LondonTaxpayer wrote:My gripe is not with West Ham but with how much the taxpayer, and probably West Ham, have invested in a big stadium that can sometimes be used for Athletics with no predicted financial return.
The rugby games that have just been played at the stadium to great reviews...how's your gripe towards those events?
Yeah, and how about the gripe about Newham getting a gross interest rate on investment of 6% (which given they tapped the Treasury at what must have been something like 2% maximum, leaves them with a RoI of at least £1.6 million p.a. on the £40 million invested) plus they get a minimum of £250,000 from the Grantor, indexed, for educational programmes per year, plus 250 days a year access to the community track, plus 10 days a year in the stadium itself, plus 100,000 tickets to events at the stadium for residents, plus at least 75% of employees at the stadium being sourced from Newham, all as detailed in Schedule 4 (page 120) of the contract?
I didn't realise Newham got a guarenteed 6% return - that is good. I was aware of the other benefits and it seems Newham did a good deal for the borough and residents. I am wary though that the warm-up / community track will provide most of the athletics legacy from the games.
Must say it makes me slightly envious of Newham residents. Other Host Boroughs (LBTH, LBWF, LBH, LBG, LBB&D) just get a promise that Concessionaires will do 'community events' in them at some undefined point.
Apparently the plan is to distribute to 'community leaders', whatever they are, and they will give them to 'deserving' people. Sounds eminently exploitable.
Antwerp_Lad wrote:Doesn't a higher position also mean more money from the TV deal or whatever it is ?
Of course it does. As I said above, it's currently £1.25m per place but will go up considerably in next year's deal.
So say we were 5 places higher that could easily be an extra £10m, let's say £6m to West Ham and £4m to the taxpayer, which sounds like "many millions" to me. While still leaving worthwhile extra income for the club.
[quote="Chris BMU"][quote="Antwerp_Lad"]Doesn't a higher position also mean more money from the TV deal or whatever it is ?
Of course it does. As I said above, it's currently £1.25m per place but will go up considerably in next year's deal.
So say we were 5 places higher that could easily be an extra £10m, let's say £6m to West Ham and £4m to the taxpayer, which sounds like "many millions" to me. While still leaving worthwhile extra income for the club.
As pinks said how much more revenue will be pumped into the team? Stadium naming rights, not as much as we all thought, match day catering, not much as we first thought, payments for improved league position, less than every club in the league if we finished in a comparable position.
Francoisvander or else wrote:As pinks said how much more revenue will be pumped into the team? Stadium naming rights, not as much as we all thought, match day catering, not much as we first thought, payments for improved league position, less than every club in the league if we finished in a comparable position.
We will be fine.
I do feel sorry for the ongoing misery experienced by some at the prospect of the move, while admiring their tenacity in attempting to bring everyone else down in the face of an increasing flood of positive news and visitors' reports praising the stadium. They are fellow Hammers, I think, so I hope they will nevertheless be able to drag themselves along next season and possibly even find it bearable enough to keep coming in future years.
Chris BMU wrote:Fresh points are always welcome for consideration and debate. The same old tired ones, not so much.
We are getting fed up with your put downs and attempts to moderate this forum, any future posts will be deleted, if you don't like it dont post, or find other forums where you can
This forum, is here for the fans, the lldc, whufc, have enough weight to put down any debate and have from day one, we are not letting that happen on here, please debate the points, not these petty one line put downs you and others seem to choose
If you have a problem with this post them pm utj, do not discuss on here, i will delete it and won't reply
sicknote wrote:We are getting fed up with your put downs and attempts to moderate this forum, any future posts will be deleted, if you don't like it dont post, or find other forums where you can
This forum, is here for the fans, the lldc, whufc, have enough weight to put down any debate and have from day one, we are not letting that happen on here, please debate the points, not these petty one line put downs you and others seem to choose
If you have a problem with this post them pm utj, do not discuss on here, i will delete it and won't reply
The reason why I believe the club has severely shot itself in the foot by constructing a deal for the stadium in the way it has is because it hurts our position relative to our competitors .
For example in the future if
West Ham win the FA cup we would pay more rent to LLDC , whereas were Chelsea to do so they would not
West Ham finish 5th we would pay more rent to LLDC , whereas Chelsea would not, meaning they would be relatively better off .
In other words , given the same level of performance our financial returns will be lower than our competitors .
That cannot be a good deal for West Ham United FC .
Naturally we will not have to fund the building cost of a new stadium which of course is an advantage that some of our competitors will not have .Tottenham and Chelsea will both have huge bills to pay but will use naming rights to offset a huge chunk, and one of them has an owner that will simply pay the cost anyway .
If one looks at the current situation using the 2013/14 season data, the turnover of each club excluding any broadcast (TV) income is as follows .
Manchester United - £297.5m - and no stadium building costs due
Manchester City - £213.3m - and having just increased capacity at the COMS .
Chelsea - £179.9m - with a new stadium to be built that will provide greater earning potential
Arsenal - £177.9m - With a new stadium already built ( note : they have £228m cash in the bank)
Liverpool - £154.7m - currently expanding Anfield to accomodate Klopps ego .
Tottenham Hotspur - £85.7m -with the prospect of a new stadium only 12 months after we move home
Newcastle United - £51.4m - with a 52k capacity stadium
Aston Villa - £44.2m - Up for sale, no chance of Villa park being re-developed anytime soon
West Ham United - £39.5m - soon to move to a rented stadium
Everton FC - £32.05m - Forever up for sale, forever wanting to build a new stadium, forever lacking the money to do so .
So, looking at that little league table , where currently we are 9th , we might , on the back of the stadium move rise to 7th , but , and this is key , the top 6 will continue to move further away as we have capped our earning potential because of the way we have done the deal for the new ground whereas they have not got a similar handicap .
Frankly, it will be a struggle to hang on to 7th place in that table - if we actually get there .
Which brings me back to the question I asked Brady all those years ago at a SAB meeting
How much more money will flow through to the Managers budget as a result of the move ?
and, whatever it is, will it be enough to make a difference ?
Agreed, just moving into the rented accommodation at the OS will not allow us to close the financial gap significantly, but it gives us a raised profile, helping us to attract a better level of players and more fans.
Which in return sets us up nicely for a takeover somewhere down the line (despite our owners' claims they want to keep the club in their families).
If a good enough offer comes in it'll be accepted. Rich owners (unfortunately) are the only realistic chance to seriously challenge the top clubs consistently like Man City are doing now.
The OS will give us a better financial platform than the Boleyn though.
Realistically apart from having a "one off"season with any of Man Utd, City, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool having a poor season then 6th place is our 1st place without a takeover in my opinion.
Spurs have one of the worse squads they have had in years at present but are ahead of us off the field still at the minute due to their more recent success.
But are catchable in terms of league finish even this season based on squad and moving to the OS will help us catch them financially.
Having a better squad and spending more will give us a better chance of a cup, so I think the move will increase the chance of this in some capacity at least.
The million dollar question for me still evolves around being taken over or not, it's the only way I think we would ever compete for CL places or the league
They can pretend all they want but I'm still convinced that when Mr Billionare comes knocking (and I'm sure they will) they will be rubbing their hands together