to have done no wrong. If the Govt have failed to do something I struggle to see where we come into the argument.
It stinks of Spurs, Levy and a large bunch of sour grapes to me.
- kitthehammer
- Posts: 12345
- Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 1:11 am
- Location: way out west in Egham
- Has liked: 74 likes
- Total likes: 303 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
How can we be liable if we are tenants?
If anyone has to pay out it would be the owners, surely
If anyone has to pay out it would be the owners, surely
Online
- Big George
- Posts: 13291
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:59 pm
- Location: ENFP-T
- Has liked: 133 likes
- Total likes: 274 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Because we are the beneficiaries of the state aid, we are paying nowhere near the market rent. Not Difficult case to prove, it will cripple the club.think about getting a Tevez judgement against us every year for the next 99 yearskitthehammer wrote:How can we be liable if we are tenants?
If anyone has to pay out it would be the owners, surely
- Believer
- Posts: 9150
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:35 pm
- Has liked: 1389 likes
- Total likes: 735 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
My thoughts as well. If you hire a car, you would be right to assume that the hire company have registered it, got the insurance in place and road tax etc. you don't drive it down the road, get pulled by plod and have to pay any fines.kitthehammer wrote:How can we be liable if we are tenants?
If anyone has to pay out it would be the owners, surely
This is just another stick to beat us with and it annoys me that this far down the line we still haven't made an official statement to the press about our part in it and the benefits we are bringing to the community etc. yes, Karren comes out with sound bites in her column etc but nothing to the level that Spurs would have done had the boot been on the other foot.
The silence from our lot is ridiculous. They can't even show us the finished stadium pictures or quote sighting distances to us so this lack of information can only be fueling the flames being lit by The Guardian today and no doubt The Mail tomorrow etc etc....
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
As some of us have been saying, the deal West Ham got is too good to be true - or it would be if the it was a proper football stadium.
The powers that be were desperate to get a Premier league football club into the OS. Gold, Sullivan & Brady were desperate to get there no matter what the fans thought. It has just been a matter of time before this deal was challenged and some of the statements from G,S & B will add weight to the case against us.
Of course if everything hadn't been kept so secret the deal would have been properly scrutinised at the outset and we wouldn't have these potential costs hanging over us.
The powers that be were desperate to get a Premier league football club into the OS. Gold, Sullivan & Brady were desperate to get there no matter what the fans thought. It has just been a matter of time before this deal was challenged and some of the statements from G,S & B will add weight to the case against us.
Of course if everything hadn't been kept so secret the deal would have been properly scrutinised at the outset and we wouldn't have these potential costs hanging over us.
Online
- Big George
- Posts: 13291
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:59 pm
- Location: ENFP-T
- Has liked: 133 likes
- Total likes: 274 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
No fun knowing you've right all along is it?brownout wrote:As some of us have been saying, the deal West Ham got is too good to be true - or it would be if the it was a proper football stadium.
The powers that be were desperate to get a Premier league football club into the OS. Gold, Sullivan & Brady were desperate to get there no matter what the fans thought. It has just been a matter of time before this deal was challenged and some of the statements from G,S & B will add weight to the case against us.
Of course if everything hadn't been kept so secret the deal would have been properly scrutinised at the outset and we wouldn't have these potential costs hanging over us.
- Believer
- Posts: 9150
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:35 pm
- Has liked: 1389 likes
- Total likes: 735 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
So we should have stood up and said "no no no - we want to pay "X" amount at least" despite agreeing to everything asked of us ?Big George wrote: Because we are the beneficiaries of the state aid, we are paying nowhere near the market rent. Not Difficult case to prove, it will cripple the club.think about getting a Tevez judgement against us every year for the next 99 years
Sorry but I'm not buying that. The tenant or tenants in this case don't set the rent charges. If anyone has ballsed up it's the LLDC / Govt. Again ! They should of done the sensible thing in the first place and Llowed us to inject our initial £100m offer prior to starting the build but Coe and his cronies thought that Athletics was capable of operating within their own means for life. They got carried away on the Olympics wave believing that they would sell out events every week for the next duration. Only later did they realise that maybe they'd dropped a clanger. If you were to ask Coe now whether or not we should have been allowed to inject £100m at the outset and make the stadium football friendly from the off, my guess is he'd agree. They created a monster and we have IMO bailed them out from having a £500m white elephant for only £169m. As far as I'm concerned, we are paying for modifications to what would be an expensive empty bowl. The £500m stadium would have had to be managed and paid for etc until the Japanese paid £1 for it or something like the O2.
Instead, for a cost of £169m we are making it useable and in doing so, creating a stadium which can be used for corporate events, concerts, rugby, athletics etc indefinitely. Yes we have got favourable terms in paying back the £169m but really, instead of people getting all uppity about it, we should be applauded for saving the Govt money.
- sicknote
- Plumbing the depths
- Posts: 30684
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 9:34 pm
- Has liked: 99 likes
- Total likes: 154 likes
- Contact:
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
If you hired a car or van for work through say newham council for say 2 pounds a week and put it down as a business cost, rather than say 150 pound a week at europcar , it would be unfair competition over any rival of yours in business no matter what business you are in its state aid, taxpayers money is not there for business to compete unfairly or profit where they would not if the state had no given them a caveat
The state is not making a penny of your profit, you are and thats why any competition rules and laws will look at your books and accounts and tax you accordingly, and penally if you are the sole beneficiary company in Europe of such a state aid deal
The council and govt are not liable at all, unless they profit from a private business
The state is not making a penny of your profit, you are and thats why any competition rules and laws will look at your books and accounts and tax you accordingly, and penally if you are the sole beneficiary company in Europe of such a state aid deal
The council and govt are not liable at all, unless they profit from a private business
- Believer
- Posts: 9150
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:35 pm
- Has liked: 1389 likes
- Total likes: 735 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Sorry but we are going to have to agree to disagree. I don't doubt what you're saying is correct in theory but who else is going to use the stadium ? If we now back out the deal will be liable for that as well ? If we sit up and agree and basically say, " you know what, this is all a bit too controversial for us, we're going to remain where we are and look at alternatives for a new stadium", will we get fined for that as well ? If not, that is precisely what I'd do. Walk away and tell the Govt to deal with it. Pay whatever compensation we have to Galliard and walk away. Sit back and watch "the legacy" crumble !sicknote wrote:If your hired a car or van for work through say newham council for say 2 pounds a week and put it down as a business cost, rather than say 150 pound a week at europcar , it would be unfaor competition over any rival of yours in bisiness no matter what business you are in its state aid, taxpayers money is not there for business to compete unfairly or profit where they would not if the state had no given them a caveat
The state is not making a penny of your profit, you are and thats why any competition rules and laws will look at your books and accounts and tax you accordingly, and penally if you are the sole beneficiary company in Europe of such a state aid deal
The council and govt are not liable at all, unless they profit from a private business
- the pink palermo
- Huge noggin
- Posts: 45058
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
- Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
- Has liked: 759 likes
- Total likes: 2943 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Are you joking ? The entire move has been done in a cloud of secrecy , poor consultative process, a bogus poll , and what some may call a deal too dodgy for the taxpayer .That's before I mention the fact ordinary supporters will be asked to pay for a ticket while Brave Sir Robin will be able to distribute 100k a season to his local voters .Tickets for votes ? Outrageous .Believer wrote:
What exactly have we as a club done wrong ?
Clearly we have or maybe the law has changed .The fact is many well informed people have been asking questions about this deal and it could yet come back to haunt us .Believer wrote: Have we done anything different to City ?
Frankly if this ever reaches a court I doubt the judges will have heard of either club so the old "stoke 'em up with the spurs threat" doesn't wash .The fact is they are a competitor .The fact is they are shelling out a fortune to stay competitive while we are handed almost for free a stadium built at the tax payers cost .No wonder they are complaining .Believer wrote: Let's face it, the main complaints are coming from spurs and levy and they're just worried at the fact that we can become as big if not bigger than them.
I have made no such statement .Believer wrote: As you quite rightly state, Spurs have got legal aid for their ground and yet have the hypocrisy to moan at us.
Me too .That's why I wish we behaved ourselves at a senior level .Karren has decided to enter the murky world of politics .It's a rough business and by doing so she is dragging our club into that arena .If she wants to be a politician, she should go and be one, but sever her ties with the club .Believer wrote: I'm getting more than a bit sick of the constant bitching aimed at our club.
The fact they've played their cards better is a reflection of the calibre of the executives running each club .Believer wrote: Had Spurs won the bid and got the OS, there'd be nothing but positive spin in the press every week about how they've stepped in to save the white elephant etc etc. we just appear to be sitting back letting the bullies take our sweets.....
Levy is a pro , Brady an amateur .I've been telling people that for years .
We can't even organise the season ticket sales properly ffs .
- Denbighammer
- Posts: 12871
- Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:53 pm
- Location: Dodging, Dipping, Diving, Ducking and Dodging.
- Has liked: 697 likes
- Total likes: 431 likes
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
Regardless of the legal issues, the perception amongst the public, both football and non-football fans, is that we've cheated our way into a taxpayer-funded new stadium. Everyone will hate us. Does that really matter? It can't be a positive thing.
Is it all really worth it? Not that it matters now, we can't shut the stable door as that horse has well and truly bolted. Lets just hope we don't get left with a 3-legged donkey.
Is it all really worth it? Not that it matters now, we can't shut the stable door as that horse has well and truly bolted. Lets just hope we don't get left with a 3-legged donkey.
Re: OS to cost West Ham millions in EU penalties
so we are liable because we negotiated a good deal?? i dont see the logic.
if it is a great deal then the blame lays with those who agreed to contract.
if it is a great deal then the blame lays with those who agreed to contract.