The Olympic Stadium: Poll IV

[Paddy O'Hammer]

Lease!! Rubbish.

[Babooshka]

In her statement M/s Brady says "... it must provide an arena that is fit for world-class football..."
I was wondering who would be playing there then...?
In summary - a patronising and pathetic attempt to get supporters onside.... "yes we have listened to the supporters with interest..." and decided to proceed anyway despite the majority opposing the move...!
You utter fools - this will be the end of The Hammers as we know them and the connection to our spiritual home.
How they can make the ground fit for purpose is to pull it down and start again, but under the lease, no doubt this will be impossible.
We are losing our home because of this bunch of half-wits, and that's being generous to them. They have an underlying agenda to recover their investment and clearly we the supporters are being mugged with impunity.
Utterly Utterly appalled!!!
Have I made my point clear?

[Pop Robson]

Are SAB still sworn to secrecy ?

Or can all be revealed ?

[mywhufc]

Are SAB still sworn to secrecy ?

Or can all be revealed ?

Depends on what you want to know

[WestHamIFC]

I wonder how people would vote if these plans are indeed true?:

http://www.kumb.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 9#p3353881" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;




Would probably sway me in favour, tbh..

[mushy]

They would probably read the bit about retractable seating in the upper tiers and kill themselves laughing.

[westham,eggyandchips]

If these "plans" are to be believed then why dont the club release them?

Also, plans are one thing, planning permission is something else. Lets not forget we will only be leasing the stadium, so to carry out such changes are going to be ver very difficult.

[the pink palermo]

I am not a member of WHU's view commitee , nor I am a moderator on this site , I do however ( currently) sit on the SAB .

Around a week or so ago the VC gave a briefing to two major media outlets , the BBC and the Daily Telegraph which caused them to publish stories in which the VC was quoted as saying the fans to whom the club had shown their plans were "100%" in favour of the move .
The fans in question were widely believed to be the 43 members of the SAB Olympic stadium focus group who had taken part in a "show of hands" at a presentation a few weeks previously .

A number of posters from this chatboard were in that room , and categorically denied ever voting in favour of the move .I'm one such person , and this has been confirmed by another poster on this site , who was also at the meeting .The club , on the offical site, issued a clarification which suggested that "nobody had voted against the move" .This , to eagle eyed observers , is obviously not the same as voting for the move .

WHU's view ? The independent fans group who have a neutral position on whether to move to the OS or not but who have campaigned for the club to ballot it's fans ahead of any decision to relocate , met in the supporters club a week ago .That meeting was attended by WHU's Marketing Director who heard impassioned pleas for the club to undertake such a task , one that had been promised in a previous meeting by the VC , since recinded .

WHU's view ? advised the clubs Marketing Director of their intention to carry out a poll at the remaining home fixtures , which would be in addition to the polls already undertaken by KUMB.com, and of which the club were aware , having quoted the results of the poll undertaken when Spurs were rumoured to be interested in Stratford , in the presentation to the SAB .

A considerable number of ballot forms were distributed by volunteers prior to the match versus Birmingham City , and many of them were completed and returned immediately .The desire of the fans to have a say in the future of their club was obvious to those handing out the leaflets .

The BBC then interviewed two members of WHU's view committee on the London news slot , giving some publicity to the poll they were undertaking .

Strangely enough , and by sheer coincidence a Twitter account , widely believed to have a source close to the club, possibly even the VC herself, suddenly comments on the "plans" .Nothing too detailed of course , all broad brushes , but containing the magic words" retractable seating" and "cover the track" .Oh, and it's "awesome" .

Now, as much as I would like to believe this Twitter post , because I have no vested interest in doing otherwise , I have a problem with the credibility of the possible source that has fed them the story .

You see, I know there was not 100% support offered for a move by the SAB , I know there was at least one dissenting voice, and I know there were no details ( and it's dcoumented in the clubs minutes of the meeting) on the financial benefits of the proposed relocation .Therefore I know the stories attributed to the clubs VC were not correct .

So, why should I believe these stories which are also allegedly from the same or similar source ?

That's the problem when you don't tell the truth .Nobody believes anything you say .

[Iron-worx]

If these "plans" are to be believed then why dont the club release them?

Also, plans are one thing, planning permission is something else. Lets not forget we will only be leasing the stadium, so to carry out such changes are going to be ver very difficult.

I Don't see how such plans could be released given the confidentiality clauses of the application is the answer to the first question, they wouldn't be releasable until after the decision had been announced - Which is pretty much what Gold et al have been saying.

Given that the authorities are doing all they can to avoid a white elephant I doubt that they would make it difficult at all to carry out reasonable changes, in fact they'd likely be falling over themselves to oblige not wanting to be seen as obstructive.

Lets face it ours must be the most likely application from their point of view - Cricket, nah, Baseball, you've got to be kidding me that could fail before it started. They're looking for long term viability of the place and from their point of view were the most likely candidate for that.

My prediction is that it will be awarded to us and that there will be some plans albeit maybe not as grandiose as suggested in this tweet.

[Yea Why Not]

How reliable is this fella on Twitter? And what has he got to do with our club?

Cheers

[WestHamIFC]

If these "plans" are to be believed then why dont the club release them?

Because they are not allowed to until 21 May??

[Aceface]

Clungewhu. I have seen the plans for the olympic stadium and its awsome. Retractable seating in the lower and upper levels totaly cover the track. Retractable roof. All 4 stands named after legends moore hurst peters brooking. Seats claret and blue.You will be amazed its fantastic. Cost 150 mil.

Taking into account that it's Adzman - whose Twitter modus operandi seems to be 'tell people what they want to hear' - this would certainly make me look seriously at the move again. It's pretty much what I would have wanted right from the start.

Which is why I doubt that it's actually the case - why were literally none of these plans revealed during the first round of bidding? They spent years pitching for it first time round, then in the space of 3 or 4 months during the re-bid they've managed to figure out retractable seating and retractable roofing? Suspect

[Georgee Paris]

I'm sold.

[The Boleyn Hound]

I'm not sure if I'm being pedantic or not here,but:

"All four stands named after"...etc.

As it is a bowl, there will not be four stands, but one.

What has he seen to make him say this, or has he, like some have suggested, said what he knows we want to hear?

[Aceface]

As someone mentions on his Twitter page, if it's accurate giving out this info would probably be in breach of whatever confidentiality agreements are in place. So it'll probably turn out the plans ARE as breathtakingly amazing as they're making out, but we'll lose out on it after Barry Hearn gets a div lawyer in to take us down to Chinatown on a technicality.

That is the actual West Ham way

[Aceface]

I'm not sure if I'm being pedantic or not here,but:

"All four stands named after"...etc.

As it is a bowl, there will not be four stands, but one.

What has he seen to make him say this, or has he, like some have suggested, said what he knows we want to hear?

Also, Martin Peters Stand? Nah.

Should be a few more deserving names that should be at the front of the line first

[Sloop John B]

As someone mentions on his Twitter page, if it's accurate giving out this info would probably be in breach of whatever confidentiality agreements are in place. So it'll probably turn out the plans ARE as breathtakingly amazing as they're making out, but we'll lose out on it after Barry Hearn gets a div lawyer in to take us down to Chinatown on a technicality.

That is the actual West Ham way

Also we get the stadium and the plans are false, or we totally reject the stadium, and then the plans are real.

Was totally against until I read Claret and Blue seats...now 100% onboard

[Yea Why Not]

How reliable is this fella on Twitter? And what has he got to do with our club?

Cheers

?????????? Anyone?

[Matt of iron]

Keep ignoring him everyone.

He might leave!

[beckton]

Ignore who?