LLDC CEO Lyn Garner got it so wrong in her first performance in front the London Assembly as she tries to blame West Ham for the Stadium woes!
She listed four main issues why the London Stadium is losing money
1. Cost of the move of the seats (nothing to do with West Ham)
2. Inefficient operator in London Stadium 185 (nothing to do with West Ham)
3. No naming rights partner (nothing to do with West Ham) despite offering to help sell them.
4. Low rent from UK Athletics (who pay £32,000 per year) and low rent from West Ham who pay nearly £3m in rent and contribute another £1m in catering profit. It should be noted that the West Ham deal is what her predecessors agreed and on which West Ham made their own internal business case. The low rent is a problem of their own making when they signed the deal.
On the pitch surround she accepts that there can be no commercial/naming rights branding in the cover as it is against Premier League rules, so what is the colour worth without branding?
They have failed to land a naming rights partner for five years so I don’t see that resolving itself anytime soon so the argument is of no relevance maybe and plain silly!
Garner says there is nothing to prevent her from selling the “colour” of the pitch surround but actually, the West Ham agreement says that the stadium must always have the look and feel of the home ground of West Ham so this could become another future legal argument.
Garner says the pitch surround is unique and gives West Ham exposure so therefore wants them to pay £300,000 per year for the honour!
But she misses the point that West Ham are the ones who are providing the exposure in the first place through their involvement in the Premier League and worldwide TV audiences.
If I was in the position to do so I’d tell them to stick their counter offer of renting a track cover as they should be paying for it anyway.
Who honestly gives a single damn care what the colour is anyway!
Sully & Co should start looking for an alternative site and how we can buy/build a stadium if our own. No West Ham = no LLDC. Then we’ll see what deal can be struck.
with you on that one Demon as i see it they have broken the terms of the contract so many times so we are able to walk away from the 99yr lease,
i wonder Hugh/Sean is that at all poss?
i can only see more of the same as time goes by so at some point the board are going to have to consider it
They Would need to talk with lawyers Ray
The contract seals us in, it makes no business sense to put the club in a financial hole to avoid some mostly unfair negative press.
I for one care a lot about all the rubbish being spoke about the flaming surround colour .
If the seating was nearer the pitch it wouldn’t be an issue . Claret is actually a bad colour imo . It would look like a holiday camp swimming pool . Move the Athletics out and let us get on with it .
Move the Athletics??
LLDC seems to be relying on that £32,000 pa income…….
I wonder, how much is Lyn Garner costing LLDC??
Maybe that’s the answer.Pay the £32,000 that athletics pay and move them out,so West Ham can do what they need to do.No need to move seats,saving more money,putting down whatever colour carpet they want and have a serious go at selling the naming rights to the stadium.As it stands who wants to do a deal with a company that’s going broke?