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
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 »

Westaam wrote: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.

West Ham only have the stadium for certain days of the year, so in theory Orient could have it on other days. Or that is how i read it. Not that i want us to even think about it.

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.

West Ham only have the Stadium for certain days in the year, so as i understand it Orient could have it on other days. Not that i want us to.
User avatar
rare as rockinghorse shat
Posts: 55216
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 2:43 am
Location: **** the board
Has liked: 3 likes
Total likes: 77 likes

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

Post by rare as rockinghorse shat »

...aaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnd told.
Jayctly
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 9:10 pm

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

Post by Jayctly »

I think we are more likely to ground share with a rugby union side. The operators (and id suggest the government) seem keen to not be seen to rely on football a huge amount. The extra variety of switching between sports each week is more likely. Again, this is what I think no evidence to back it up.
gavrosh
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:28 pm

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

Post by gavrosh »

This logic is flawed, in that it has been set out from day 1 that West Ham is an anchor tenant along with UKA. Another club cant just come along and say "oh we'd like to be in there as well on a permanent basis thanks" as that undermines the entire issue with regards to anchor tenancy. Temporary ground share, one off events etc are all feasible, but Orient (or anyone else) trying to muscle in on a permanent ground share is something that I am sure would be impossible.
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 »

Over 50 wrote:West Ham only have the stadium for certain days of the year, so in theory Orient could have it on other days.
What West Ham have, as I understand, in their agreement with the LLDC is a football exclusivity clause which means that while the stadium operator Vinci can fill up the rest of the calendar with NFL, rugby, athletics, motorsport, cricket and concerts, it cannot sign up football matches.

It's a contractual term in black and white, but let's say Orient get into the Championship with a gobshite owner with loads of money and a penchant for buttering up politicians. Most politicians neither respect nor understand the law, and if someone manages to recruit the right ministers at the time to the cause of repudiating West Ham's football exclusivity clause in the name of using the stadium more often and increasing public revenue, then before you know it the game schedulers will be writing in Orient and West Ham on alternate Saturdays.

It is up to the club's ownership to appreciate this risk long before it ever comes anywhere close to realisation and to take steps to ensure it doesn't happen. How do you do that? How do you shore up one single critical clause which is capable of being repudiated by the next dickhead to take ministerial office? You either buy the stadium or you smother every seat in claret and blue, rename all the roads around the park after West Ham players, acquire the naming rights at the next rent review, and do everything and anything to make the idea of the stadium the idea of West Ham rather than the idea of a blank canvas public revenue source capable of being exploited by any old tenant.
gavrosh
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:28 pm

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

Post by gavrosh »

Westaam wrote: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..
Err I think you'll find that politicians do have respect for the rule of law, and that's why in the Lords, the Commons, and at the GLA level, when asked about the details of the contract, and on being told that it is a matter of legal confidentiality, they have not ben able to go any further. The day that politicians blatantly flout the rule of law is the day that you or I want to be getting on a plane somewhere else.
Jayctly
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 9:10 pm

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

Post by Jayctly »

gavrosh wrote:This logic is flawed, in that it has been set out from day 1 that West Ham is an anchor tenant along with UKA. Another club cant just come along and say "oh we'd like to be in there as well on a permanent basis thanks" as that undermines the entire issue with regards to anchor tenancy. Temporary ground share, one off events etc are all feasible, but Orient (or anyone else) trying to muscle in on a permanent ground share is something that I am sure would be impossible.
This is why I think rugby is more likely to share than football. Orient coming in would raise serious question around price - especially as they are likely to pay less than us. Whereas without the competition aspect, rugby would pose this problem.

Reading the statement released, does anyone know what British Airways will be using the stadium for?
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 »

gavrosh wrote:This logic is flawed, in that it has been set out from day 1 that West Ham is an anchor tenant along with UKA. Another club cant just come along and say "oh we'd like to be in there as well on a permanent basis thanks" as that undermines the entire issue with regards to anchor tenancy. Temporary ground share, one off events etc are all feasible, but Orient (or anyone else) trying to muscle in on a permanent ground share is something that I am sure would be impossible.
Under this government, and certainly with Orient pootering along in Division 2, as shown by today's statement there appears to be zero risk of anyone trying to tamper with the clause that assures West Ham of being sole footballing tenant.

But let's imagine that the government falls apart over the EU referendum and somehow Labour, with or without Corbyn, gets into office by 2020. And let's imagine that by then Orient is owned by a very wealthy and well-connected entity. All you need is those two ingredients to make for a pretty potent attack on that clause. Wave a bone to any Labour minister that they can be seen to be increasing public revenue and increasing use of a public asset at the cost of overruling private contractual rights, and which side of the fence do you think they are going to be on? The answer is obvious. The only question would be how they would go about doing it, what kind of pressure or compensation or arbitrary action they would undertake. A good starting point would be to threaten some kind of bull**** retrospective review of the award of anchor tenancy to West Ham. Yes, it would be bull****, yes it would be five years down the line, but that kind of bullying, unreasonable, autocratic behaviour is par for the course with some governments.

A West Ham board which is on the ball would appreciate that there is more at stake with covering every last seat and every last roadway in the Olympic Park in claret and blue than just appeasing fans
Last edited by Westaam on Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.
gavrosh
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:28 pm

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

Post by gavrosh »

Yeah but then any undermining of the original contract by the government of the day would immediately result in legal action by West Ham, naturally, which under current rule of law would mean huge compensation for us. It would require a government of Argentinian standards to both rip up an existing contract such as this and then to prevent legal action to be taken to redress the loss that would result to West Ham as a result of it. As I said, by that time, I (and my assets) would be out of there.
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 reckon Vinci can have other football events in there, like a temporary groundshare while another club are building their own ground for instance or a big FA Cup game where a club like Orient host Man U or Chelsea and where they could sell enough tickets in order to being able to afford the 100K or so needed to rent the placefor that one game.

Apart from that the bidding process has installed West Ham as anchor concessionaire. Meaning that no other football club can waltz into the OS on a permanent basis without West Ham being able to do anything about it. That's why West Ham were prepared to sell their own ground and commit to playing at the OS for 99 years.
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 »

gavrosh wrote:Err I think you'll find that politicians do have respect for the rule of law, and that's why in the Lords, the Commons, and at the GLA level, when asked about the details of the contract, and on being told that it is a matter of legal confidentiality, they have not ben able to go any further. The day that politicians blatantly flout the rule of law is the day that you or I want to be getting on a plane somewhere else.
That day would certainly be when Jeremy Corbyn takes office in Downing Street. And it might well be when someone like Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper takes office.

There is blatantly flouting the law and there is unblatantly flouting the law. In tinpot countries, they just rip up contracts and tell the private corporations to **** off. Which may sound hardcore but it's the quickest way to return any country to the commercial stone age.

In Britain, the same action would take place decorated with words like Official Inquiry and Public Review. The same end result would transpire but there would be a thin veneer of respectability and legality to their actions, designed to tell the people that Yes, we are being high-handed and restrospective, and yes these private entities are being shafted, but see here, we have a rubber stamp proving to you that there's a really really important, moral, and legitimate purpose to it.

The law only stands for so long as people with power agree to keep the law above their power.
Last edited by Westaam on Thu Sep 03, 2015 12:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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:
What West Ham have, as I understand, in their agreement with the LLDC is a football exclusivity clause which means that while the stadium operator Vinci can fill up the rest of the calendar with NFL, rugby, athletics, motorsport, cricket and concerts, it cannot sign up football matches.

It's a contractual term in black and white

That's my understanding too. Brady said no football club can play there without West Ham's permission. I doubt Orient would be overly keen on playing in a West Ham branded stadium anyway.

5,000 fans in a stadium that size would be awful too.

As for having regular Rugby fixtures, that certainly would be a good test of this latest Destro pitch technology!!
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 »

gavrosh wrote:Yeah but then any undermining of the original contract by the government of the day would immediately result in legal action by West Ham, naturally, which under current rule of law would mean huge compensation for us. It would require a government of Argentinian standards to both rip up an existing contract such as this and then to prevent legal action to be taken to redress the loss that would result to West Ham as a result of it. As I said, by that time, I (and my assets) would be out of there.
Well, this is the thing. The contract obviously doesn't say "West Ham will be paid a hundred million pounds if the footballing exclusivity clause is repudiated". And even if it did, it would probably be deemed an unenforceable penalty clause. And so, then, the issue would migrate from "No other football team can play their home games in the Olympic Stadium - end of" to "How much money ought West Ham to be paid if the LLDC repudiates this clause?"

The value of Leyton Orient would increase so astronomically were they granted co-tenancy that quite a fair old whack of compensation could be economic from the LLDC's point of view.

It becomes a simple commercial calculation - and the sums of money involved in Premier League tv rights would incline the outcome in favour of a second tenant.

Which is why, at the risk of repeating myself, the club would be seriously remiss by waiting for Orient to move up two divisions and for this issue to move back towards being something worthy of serious consideration. There are things they can begin to do even now which will increase the chance of public sentiment weighing against it.

West Ham could have been a big club fifty years ago, but unlike the ownership at Arsenal, the club's owners were smalltime. Among other things, Arsenal appreciated the importance of renaming Gillespie Road tube and covering the station walls in Arsenal murals. For West Ham there is a more pressing reason to mark out their territory. The club should transform one or two blocks of seating to wholly claret and blue each and every season. That way the annual expenditure would be tolerable and there would be a narrative progression towards the comprehensive Westhamification of the stadium.
gavrosh
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:28 pm

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

Post by gavrosh »

I get where you are coming from but I frankly dont see how things stack up for Orient, in fact especially for Orient given that barry Hearn now holds the long lease of the ground and has started to charge the club rent of £180,000 which escalates over time. D&R are probably a longer term safe bet. Orient sits between three major north/ east London clubs, and can never now compete in term of bringing in the numbers.
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 »

WestHamIFC wrote:5,000 fans in a stadium that size would be awful
Fulham didn't exceed a 5,000 average attendance for ten years between 1986 and 1996.

By the time they were relegated from the Premier League, they were maxing out their capacity at 25,000. Who knows how much higher it would have been had Craven Cottage's capacity been higher. 30,000? 35,000?

If Orient got into the Championship and with an owner with money or with an Eddie Howe clawed their way into the Premier League, they would be buying a Max Gradel and a £10m - £15m striker before the opening match of their first season.

I have no doubt that Orient could ultimately exceed the number of people (41,000) who were at the rugby on Saturday.

That's the biggest change with the tv money these days. Teams like Hull, Swansea, Bournemouth, and yes Leyton Orient were they in the Premier League can raid the continent and pack their squads with £10m World Cup stars.

Orient and West Ham would be in direct competition for the same constituency of potential fans.
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 a long way now for Orient to reach the Championship level. It may take them anything between 5-10 years, if it happens at all. At that stage we should be well established in the OS and the stadium will be very much associated as the home of West Ham.

New football fans don't grow on trees. Even if Orient made it into the Championship the best thing they might look forward to is selling out Brisbane Road on a regular basis. Their hardcore fanbase is around 5.000 people.
It'll be incredibly difficult for them to raise that figure to even 20.000 in the Championship.
Orient never had a big fanbase, so even while being based in London I think you cannot call them a sleeping giant. There is too much competition in and around London and their initial fanbase is too small to begin with.

They have made a good start to the season and may well get promoted back to League One at the first time of asking. But even then it'll be very hard to make another step up.
User avatar
Wembley1966
Posts: 7730
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:48 pm
Has liked: 6 likes
Total likes: 124 likes

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

Post by Wembley1966 »

WestHamIFC wrote:As for having regular Rugby fixtures, that certainly would be a good test of this latest Destro pitch technology!!
Watford managed it with Saracens renting off them - sometimes playing the day after. Sharing with Rugby and playing alternate weekends would very good as that would then probably stop any chance of Orient (or others) being able to share.
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 »

That's a good point.

West Ham United rugby club.

They should set it up.
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:It's a long way now for Orient to reach the Championship level. It may take them anything between 5-10 years, if it happens at all. At that stage we should be well established in the OS and the stadium will be very much associated as the home of West Ham.

New football fans don't grow on trees. Even if Orient made it into the Championship the best thing they might look forward to is selling out Brisbane Road on a regular basis. Their hardcore fanbase is around 5.000 people.
It'll be incredibly difficult for them to raise that figure to even 20.000 in the Championship.
Orient never had a big fanbase, so even while being based in London I think you cannot call them a sleeping giant. There is too much competition in and around London and their initial fanbase is too small to begin with.

They have made a good start to the season and may well get promoted back to League One at the first time of asking. But even then it'll be very hard to make another step up.
In theory, Orient could be in the Championship in August 2017. They have started this season looking like they mean to be promoted straight back to Division 1. They came within a whisker of being promoted to the Championship two seasons ago. All it takes is a new owner willing to splash some cash and a competent manager. As soon as they stumble across that combination, they'll be in the Championship. And then the fun will begin.

I do think that football fans grow on trees. In this generation, there are more domestic and international migrants in London than ever before. London's indigenous population has never been lower as a percentage, and its overall population has never been higher. And the big growth area now and in the medium term will be in and around east London. It's not like in the 1980s when the country had 10,000 net inward migration per year. These days the country has 300,000 net inward migration per year. You couldn't ask for riper conditions to win a new fanbase. Orient's big complaint about the Olympic Stadium was that West Ham would undercut them on price and steal their current and potential fans. Can you imagine what Orient would price tickets at in the Olympic Stadium? They would be handing out 50,000 tickets for £5 a game. It would still be Manchester United, Liverpool, Chelsea and Spurs turning up to Orient games, and with tv money Orient would be putting out a team as strong as anything Swansea or Southampton can do. It's Premier League football. At £5 a ticket it won't matter to the people pouring through the turnstiles whether the home team is wrapped in a claret and blue home shirt or a red one.

Since Hearn has gone and Orient have been relegated, it's very easy to assume, as a fan and for those on the club's board, that the issue is dead, buried, gone away forever. But I think it's just dormant. Someone will come along and clock the opportunity and do enough to get Orient into the Championship, and then they are just forty-six matches from getting £100m+ a year tv money. At that point, the first signing I would make if I were the Orient chairman wouldn't be a £10m winger or a £15m striker. They would be my second and third signings. My first signature would come in the shape of £3m and it would go at the bottom of a letter to Vinci proposing to pay them double what West Ham pay for use of the Olympic Stadium.

At that point, economically, politically, in the media, in popular opinion, the issue is very much back on the table. And all that then stands between Orient and moving in on West Ham's future is their ability to demonstrate a season or two of consolidating themselves in the Premier League like Swansea have, and the reluctance of people in government to lean on West Ham to capitulate whether by threat or bribe or a combination of the two.

I hope that someone makes sure that Sullivan, Brady and Gold are not complacent about Orient, and that they have a strategy to ensure that this scenario never gets going. The two best things they can do in the short term are get a rugby club signed up for the alternate week (ideally a West Ham branded rugby club) and without delay start a project to get the seats fully claret and blue, block by block, over a number of seasons. Who cares if Vinci and the LLDC moan that we are just one of multiple tenants when we go to them with our demands? If we keep bugging them about fan discontentment they'll give in eventually.

What the club must not do is get used to playing the "We're only tenants" card whenever fans demand something of them. It's understandable, say, when it comes to this busy construction period, but that is the exact ethos that will open the door to Orient.
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 »

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.
Locked