As West Ham fans, we will be infinitely aware of the stories which arise each season detailing the annual losses the London Stadium has made. The figures have historically varied between £20 million and £30 million per season, but the tale remains the same: the London Stadium loses vast amounts of money.
It is why they accept that West Ham pay far too little rent in a deal arranged by Baroness Brady, which at the time was labelled the deal of the century. Unfortunately, West Ham find themselves in a rather sticky situation, with strained relationships between landlords and tenants.
So whilst we demand the London Stadium at a peppercorn rate, we also do not have the kind of facilities expected of a modern-day football venue. In many respects, it is something of a halfway house where West Ham do not get the stadium cooperation we would like, and the stadium management organisation do not receive the money needed. It is a situation where nobody wins.
Athletics row highlights deeper London Stadium issues
Factor in the continuing rows between West Ham and the stadium, which have gone legal more times than I care to remember, and it is clear to see that there is a breakdown in the relationship between the two parties.
This has not been helped by West Ham’s recent reluctance to allow UK Athletics to hold the World Championships in September 2029. West Ham have correctly cited the fact that the Premier League season is already up and running during the month of September, and have so far refused to approve athletics use of the stadium.
However, I cannot help but feel we are being… unnecessarily awkward. Because, as is standard during the month of September, there tends to be a two-week international break. Factor in one home game and one away, it is entirely possible that West Ham would only need to move one home fixture, which the Premier League would be more than happy to do.
London mayor Khan doesn’t enjoy a great relationship with West Ham
A chance to repair the relationship
Taking off my claret and blue spectacles for a second, it is easy to see why the club’s reluctance to do this has peeved the stadium owners. Because make no mistake about it, hosting the World Athletics Championships would be one of the few events which would turn a profit for the London Stadium.
Much of what goes on around West Ham are vanity projects, with Major League Baseball being a case in point. London Mayor Sadiq Khan wants to host the event, but overall, it has made a loss. The same will not be said for the World Athletics Championships, which would pack the stadium out day after day and might actually revive some goodwill between landlords and tenants, whilst also allowing the venue, which is beginning to come apart at the seams, to receive a much-needed cash injection.
I wonder if you would feel the same if you rented a house and the L/L wanted it back for a month? Why should we agree to this? In this season in particular we should all be aware how a bad start to a season can ruin the entire season. We will have a disadvantage to all other teams having no home games in September. Fact. Sorry, love athletics but it’s not our problem to fix if they won’t allow the athletics event a few weeks earlier in August. After all, we all had to have a world cup 6 months out of sync when Qatar hosted! Didn’t hurt their bid.
In my opinion, we should accommodate this request. I’m no fan of Khan or Coe, but as a lifelong Hammer who went to the Athletics World Champs in 2017 at the stadium, I have to say it was fantastic. Some goodwill on our part may help ease our landlord/tenant difficulties and it’s not bad marketing to have the club name and colours broadcast world-wide, irrespective of whether we’re in the Premiership or (gulp) the Championship in 2029.
If it wasn’t for us taking on the stadium post Olympics then it would have been converted to a 25,000 seat athletics venue and no doubt making a loss each year.
I thought the stadium rebuilt in Birmingham for last Commonwealth games was going to be athletics HQ in future. It would also spread big events to Midlands and North to counter the political accusations that we are too London centric!
I assume theres more to this than just September, why would the stadium owners have the place in athletics mode all summer, back to football at great expense for 1, possibly 2 home games in August (Never know what could happen in that time, maybe some pre qualifying european games) and then back to athletics for 3 to 4 weeks.
Thats a lot of money for athletics to football and back to athletics in a 9 week period.
And I dont think any of us would be happy with no home games until beginning of October.
I am confused as to the implications of vacating the stadium for Athletics. The press keep saying it might only be one game that needs to be moved. My understanding is that it takes 15 days to transform the stadium. That would mean 30 days, add on 7 days for the event makes 37. Next they will want to hold an event for disabled and we would be up to 6 weeks. Can you bring some clarity please Gonzo
A contract is a contract. I do think that West Ham should help out here but equally perhaps there needs to be something in it for West Ham to agree the contract variation. Perhaps allow some of the women’s teams games at the London stadium without the current excessive fee that would apply?
Hi Gonzo, agree with just about everything you say . Amazing what a bit of common sense can do ⚒
Cheers Steve, exactly my thoughts mate
Why is the set up and take down time being ignored in the discussion…Is that not up to 2 weeks either side?..
It’s not being ignored Dean, hence the reason the whole of September is being requested. Typically the Stadium will be in use for 10 days including the opening ceremony. We’re looking at 1 possibly 2 home fixtures being switched.
I just think we could pick our battles more carefully given we’ll need some goodwill at some point.