A previously adjourned hearing concerning the appeal by the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) against the Information Commissioner’s (ICO) order to publish the full financial terms of the deal between itself and West Ham United FC will reconvene on Thursday March 17th at 10am at Court 4, 15 Bream’s Buildings, London, EC4A 1DZ.
A football fans coalition spokesman said:
“We have already demonstrated to the tribunal that it is impossible for another football club to share the stadium, despite the LLDC’s insistence, and the fact that West Ham United were perfectly happy to contradict the LLDC view only serves to underscore the strength of our case.”
“We hope, given this, and the weight of other evidence presented to support our case, that the LLDC and anyone else with influence over them, respects the decision of the tribunal and doesn’t seek a further appeal. During a time when the LLDC itself is struggling to make a commercial success of the Olympic legacy, racking up thousands more on top of the £21,000 of taxpayers’ money already spent on this appeal alone does seem to be frivolous.”
The coalition led by the Charlton Athletic Supporters’ Trust (CAST) and Leyton Orient Fans’ Trust demand to know:
How much the stadium costs West Ham to hire
How much the stadium maintenance will cost, and who will pay for it
How much each party will earn from stadium naming rights
What happens to the stadium in the event of financial difficulties at stadium company E20
What happens if West Ham United is sold by its current owners
How much West Ham United earns from matchday catering
How many jobs are being ‘created’
How much office space is being provided to West Ham United and on what terms
Yawn…. when will they ask how much additional money will be made each season on every day other than those that West Ham is not occupying the Stadium…. ?
Sod ’em.More happy about Norwich getting a point against Citeh.The top 4 is still more than achievable.Should we play a weakened team in the FA Cup & go for the league,lol.OK I ain’t being serious before someone tells me we shouldnt 😀
How much the stadium costs West Ham to hire
(none of your business)
How much the stadium maintenance will cost, and who will pay for it
(none of your business)
How much each party will earn from stadium naming rights
(none of your business)
What happens to the stadium in the event of financial difficulties at stadium company E20
(none of your business) we will buy it
What happens if West Ham United is sold by its current owners
(REALLY none of your business)
How much West Ham United earns from matchday catering
(none of your business)
How many jobs are being ‘created’
(none of your business)
How much office space is being provided to West Ham United and on what terms
(none of your business)
i tried to put this as polity as possible i mean come on is any of this really in the public interest? any business model has to be given time to work first before any questions need to be answered
Elsewhere, a coalition of 60,000 West Ham fans called on fans of other clubs to wind their necks in, swallow their bitterness and perhaps put a little more effort into supporting their own clubs instead of wasting their time trying to find out how ours works. There’s a massive assumption that the stadium is subject to normal market forces and prevailing costs for space rental should apply, but there’s no market for it outside of West Ham and Premier League football. They all forget we could stay at UP and let the thing rot as an ongoing pull on taxpayer finances, or let Orient rent it for ten bob a game. What comments would be made if we pulled out of the deal and left it vacant? Would that make them happy? Have they raised the question of how much AC/DC are paying for rental, or if the Springsteen concert revenue was subject to full UK taxes? Of course not – their concern for the taxpayer only applies to us!
*LIKE* button
Top comment Ray1962. On the one hand I’d love it if the LLDC just dug their heels in and did one appeal after the other exploring all legal avenues here just so the Fan Coalition gets even hotter under their their collective jealous collars.
On the other hand I’d like to hear some of those terms actually put out in the open showing all the world that West Ham being in there is a good thing that makes a lot of financial sense for a stadium in public ownership. It should also show that West Ham are in fact subsidising the athletics legacy in the OS with the Premier League appeal and TV exposure (plus the TV money of course).
Of course it can be argued if West Ham should have paid more money upfront for the stadium conversion or a higher rent. But that has been settled in tough negotiations and West Ham apparently were very shrewd in those negotiations, so fair play to getting a good result there!
I’ve read from rival fans moaning why we are rumoured to pay only 2.5 million rent a year when Chelsea and Spurs are rumoured to pay 12 or 15 million a season at Wembley. I sometimes despair of the human race.
Isn’t it blindingly obvious if you use a service (hired car; rented summer house) for a longer period that the average daily/monthly/yearly rate becomes more favourable ?
Isn’t it blindingly obvious that West Ham committing themselves to rent the OS for 99 years is a different scenario than Chelsea renting Wembley for an emergency interim of two or three seasons only, warranting different rates ?
The Fan Coalition are fighting a losing battle, even if they may get to see some of those terms released soon. We will move into the OS and have a record number of season ticket holders there, our terms will not change despite all their sticking their noses into our business and West Ham are sitting comfortably in the top 6 of the Premier League.
While Charlton Athletic may find themselves in League One soon.
Now THAT surely is enough reason for some more petitions to keep those Charlton Lifers busy for the next five years or so…
Give them the information,
What can they do give our board a prize for being so good at there job,
Ask for Boris to resign for bad leadership of London,
They will ***** for years to come 99 in fact,then we will probably rent Chelski,s new stadium because the Russians will be gone no more money the Arabs won’t want it because we will be top dog in London,
Charlton will be in the southern league playing Orient,
Who cares what is in the agreement as long as it’s legal and finished with,
IF the situation is irrevocable, then I reckon let all the info be published. The fact is that had WHU not bid, then the OS would have rotted like most others round the world. The bidding process was open to ALL. Charlton or Orient could have bid for it. They didn’t. In fact no-one else did. Like any other auction, if there is no competition, then the buyer is in a strong position to negotiate, which is precisely what WHU did. Anyone complaining is simply not facing the natural order of things. Personally, I still feel we could have got more: more days per year, and more stands named (E.g The Billy Bonds Stand – Ooops a bit of my bias and love of BB creeping in there!) – but I am not complaining; better terms would only increase the intensity of criticism.
The OS is OUR home, and not anyone elses. No-one else has a permanent lease on the place. We are the lead tenant. Like any other tenancies, that gives superior rights.
Complaints about the terms are simply sour grapes.
Could the terms be seen as an unfair advantage by the Prem League or even the Euro Court?
Apparently the deal has been seen and given the green light by the Premier League and the EU. In can understand other clubs’ fans’ frustrations, of course I can.
They have to spend hundreds of millions for their new stadiums while we do not need that kind of outlay.
Then again people don’t seem to get the fundamental difference insofar as were not allowed to BUY the place but only rent it. Which means we won’t have to pay for certain costs while we alos won’t rake in the same kind of income from playing in the OS wthout being the actual owners.
For West Ham it is a mixed bag obviously while for the LLDC/taxpayer it was a woeful negotiating position that caused them having to hand out a favourable deal in order to actually find an anchor tenant in the first place who would keep this thing in operation long term.
Of course West Ham have an advantage now over other clubs, that’s why the owners made the move (why would anyone sign a deal not giving them any kind of advantage?). But I don’t see a way where someone would have agreed to rent the OS (leaving ownership in public hands) while still paying for costs as if owning the place outright ?
The government couldn’t have it both ways. Maybe the best way would have been to sell everything up post games to the highest bidder. They obviously didn’t want that as they were keen on keeping with this atletics legacy thing.
I will revel in rival jealous fans singing in future about them paying for “our” stadium.
Let them sing till they choke on their envy, jealousy and anger…COYI!