News

“Bitter and Jealous” | Clubs Furious at Hammers PSR Advantage

|
Image for “Bitter and Jealous” | Clubs Furious at Hammers PSR Advantage

West Ham’s rental agreement at the former Olympic stadium was once hailed as the “deal of the century.” Now, the Irons’ rental agreement for the venue has come under more scrutiny, with many claiming the club has an unfair advantage over competitors under the current PSR regulations.

The London Stadium continues to represent a massive financial burden for the capital’s taxpayers, as revealed in the latest accounts from the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC). Despite efforts to offset losses by hosting concerts and other events, the stadium’s owner, E20 Stadium LLP, reported a staggering loss of almost £21 million in the financial year ending May 2024.

The revealed accounts underscores the significant disparity between the costs of maintaining the stadium and the income it generates. Notably, West Ham pay a relatively modest rent of £3.6 million per season, which does not cover any of the stadium’s upkeep expenses, such as heating, cleaning, or maintenance.

Understandably, a few noses have been put out of joint by the fact that West Ham retains all ticket revenues and a portion of the catering income, further tipping the financial balance in the club’s favour. While the recent loss of Allianz as a potential stadium sponsor is significant, many within football and the London Assembly resent the Hammers’ deal.

Share this article

Hammers Chat video blogger @Gonzobignose

0 comments

  • John Ayris says:

    The stadium was rented within market conditions. There has been no option of buying it. That’s the beginning and the end of the matter.

    • John simmonds says:

      Wasn’t it Barry “Earns” who put a spanner in the works to stop us buying it? And not forgetting St Daniel over.in Tottenham wanting to knock it down and rebuild over their neck of the woods!!!!
      Maybe if they’d have kept schtum and we’d have bought it no one would be moaning

    • Jezza says:

      We don’t own the stadium we rent it for about 40 days per year so the rent we pay represents £30-40M per year. If we hadn’t rented it there would be 8 foot weeds in it now just like all the other ex Olympic stadia around the world. For the other 300 odd days a year it is the responsibility of the LLDC to make it pay not WHU. But as we all know LLDC couldn’t organise a **** up etc… So stop blaming us because people’s first choice foe a venue is Wembly then the Cocks new Stadium.

  • Andrew Couch says:

    This seems a non-story, and I don’t believe it. The club have been in the stadium for 7 or 8 years and this has been in the public domain since the start of their tenure.

  • Charlie Farley says:

    There’s not a club in the country who wouldn’t have grabbed the opportunity at playing at home in the Olympic Stadium had it been built in their area.

  • Bonzo says:

    I Imagine living in London and having to pay taxes on the Tottenham Hotspur stadium would be pretty annoying. As a West Ham fan though i absolutely love the thought of all those Spurs fans paying for our stadium.

  • elduder says:

    well the government is the reason energy costs are sky high

    if it weren’t for jo-blowhard the ukraine peace deal in april 2022 would have held but of course our representatives don’t represent us, they represent their political donors the military and media industrial complex

    that being said, crying about high energy costs is spilt milk compared to all those ukranian conscripts forced to their death, such a sick world

  • Dawn says:

    What part of Russia you from deluded?, I mean edeluded whatever.. Ffs. COYI!

    • Dave says:

      He aint exactly wrong but not sure what its really got to do with West Ham & the stadium.

  • Trevsheadwonthecup says:

    The alianz deal was never happening at any point. Sean even said as much at the end of December.

  • James Mercer says:

    Are you joking ya clown ?!!!
    It was specifically said that when the stadium was built, it would NEVER be sold or used as a football stadium ( which, by the way the whole world knew, was a financial lie).
    So NO we would still be moaning.
    The Stadium is a tax burden , whist W Ham reap the benefits – absolute joke !!

  • Dal M says:

    Due to the fact Khan hates regular British folk, he won’t let us purchase the ground. Once financially crippled will we be able achieve the evitable and make it our own.

    • Deane says:

      Of course the deal was done (just like ULEZ) by Boris Johnson and I’m sure the little brown packet he got for that was more than Harry ever dreamed of

  • Paul H says:

    Don’t protest about this as you will be labelled far right

  • Alan says:

    I thought we had a deal in place to buy the stadium until other clubs moaned about them losing fans and whatever else they were moaning about so it had to go back to the bidding process where whoever won that process could only rent

  • Nigel says:

    West Ham should have built their own stadium.
    Who will repair it when it gets old!
    That’s what happens when you try and do things on the cheap!

    • Martin Treasure says:

      That is the thing I cannot understand about the London Mayor’s stance. Having leased it on a 99 year lease for peanuts, he then compounds the error by saying ‘ it is an asset so we will never sell it’ – this ensuring the public purse is lumbered with millions of losses and maintenance every year, thanks to his own deal to lease it.

      Edit: Of course, thanks to the many who corrected my comment. Boris Johnson agreed the initial deal. So they’re both useless at business.
      Apologies for the dumbness. Busy morning. MT

      • Deane says:

        Like ULEZ Z it was Boris Johnson’s deal not Sadiq Khan’s but let’s blame the black man cos we’re British

  • Wayne says:

    It’s nothing new though is it. Everyone knows about it and the fact that there is a legal contract in place, there isn’t a great deal that anyone can do.

    Until it is sold to whoever owns the club at the time, the debt will keep racking up and nothing else changes.

    The mayor of London has a big part to play in this, then and now.

  • Stephen Callaghan says:

    Nobody mentions Man City deal where they also rent for peanuts but get sponsorship around 40 million quid a year

  • Al Cutts says:

    Why target West Ham. Man City, Chelsea and Newcastle all rent their stadiums. Don’t them 3 have an unfair advantage?.

  • Raymond Clark says:

    Everyone thought we would be mad to rent instead of buy. They’re not laughing now. Exactly the opposite, the green eyed monster is surfacing. Id rather we owend it so we actually had a real home ground. But financially we’re,(don’t grown) quids in !

  • James says:

    It’s stunningly pathetic that some people would rather see the ground empty and falling down than see it used and bring in a small rental amount into the purse. I know they’re mostly Spurs fans but time to grow up,the deal was done and it is what it is.

Comments are closed.