Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

An archive of news, events and discussion leading up to and post West Ham United's historic move from Upton Park to Stratford in 2016.

Moderators: Gnome, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Locked
User avatar
Westaam
Posts: 1243
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:22 pm
Total likes: 11 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by Westaam »

HamburgHammer wrote:Still a lot of football to be played, and FFP rules are pretty strict at the lower levels.So you can't just have wealthy owners buying their way into the Premier League with Orient.
It can happen of course but it will be very very difficult for them.
Their current owners didn't expect things to be as difficult as they turned out to be.
Without wanting to sound too mean, I hope that Orient's good start to the season tails off and that they end up languishing in the bottom division for as many years as possible.

I may not have succeeded in not sounding too mean.
User avatar
Westaam
Posts: 1243
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:22 pm
Total likes: 11 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by Westaam »

There is a big difference between the potential revenue from a rugby tenant and from a second Premier League football tenant, so in the long term, aside from buying the stadium, the permanent answer is a permanent NFL tenant.
User avatar
HamburgHammer
Posts: 4020
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by HamburgHammer »

Permanent overseas NFL franchise in Europe is highly unlikely for a number of reasons, London included.
I can see Mexico getting a franchise there eventually. And of course there will be several NFL games being staged in London. But there will not be a London franchise.
User avatar
Westaam
Posts: 1243
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:22 pm
Total likes: 11 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by Westaam »

HamburgHammer wrote:Permanent overseas NFL franchise in Europe is highly unlikely for a number of reasons, London included.
I can see Mexico getting a franchise there eventually. And of course there will be several NFL games being staged in London. But there will not be a London franchise.
Really?

I have read on numerous occasions that the long-term strategy for playing an increasing number of NFL games in London is ultimately the establishment of a London franchise.

Of course there will be wrinkles, but the NFL has calculated that it will be massively profitable for them, so the players will just have to get used to spending that much more time on airplanes.

What are the reasons you referred to?
User avatar
WestHamIFC
Posts: 5684
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 10:18 pm
Location: Essex
Contact:

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by WestHamIFC »

Westaam wrote:I have no doubt that Orient could ultimately exceed the number of people (41,000) who were at the rugby on Saturday
:lol:
User avatar
HamburgHammer
Posts: 4020
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by HamburgHammer »

It's the very reason you mentioned: Airmiles. Profits are one thing, but it will not work for a franchise that will have to spend as much time on airplanes as a London franchise. Same with other teams having to travel to London. Different timezone also doesn't make it ideal for US television.
You want competitive teams and even if they'd play in London in front of a full house every time, it will be hard for the London team to compete with all the travel issues on their hands.
And don't forget, there are several places in the USA, Canada or Mexico who are desperate for a franchise: Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Oklahoma City, Hawaii, Mexico City, Toronto to name a few.
I've heard of the London rumours, but I think the travel issue will be the reason why London will not get their own franchise.
The World League/NFL Europe didn't survive, in no small part due to the travel costs involved.
Over 50
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 9:11 pm

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by Over 50 »

HamburgHammer wrote:Still a lot of football to be played, and FFP rules are pretty strict at the lower levels.So you can't just have wealthy owners buying their way into the Premier League with Orient.
It can happen of course but it will be very very difficult for them.
Their current owners didn't expect things to be as difficult as they turned out to be.
Those rules are easy to get round. An owner can put as much as he likes into a club as long as it is not a loan. Look at Bournmouth, they would not be where they are now without big money from the owner.
Gweddy
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 10:04 am

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by Gweddy »

I see that dan roan of the bbc and steve lawrence (the architect who scuppered the original deal) are in cahoots on this campaign for the tax payer – can’t help thinking that there is some sort of conspiracy going on here, the tax burden being just a convenient front.
User avatar
Ozza
Posts: 28197
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
Location: Here, there, every f****** where
Has liked: 945 likes
Total likes: 2363 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by Ozza »

Hamburg, Im not sure you are right, there are already a number of top premier league clubs here jostling for NFL possibility.

How long are flights between the east coast and the UK now?

Money will outweigh logistical constraints every time.
User avatar
E7Iron
Posts: 271
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by E7Iron »

Ozza wrote:Hamburg, Im not sure you are right, there are already a number of top premier league clubs here jostling for NFL possibility.

How long are flights between the east coast and the UK now?

Money will outweigh logistical constraints every time.
I arrived back from JFK a couple of weeks ago and it took just over 6 hours.
User avatar
HamburgHammer
Posts: 4020
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by HamburgHammer »

I doubt though a London franchise would only play teams from the Eastcoast, but the travel involved for the overseas franchise will be an issue of competitive fairness. It's easy to see that a team is at a severe disadvantage if it has to spend so much more time on airports and in airplanes than the other teams in the league. I agree about the profit thing, the league may go through with it, no matter what.
I would still expect other candidates to get a team first, namely Los Angeles, Mexico City or Oklahoma City.
User avatar
HamburgHammer
Posts: 4020
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Too far away from Upton Park, Hamburg, Germany, to be precise
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by HamburgHammer »

They are not giving up their cause just yet...

Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham fan coalition brand government response to petition over West Ham stadium deal 'wholly inadequate'
JAMES BENGE Friday 4 September 2015 16:49 BST0 comments

The coalition of supporters’ groups campaigning for a public inquiry into the decision to award West Ham tenancy of the Olympic Stadium have branded the government’s response to their petition “wholly inadequate”.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport yesterday rejected the petition from fans of Arsenal, Tottenham and Chelsea, maintaining that West Ham’s deal for a new stadium “constituted the best available return for the taxpayer”.

The government’s response reaffirmed its belief that only with the tenancy of a major London football team could the stadium have a viable long-term future.

However the supporters’ groups, which include the initial eight London signatories and fans from six other clubs including Manchester United, Norwich and Everton, immediately condemned the government for their answer to the petition.

“This statement only recycles arguments we have previously heard from the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) and West Ham United,” said the coalition. “The facts we have uncovered need to be addressed by the Government. This statement ignores them. It is wholly inadequate.”

“The Government claims the contract has been widely scrutinised. Yet the taxpayer continues to be denied sight of it. The Government speaks of ‘profits’ flowing to the taxpayer, yet we have shown that no profit comes from West Ham’s rental because matchday overheads normally paid by clubs are in this case paid by the taxpayer.”

And the supporters do not intend to let the issue lie, warning that without the full release of the agreement between West Ham and the LLDC, “the impression of a cover up will grow”.

The DCMS have refused to release further information on the deal between the two parties, warning that releasing “commercially sensitive” information would damage the negotiating position of stadium operator Vinci.

The coalition claims to have further information which, when released, will support the case of those questioning the value for money the taxpayer has received from the deal.

Their statement added: “We are currently obtaining professional verification of new information which appears to cast further doubt on the value of the deal for the taxpayer.

“As soon as we are confident of the facts and their implications we will make a further announcement. It would surely be in the Government’s interest to release the entire contract. If it continues to fall to concerned citizens to uncover the facts, drip by drip, the impression of a cover-up will grow.”

The petition, launched last month, received the 10,000 signatures required for a response from the government within 24 hours. It currently has over 24,000 backers, some way short of the 100,000 needed to be considered for debate in Parliament.

The fourteen supporters’ trusts making up the coalition are: Arsenal, Aston Villa, The Blue Union (Everton), Canaries Trust (Norwich City), Charlton Athletic, Chelsea, Crystal Palace, The Dons Trust (AFC Wimbledon), The Foxes Trust (Leicester City), Fulham, Leyton Orient, Manchester United, QPR1st and Tottenham Hotspur.
Gweddy
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 10:04 am

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by Gweddy »

So these trainspotters have found something in the contract that the government appointed legal teams have somehow overlooked? Hope they have enough petty cash in their tobacco tins to pay any resulting costs when they are charged.
User avatar
Rays Rock
Posts: 6419
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:10 pm
Location: Outsider
Has liked: 46 likes
Total likes: 104 likes

Re: Petition from London clubs for a new public enquiry...

Post by Rays Rock »

HamburgHammer wrote:They are not giving up their cause just yet...

Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham fan coalition brand government response to petition over West Ham stadium deal 'wholly inadequate'
JAMES BENGE Friday 4 September 2015 16:49 BST0 comments

The coalition of supporters’ groups campaigning for a public inquiry into the decision to award West Ham tenancy of the Olympic Stadium have branded the government’s response to their petition “wholly inadequate”.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport yesterday rejected the petition from fans of Arsenal, Tottenham and Chelsea, maintaining that West Ham’s deal for a new stadium “constituted the best available return for the taxpayer”.

The government’s response reaffirmed its belief that only with the tenancy of a major London football team could the stadium have a viable long-term future.

However the supporters’ groups, which include the initial eight London signatories and fans from six other clubs including Manchester United, Norwich and Everton, immediately condemned the government for their answer to the petition.

“This statement only recycles arguments we have previously heard from the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) and West Ham United,” said the coalition. “The facts we have uncovered need to be addressed by the Government. This statement ignores them. It is wholly inadequate.”

“The Government claims the contract has been widely scrutinised. Yet the taxpayer continues to be denied sight of it. The Government speaks of ‘profits’ flowing to the taxpayer, yet we have shown that no profit comes from West Ham’s rental because matchday overheads normally paid by clubs are in this case paid by the taxpayer.”

And the supporters do not intend to let the issue lie, warning that without the full release of the agreement between West Ham and the LLDC, “the impression of a cover up will grow”.

The DCMS have refused to release further information on the deal between the two parties, warning that releasing “commercially sensitive” information would damage the negotiating position of stadium operator Vinci.

The coalition claims to have further information which, when released, will support the case of those questioning the value for money the taxpayer has received from the deal.

Their statement added: “We are currently obtaining professional verification of new information which appears to cast further doubt on the value of the deal for the taxpayer.

“As soon as we are confident of the facts and their implications we will make a further announcement. It would surely be in the Government’s interest to release the entire contract. If it continues to fall to concerned citizens to uncover the facts, drip by drip, the impression of a cover-up will grow.”

The petition, launched last month, received the 10,000 signatures required for a response from the government within 24 hours. It currently has over 24,000 backers, some way short of the 100,000 needed to be considered for debate in Parliament.

The fourteen supporters’ trusts making up the coalition are: Arsenal, Aston Villa, The Blue Union (Everton), Canaries Trust (Norwich City), Charlton Athletic, Chelsea, Crystal Palace, The Dons Trust (AFC Wimbledon), The Foxes Trust (Leicester City), Fulham, Leyton Orient, Manchester United, QPR1st and Tottenham Hotspur.
Ha Ha, if these people are so enraged why has it taken so long, about 3 years, to become enraged !

They risk, a) wasting there own money & b) wasting both further government money and future top revenue from rental agreements by forcing commercial details into the public domain. Which is a toal paradox for which they are supposed to stand for.
This is why in my mind and many others, their protests are founded on envy and jealousy.

As I've said previously, if this deal that West Ham has is so beneficial and potentially legally flawed, why aren't the owners or executive boardrooms of these clubs challenging the deal !

Stop complaining, and try and think of a better way of recouping the tax money spent on the entire build, or continue to chew on your sour grapes in peace !
User avatar
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...

Post by eastsider »

Rays Rock wrote: Stop complaining, and try and think of a better way of recouping the tax money spent on the entire build, or continue to chew on your sour grapes in peace !

Summed up beautifully, in a nutshell!! :thup:
Locked