Uncovering the London Stadium disputes

So what are the real disputes between West Ham and the public London Stadium owners?

The first category of disputes is related to what West Ham believe they are entitled to under their agreement namely under their London Club comparable clause.

The clause allows them to have the stadium be compared with Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs in terms of catering and facilities. Another clause promises West Ham the look and feel of their home ground.

Issues such as Sky Sports TV in the corporate lounges, the availability of draft beer and who pays for corporate hostesses are currently being decided by independent expert determination.

The same process will be used to decide whether the stadium owners have delivered on the West Ham look and feel promise.  Both sides are agreed to abide by the independent outcome.

The bigger legal challenge comes over West Ham request to increase capacity to 60,000. This is scheduled to land in court in November this year.

The contract states a minimum football capacity of 54,000 but states no maximum, whilst at the same time saying  West Ham has access to all concessionaire areas on match days.

West Ham argues that includes the unused seats, the stadium owners say it does not and West Ham should pay more than their current £25m rent for any seats over 54,000.

Perhaps  the real dispute is over money and the stadium massive losses. The London Stadium lost £20m last year and is forecast to lose a further £140m over the next 10 years.

The cost of moving the seats, stewarding, the lack of a naming rights partner and the under-performance of sub-contractors all led to the loss-making stadium.

The Stadium owners want West Ham to pay more than their £2.5m per year while West Ham believes the stadium could significantly reduce their losses by running the stadium more effectively, selling the naming rights and maximising profits from catering.