Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Moderators: Gnome, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks
- kaybee15
- Posts: 2566
- Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 9:06 pm
- Location: And I ask again - only slightly louder - HOW?
- Contact:
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
The petition was started by Richard Hunt. Not quite as good as Richard Head, but say it quickly enough and it still works to a degree...
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
A 'Hunt' with his knickers in a twist over West Ham?? Obviously not a real 'Hunt'...
- Doc H Ball
- Posts: 14693
- Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:29 pm
- Location: on parole
- Has liked: 917 likes
- Total likes: 1919 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
If Spurs had been awarded it on the same terms, everyone on here would sign. ****, we'd have started the damn thing.
Who has gone on record and said:
'We have got the deal of the century'.
'We have a veto (over shared use)'.
''This will allow us to take the next step up that we otherwise couldn't afford'.
Sounds like admissions to me.
This one will run and run. Of course, the Club could seek to refer the matter to the EC if everything is above board to stave off potential action in the next 10 years but they have chosen not to do so.
Who has gone on record and said:
'We have got the deal of the century'.
'We have a veto (over shared use)'.
''This will allow us to take the next step up that we otherwise couldn't afford'.
Sounds like admissions to me.
This one will run and run. Of course, the Club could seek to refer the matter to the EC if everything is above board to stave off potential action in the next 10 years but they have chosen not to do so.
- MD_HM
- Posts: 7677
- Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:00 am
- Location: London
- Has liked: 37 likes
- Total likes: 339 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
What was the outcome of the Man City public enquiry?
Not our fault they original built it with no future use that could bring in income, all that legacy b*llocks got in the way of what's best financially
Not our fault they original built it with no future use that could bring in income, all that legacy b*llocks got in the way of what's best financially
- hammers92
- Posts: 12082
- Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:42 pm
- Has liked: 317 likes
- Total likes: 1748 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Since when did people feel that that were angry at being ripped off as a taxpayer? Of all the things to provide an argument that you're not getting value for money, a football stadium is being used. Nothing about the bigger picture and what government stupidly spends in general but nope, West Ham and a football stadium means that now, we must get value from our taxes. This is only happening because it's football and the rivalry it brings, jealously is all it is
- eastsider
- Posts: 1654
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 7:30 pm
- Location: London E4
- Has liked: 54 likes
- Total likes: 6 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
This ^^^hammers92 wrote:Since when did people feel that that were angry at being ripped off as a taxpayer? Of all the things to provide an argument that you're not getting value for money, a football stadium is being used. Nothing about the bigger picture and what government stupidly spends in general but nope, West Ham and a football stadium means that now, we must get value from our taxes. This is only happening because it's football and the rivalry it brings, jealously is all it is
Heard Lammy MP for tottenham whittering on last night.
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Wouldn't find us indulging in any of that "football rivalry" nonsense.
- Johnny Byrne's Boots
- Posts: 32138
- Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
- Location: Care home dodger
- Has liked: 1790 likes
- Total likes: 2071 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
If it ever makes it to a public enquiry, which I strongly doubt, a significant factor will be West Ham winning not one but two free and open tenders, open to anyone in the EU.
As mentioned earlier, let's have an enquiry into Arsenal's compliance (or otherwise) with the planning conditions of their new library, Hearn's rather favourable dealings with Brisbane Road and the fire at Archway Metals.
As mentioned earlier, let's have an enquiry into Arsenal's compliance (or otherwise) with the planning conditions of their new library, Hearn's rather favourable dealings with Brisbane Road and the fire at Archway Metals.
- kaybee15
- Posts: 2566
- Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 9:06 pm
- Location: And I ask again - only slightly louder - HOW?
- Contact:
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Update: It's gone national - quake ye, all who enter here. The ST's of teams such as Man Utd, Villa and Leicester have joined in the demands for transparency, enquiry, blah blah blah. So far, those involved are:
• Arsenal Supporters’ Trust
• Aston Villa Supporters’ Trust
• The Blue Union (Everton)
• Canaries Trust (Norwich City)
• Charlton Athletic Supporters’ Trust
• Chelsea Supporters’ Trust
• Crystal Palace Supporters’ Trust
• The Dons Trust (AFC Wimbledon)
• The Foxes Trust (Leicester City)
• Fulham Supporters’ Trust
• Leyton Orient Fans’ Trust
• Manchester United Supporters’ Trust
• QPR1st Supporters’ Trust
• Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust
So far, the juggernaut campaign has reached 22'000 signatures, or a staggering 3'000 per day. In other words, inside the maximum six months allowed for a petition, it might attract half the number of votes required to have Parliament even think about possibly debating the issue. Might.
Impressive. :lol:
• Arsenal Supporters’ Trust
• Aston Villa Supporters’ Trust
• The Blue Union (Everton)
• Canaries Trust (Norwich City)
• Charlton Athletic Supporters’ Trust
• Chelsea Supporters’ Trust
• Crystal Palace Supporters’ Trust
• The Dons Trust (AFC Wimbledon)
• The Foxes Trust (Leicester City)
• Fulham Supporters’ Trust
• Leyton Orient Fans’ Trust
• Manchester United Supporters’ Trust
• QPR1st Supporters’ Trust
• Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust
So far, the juggernaut campaign has reached 22'000 signatures, or a staggering 3'000 per day. In other words, inside the maximum six months allowed for a petition, it might attract half the number of votes required to have Parliament even think about possibly debating the issue. Might.
Impressive. :lol:
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Let CAST and those who pay lip service to their crusade pay for the public enquiry, all costs refundable should it not prove to be a frivolous challenge – after all we don’t want any further burden on the taxpayer if at all possible do we?
- York Ham(mer)
- Posts: 9645
- Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 6:15 am
- Location: In exile up north
- Has liked: 111 likes
- Total likes: 149 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
West Ham are renting an athletic stadium (there's a running track round it for God's sake). Every other club in the country had the opportunity to do so but didn't. No foul there.
- Johnny Byrne's Boots
- Posts: 32138
- Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
- Location: Care home dodger
- Has liked: 1790 likes
- Total likes: 2071 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Seeing as West Ham's financial arrangements appear to be fair game, I want to know what UK Athletics are paying for the use and upkeep of the stadium.
- AlfieG
- Posts: 4792
- Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:20 am
- Location: London
- Has liked: 1 like
- Total likes: 4 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Interesting (if long) article from Mahir Bose.
It looks at what happened with Man City and that stadium... And ends with..... And this means stadiums built by public money can help a foreign buyer acquire a British asset and use it to promote his own objectives. In any other walk of life this would cause outrage. In football it barely registers, even as a matter worth discussing. That is a tragedy and is the great lesson to be learnt from the West Ham Olympic stadium deal.
http://www.insideworldfootball.com/mihi ... s-business
It looks at what happened with Man City and that stadium... And ends with..... And this means stadiums built by public money can help a foreign buyer acquire a British asset and use it to promote his own objectives. In any other walk of life this would cause outrage. In football it barely registers, even as a matter worth discussing. That is a tragedy and is the great lesson to be learnt from the West Ham Olympic stadium deal.
http://www.insideworldfootball.com/mihi ... s-business
- Johnny Byrne's Boots
- Posts: 32138
- Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
- Location: Care home dodger
- Has liked: 1790 likes
- Total likes: 2071 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
I wouldn't believe a word Mihir Bose says or writes, not since he stated as fact on many occasions that Tevez was "ineligible" to play.
- Pop Robson
- Posts: 17083
- Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 9:12 pm
- Location: Looking for the 50,000
- Has liked: 34 likes
- Total likes: 15 likes
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Last time I looked they'd managed 22,000 signatures in about 2 weeks with Plenty of press, no one gives a ****.
Do a vote for should mill wall wear pink and that'll get more votes !
Public in this country don't seem to care about sod all
The youth are subdued nowadays, hence nothing for them like the old days of punks, mods, rockers, New Romantics etc etc anymore
Was in Brighton this weekend full of mods 99% over 40/45
Do a vote for should mill wall wear pink and that'll get more votes !
Public in this country don't seem to care about sod all
The youth are subdued nowadays, hence nothing for them like the old days of punks, mods, rockers, New Romantics etc etc anymore
Was in Brighton this weekend full of mods 99% over 40/45
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Government responds to West Ham Olympic Stadium petition
A statement read: “West Ham United has a concession at the Stadium and their contributions reflect that status. The contract, awarded after an open public competition, has been widely scrutinised and tested in court.
“Following the completion of its transformation programme the Stadium will be – unlike so many previous Olympic Stadiums – a world-class multi-use arena with a long-term future, and one that won’t require continuous support from the taxpayer. The stadium remains in public ownership (E20 Stadium LLP – a joint venture between the London Legacy Development Corporation and Newham Council) and the profits from its multiple uses will flow to the taxpayer.
“As a long-term concessionaire West Ham United will only access the full stadium facilities for and shortly ahead of home matches, anticipated to be an average of 25 games a year. The stadium’s other anchor concession-holder, British Athletics, has a concession for one month a year. The stadium will be available for commercial and other uses at all times outside of these existing commitments.
“The Stadium is a multi-use venue, which has already hosted a major athletics meet this year, the Sainsbury’s Anniversary Games, and will host a range of other events in 2015 including five matches during the Rugby World Cup this autumn, a Rugby League international between England and New Zealand and the Race of Champions motorsport event. In addition the Stadium will host elite athletics including the IAAF and IPC Athletics World Championships in 2017.
“A world class stadium operator has been appointed and it is part of the operator agreement that the Stadium will host concerts and other events.
“None of these events will financially benefit West Ham United. All revenues from these events will be shared by the operator and the Stadium owners. The stadium operator has a proven international track record of success in managing and maximising revenue from multi-use stadia and is contractually incentivised to generate maximum income.
“The agreement with West Ham United, including their contribution to transformation costs and rent, followed an open competitive process, which was delivered under EU rules, conducted visibly and exposed to significant scrutiny. The outcome has been tested in the courts and upheld. As the winning bid this constituted the best available return for the taxpayer and secures the commercial viability of a national asset for the next 100 years.
“The European Commission (EC) is responsible for assessing whether public investment distorts the competitive market. The EC has considered this issue on more than one occasion and has done so with full sight of the contractual terms, comprehensive detail of the tender exercise and in depth legal opinion on compliance with UK and EU law. It has found no case to answer. Therefore we do not believe that a public inquiry is necessary.
“The detail of the rental agreement between the Stadium owners and West Ham United is commercially sensitive. Disclosing details of the contract would undermine the future negotiating position of the Stadium’s operator, Vinci, who are working hard to bring in future events to get the greatest possible return and ensure that the Stadium is a commercial success.
“It is important that the stadium owners and operator are able to negotiate future contracts in a way that derive maximum value and are not constrained by any one agreement. Such arrangements are standard practice and are designed to both protect the previous public expenditure and maximise the return on this investment.
“Department for Culture, Media and Sport.”
A statement read: “West Ham United has a concession at the Stadium and their contributions reflect that status. The contract, awarded after an open public competition, has been widely scrutinised and tested in court.
“Following the completion of its transformation programme the Stadium will be – unlike so many previous Olympic Stadiums – a world-class multi-use arena with a long-term future, and one that won’t require continuous support from the taxpayer. The stadium remains in public ownership (E20 Stadium LLP – a joint venture between the London Legacy Development Corporation and Newham Council) and the profits from its multiple uses will flow to the taxpayer.
“As a long-term concessionaire West Ham United will only access the full stadium facilities for and shortly ahead of home matches, anticipated to be an average of 25 games a year. The stadium’s other anchor concession-holder, British Athletics, has a concession for one month a year. The stadium will be available for commercial and other uses at all times outside of these existing commitments.
“The Stadium is a multi-use venue, which has already hosted a major athletics meet this year, the Sainsbury’s Anniversary Games, and will host a range of other events in 2015 including five matches during the Rugby World Cup this autumn, a Rugby League international between England and New Zealand and the Race of Champions motorsport event. In addition the Stadium will host elite athletics including the IAAF and IPC Athletics World Championships in 2017.
“A world class stadium operator has been appointed and it is part of the operator agreement that the Stadium will host concerts and other events.
“None of these events will financially benefit West Ham United. All revenues from these events will be shared by the operator and the Stadium owners. The stadium operator has a proven international track record of success in managing and maximising revenue from multi-use stadia and is contractually incentivised to generate maximum income.
“The agreement with West Ham United, including their contribution to transformation costs and rent, followed an open competitive process, which was delivered under EU rules, conducted visibly and exposed to significant scrutiny. The outcome has been tested in the courts and upheld. As the winning bid this constituted the best available return for the taxpayer and secures the commercial viability of a national asset for the next 100 years.
“The European Commission (EC) is responsible for assessing whether public investment distorts the competitive market. The EC has considered this issue on more than one occasion and has done so with full sight of the contractual terms, comprehensive detail of the tender exercise and in depth legal opinion on compliance with UK and EU law. It has found no case to answer. Therefore we do not believe that a public inquiry is necessary.
“The detail of the rental agreement between the Stadium owners and West Ham United is commercially sensitive. Disclosing details of the contract would undermine the future negotiating position of the Stadium’s operator, Vinci, who are working hard to bring in future events to get the greatest possible return and ensure that the Stadium is a commercial success.
“It is important that the stadium owners and operator are able to negotiate future contracts in a way that derive maximum value and are not constrained by any one agreement. Such arrangements are standard practice and are designed to both protect the previous public expenditure and maximise the return on this investment.
“Department for Culture, Media and Sport.”
- WestHamIFC
- Posts: 5684
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 10:18 pm
- Location: Essex
- Contact:
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Here's the link to that Govt response:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/106355
They should have ended with:
"And if any of you fu(ker$ can come up with a single viable alternative for the stadium please do let us know."
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/106355
They should have ended with:
"And if any of you fu(ker$ can come up with a single viable alternative for the stadium please do let us know."
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
That's about as sturdy a response as could have been hoped.
Let's hope Leyton Orient don't move above the bottom two divisions over the next few years. You can bet that if they get into the Championship, there will be renewed calls to unpick the LLDC/WHU contract to allow them to groundshare.
Orient is probably the most interesting speculative purchase in world football for that reason. The club changed hands recently when Hearn sold it for £4m, and after they were relegated to Division 2 in May, the new Italian owner said he was thinking of selling up.
It would indeed be very speculative, because without permission to groundshare the club's potential is limited. But if somehow they wangled it, and you never know these days because faced with popular clamour most politicians have no respect for the rule of law or the sanctity of contract, then someone buying now for say £3m could make a hundred or two hundred times their money over the long-term with Orient in the Olympic Stadium and bringing Manchester United, Chelsea et al to Stratford for a second time each season.
That's why in the long run, it's important for Sullivan and Gold to sell to a buyer capable of buying the stadium and shutting the door to a groundshare permanently.
Let's hope Leyton Orient don't move above the bottom two divisions over the next few years. You can bet that if they get into the Championship, there will be renewed calls to unpick the LLDC/WHU contract to allow them to groundshare.
Orient is probably the most interesting speculative purchase in world football for that reason. The club changed hands recently when Hearn sold it for £4m, and after they were relegated to Division 2 in May, the new Italian owner said he was thinking of selling up.
It would indeed be very speculative, because without permission to groundshare the club's potential is limited. But if somehow they wangled it, and you never know these days because faced with popular clamour most politicians have no respect for the rule of law or the sanctity of contract, then someone buying now for say £3m could make a hundred or two hundred times their money over the long-term with Orient in the Olympic Stadium and bringing Manchester United, Chelsea et al to Stratford for a second time each season.
That's why in the long run, it's important for Sullivan and Gold to sell to a buyer capable of buying the stadium and shutting the door to a groundshare permanently.
Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...
Most people would find it hard to take seriously the idea of Leyton Orient being worth £600m, but then Fulham were getting average gates of between 4,000 and 5,000 between 1986 and 1996 in the bottom two leagues.
In 1989, Michael Knighton came within a whisker of buying Manchester United for £20m.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/date ... 499267.stm
Imagine if you had suggested in 1989 that Fulham FC would be sold for £200m. It would have been hard to take seriously. You could probably have bought the club for 500k at that time.
Mohamed Al Fayed netted £150-200m when he sold Fulham to Shahid Khan in 2013.
Revenue from just being in the Premier League is much higher now than even two years ago when Fulham changed hands, and it's going to continue to rocket higher in the coming couple of years. Goodness knows how high it will be a decade from now, but that combined with an 80,000 seat stadium compared with Craven Cottage mean that it's an idea to take seriously. So, it's a serious priority to sell to a new owner capable of following the Manchester City owner's example. Although, to correct myself, Manchester City didn't buy the stadium (yet), they renegotiated the 250 year lease to acquire the naming rights in exchange for a rent uplift. At the very least, the test for a suitable new owner would be to stamp West Ham's exclusivity on the stadium by doing something similar.
In 1989, Michael Knighton came within a whisker of buying Manchester United for £20m.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/date ... 499267.stm
Imagine if you had suggested in 1989 that Fulham FC would be sold for £200m. It would have been hard to take seriously. You could probably have bought the club for 500k at that time.
Mohamed Al Fayed netted £150-200m when he sold Fulham to Shahid Khan in 2013.
Revenue from just being in the Premier League is much higher now than even two years ago when Fulham changed hands, and it's going to continue to rocket higher in the coming couple of years. Goodness knows how high it will be a decade from now, but that combined with an 80,000 seat stadium compared with Craven Cottage mean that it's an idea to take seriously. So, it's a serious priority to sell to a new owner capable of following the Manchester City owner's example. Although, to correct myself, Manchester City didn't buy the stadium (yet), they renegotiated the 250 year lease to acquire the naming rights in exchange for a rent uplift. At the very least, the test for a suitable new owner would be to stamp West Ham's exclusivity on the stadium by doing something similar.