West Ham 2016/17

[QUOTE="BlueHammer85, post: 9805039, member: 33182]

As for these owners not giving a shite - how about the fact they invested out there own pockets from this club folding, we was in serious debt under the icelandics....[/QUOTE]

I am not quite sure it was an altruistic act or out of love for the club. They got a decent deal buying the club and would have known about the potential of the club. I don't know what the motivations were behind buying the club but because I think they are slime, I will tend to look at it negatively.

Personally, I hope West Ham flourish. Far more likeable than United, Spurs (sorry, Crouchy), Liverpool, Arsenal and Everton. I actually have sympathy with West Ham fans this season, as I think you have been let down by your board. Their eyes are bigger than their bellies. The whole stadium fiasco appears to be down to them caring about the £ and having little consideration for the fans. Again, just to reitierate, that view stems from the fact that I dislike Sullivan et al.
 
Crouchinho said:
Lol you've always ripped the piss out of Spurs and I never said a word mate. That season we signed Soldado and paulinho you'd put up pictures every week laughing at us. Mine is not banter though as I'm just speaking the truth.

Watford and Sunderland fans never had an issue with you before but you've irked them lot. I was right about state aid too, not quite on the Madrid scale but when the government won't break even for 400 years it's a favourable deal
Click to expand...

Ha, good memory to be fair. It's been a long time since I can take the piss out of Spurs :(

As for state aid Zzz, dodgy deals bla bla bla - do I care ?

I'm just relived we got out of Upton Park and more than happy with our new stadium.
 
"Deeply concerned" London Mayor Sadiq Khan has ordered an investigation into a £50m increase in the cost of converting West Ham's London Stadium.

In 2015, former mayor Boris Johnson said the change from an Olympics arena to a football stadium would cost £272m, a figure which has now risen to £323m.

The investigation will look into inherited issues including the cost of moving the retractable seating.

Paul Fletcher, who has built or advised on more than 30 new grounds, said it should be rebuilt as fans are too far from the pitch so it is not suitable for football.

The club declined to comment when contacted by BBC Sport.

A spokesperson for the London Mayor said: "The mayor is deeply concerned about the finances of the Olympic Stadium, which have clearly been left in a total and utter mess by the previous administration at City Hall.

"Sadiq has ordered a detailed investigation into the full range of financial issues surrounding the stadium."

Part of the reason for the increase is a rise in the cost to install and operate the retractable seating, which can be removed for concerts and athletics events. The cost of £8m a year is up from an estimated cost of £300,000 because the company originally contracted for the job had gone bust, reports BBC sports editor Dan Roan.

It means stadium operators London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) and the London taxpayer will need to pick up the additional costs, with Premier League side West Ham contributing £2.5m-a-year rent, plus the one-off £15m for the conversion cost.

Sir Robin Wales, Mayor of Newham - the borough which co-owns the stadium after investing £40m - said he "fully supported" the call for an independent review into the rising costs.

"We have a duty to taxpayers to scrutinise this," he added.

John O'Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "For too long the details of this shabby deal were kept in secret and lacked proper scrutiny so Sadiq Khan is absolutely right to look again at the case.

"It's now down to those in charge of the inquiry to get to the bottom of how West Ham were gifted the deal of the century while ensuring their investigation doesn't end up costing the taxpayer as much as the stadium."

West Ham won the bid to occupy the Olympic Stadium in March 2013 and played their first game there in August 2016, after 112 years at Upton Park.

However, their move has been marred by fan violence, leading the club to issue a five-point security plan to prevent further disorder.
 
Crouchinho said:
"Deeply concerned" London Mayor Sadiq Khan has ordered an investigation into a £50m increase in the cost of converting West Ham's London Stadium.

In 2015, former mayor Boris Johnson said the change from an Olympics arena to a football stadium would cost £272m, a figure which has now risen to £323m.

The investigation will look into inherited issues including the cost of moving the retractable seating.

Paul Fletcher, who has built or advised on more than 30 new grounds, said it should be rebuilt as fans are too far from the pitch so it is not suitable for football.

The club declined to comment when contacted by BBC Sport.

A spokesperson for the London Mayor said: "The mayor is deeply concerned about the finances of the Olympic Stadium, which have clearly been left in a total and utter mess by the previous administration at City Hall.

"Sadiq has ordered a detailed investigation into the full range of financial issues surrounding the stadium."

Part of the reason for the increase is a rise in the cost to install and operate the retractable seating, which can be removed for concerts and athletics events. The cost of £8m a year is up from an estimated cost of £300,000 because the company originally contracted for the job had gone bust, reports BBC sports editor Dan Roan.

It means stadium operators London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) and the London taxpayer will need to pick up the additional costs, with Premier League side West Ham contributing £2.5m-a-year rent, plus the one-off £15m for the conversion cost.

Sir Robin Wales, Mayor of Newham - the borough which co-owns the stadium after investing £40m - said he "fully supported" the call for an independent review into the rising costs.

"We have a duty to taxpayers to scrutinise this," he added.

John O'Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "For too long the details of this shabby deal were kept in secret and lacked proper scrutiny so Sadiq Khan is absolutely right to look again at the case.

"It's now down to those in charge of the inquiry to get to the bottom of how West Ham were gifted the deal of the century while ensuring their investigation doesn't end up costing the taxpayer as much as the stadium."

West Ham won the bid to occupy the Olympic Stadium in March 2013 and played their first game there in August 2016, after 112 years at Upton Park.

However, their move has been marred by fan violence, leading the club to issue a five-point security plan to prevent further disorder.
Click to expand...

It should be knocked down apparently

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37828905

Only if we aren't fucking paying for it.
 
Question for Sadiq Khan, how many dildos can you get for £51m and do you get a discount for paying in bulk?? He should ask for remuneration in rubber phalluses and then use them to fuck the whole of London, facking spivs, innit bruv.
 
stony said:
It should be knocked down apparently

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37828905

Only if we aren't fucking paying for it.
Click to expand...

lol, when Levy proposed to knock it down, and Spurs would pay to make it into a football stadium everyone was up in arms, now these 'experts' are saying to tear it down. You cannot make it up!

Listening to some fella on Talksport, he said the government would never get their money back and be out of pocket by 18m a year for 100 years, it would be over 2bn lost with conversion

I don't live in England anymore, so cannot complain too much, but if I were a tax-payer there I'd be a bit pissed off. Tax-payers paying for their corner flag 'maintenence', goal posts, cleaners, pest control, score boards, jumbotrons, stewards, 8m a year on retractable seating, not to mention the 272m cost of converting it already!
 
Crouchinho said:
lol, when Levy proposed to knock it down, and Spurs would pay to make it into a football stadium everyone was up in arms, now these 'experts' are saying to tear it down. You cannot make it up!

Listening to some fella on Talksport, he said the government would never get their money back and be out of pocket by 18m a year for 100 years, it would be over 2bn lost with conversion

I don't live in England anymore, so cannot complain too much, but if I were a tax-payer there I'd be a bit pissed off. Tax-payers paying for their corner flag 'maintenence', goal posts, cleaners, pest control, score boards, jumbotrons, stewards, 8m a year on retractable seating, not to mention the 272m cost of converting it already!
Click to expand...

And to think City get stick for having a "free stadium". We got pelters from the media, but mostly after the takeover. The comparisons to us are ludicrous. We paid for the redevelopment into a football stadium, gave them Maine Rd, and continue to pay rent of £4M per year, which goes into the coffers of MCC. It would actually have been cheaper for City(post Mansour) to buy the stadium outright, but then the local council would miss out on £4M a year rent.
The deal West Ham have got stinks like Kerry Katona's minge. Bent as fuck and there should be a public enquiry into why so much tax payers money has ended up in the hands of a couple of dildo salesmen and their hired witch.
 
stony said:
And to think City get stick for having a "free stadium". We got pelters from the media, but mostly after the takeover. The comparisons to us are ludicrous. We paid for the redevelopment into a football stadium, gave them Maine Rd, and continue to pay rent of £4M per year, which goes into the coffers of MCC. It would actually have been cheaper for City(post Mansour) to buy the stadium outright, but then the local council would miss out on £4M a year rent.
The deal West Ham have got stinks like Kerry Katona's minge. Bent as fuck and there should be a public enquiry into why so much tax payers money has ended up in the hands of a couple of dildo salesmen and their hired witch.
Click to expand...
I've often thought about why City haven't offered to buy the ground (assuming they haven't) and came to the conclusion that renting / leasing it at 3 or 4 million a year, well, based on a 100 million sale, if someone had 100 million quid, if you kept it in the bank, you'd get more than 3 or 4 million in interest. Or do I have my sums wrong?
 
Crouchinho said:
"Deeply concerned" London Mayor Sadiq Khan has ordered an investigation into a £50m increase in the cost of converting West Ham's London Stadium.

In 2015, former mayor Boris Johnson said the change from an Olympics arena to a football stadium would cost £272m, a figure which has now risen to £323m.

The investigation will look into inherited issues including the cost of moving the retractable seating.

Paul Fletcher, who has built or advised on more than 30 new grounds, said it should be rebuilt as fans are too far from the pitch so it is not suitable for football.

The club declined to comment when contacted by BBC Sport.

A spokesperson for the London Mayor said: "The mayor is deeply concerned about the finances of the Olympic Stadium, which have clearly been left in a total and utter mess by the previous administration at City Hall.

"Sadiq has ordered a detailed investigation into the full range of financial issues surrounding the stadium."

Part of the reason for the increase is a rise in the cost to install and operate the retractable seating, which can be removed for concerts and athletics events. The cost of £8m a year is up from an estimated cost of £300,000 because the company originally contracted for the job had gone bust, reports BBC sports editor Dan Roan.

It means stadium operators London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) and the London taxpayer will need to pick up the additional costs, with Premier League side West Ham contributing £2.5m-a-year rent, plus the one-off £15m for the conversion cost.

Sir Robin Wales, Mayor of Newham - the borough which co-owns the stadium after investing £40m - said he "fully supported" the call for an independent review into the rising costs.

"We have a duty to taxpayers to scrutinise this," he added.

John O'Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "For too long the details of this shabby deal were kept in secret and lacked proper scrutiny so Sadiq Khan is absolutely right to look again at the case.

"It's now down to those in charge of the inquiry to get to the bottom of how West Ham were gifted the deal of the century while ensuring their investigation doesn't end up costing the taxpayer as much as the stadium."

West Ham won the bid to occupy the Olympic Stadium in March 2013 and played their first game there in August 2016, after 112 years at Upton Park.

However, their move has been marred by fan violence, leading the club to issue a five-point security plan to prevent further disorder.
Click to expand...

They have a duty to the taxpayer, to not fucking pay it. Tell West Ham to dig in their coffers.
Since when has the tax payer been liable for the upkeep of private business.
 
How have they managed to pull it off with retractable seating that actually is retractable but has to be dismantled and takes weeks and the stadium won't be ready for kick off next season ?
Why would you need to take the seating out to stage concerts anyway ?
 
prestonibbo_mcfc said:
They have a duty to the taxpayer, to not fucking pay it. Tell West Ham to dig in their coffers.
Since when has the tax payer been liable for the upkeep of private business.
Click to expand...
Yep the government is only getting back 3m a year yet the government put close to 18m a year into it. No wonder the country is so messed up!
 
stony said:
And to think City get stick for having a "free stadium". We got pelters from the media, but mostly after the takeover. The comparisons to us are ludicrous. We paid for the redevelopment into a football stadium, gave them Maine Rd, and continue to pay rent of £4M per year, which goes into the coffers of MCC. It would actually have been cheaper for City(post Mansour) to buy the stadium outright, but then the local council would miss out on £4M a year rent.
The deal West Ham have got stinks like Kerry Katona's minge. Bent as fuck and there should be a public enquiry into why so much tax payers money has ended up in the hands of a couple of dildo salesmen and their hired witch.
Click to expand...

You really stuck money into it, and I think both parties get a great deal, city and the council, I don't think anybody kicked up a stink at the time because everyone thought it was good, it still is really. This one is very dodgy, we are not talking millions it's potentially in the billions. I noticed the likes of Seb Coe are keeping quiet about all of it now
 
Mad Eyed Screamer said:
I've often thought about why City haven't offered to buy the ground (assuming they haven't) and came to the conclusion that renting / leasing it at 3 or 4 million a year, well, based on a 100 million sale, if someone had 100 million quid, if you kept it in the bank, you'd get more than 3 or 4 million in interest. Or do I have my sums wrong?
Click to expand...

Good question but the beautiful thing is they can upgrade it and not have to fork out the expense. Either way it creates more jobs and more business in the area and everyone is making money, unless I'm way off the mark
 
Crouchinho said:
You really stuck money into it, and I think both parties get a great deal, city and the council, I don't think anybody kicked up a stink at the time because everyone thought it was good, it still is really. This one is very dodgy, we are not talking millions it's potentially in the billions. I noticed the likes of Seb Coe are keeping quiet about all of it now
Click to expand...

Coe is an arsehole, most of problems at the stadium is because he and others insisted it could still be used as an athletics stadium. Who honestly gives a shit about watching athletics apart from when it's one of the big ones like the olympics.
 
Mad Eyed Screamer said:
I've often thought about why City haven't offered to buy the ground (assuming they haven't) and came to the conclusion that renting / leasing it at 3 or 4 million a year, well, based on a 100 million sale, if someone had 100 million quid, if you kept it in the bank, you'd get more than 3 or 4 million in interest. Or do I have my sums wrong?
Click to expand...

You might be right mate, but I thought they had dismissed the idea because any money paid for the stadium would leave Manchester. This way everybody benefits.
 
prestonibbo_mcfc said:
They have a duty to the taxpayer, to not fucking pay it. Tell West Ham to dig in their coffers.
Since when has the tax payer been liable for the upkeep of private business.
Click to expand...
Isnt Newham one of the London boroughs with one of the worst homeless lists and having a crisis with social housing? And it paid £40million into that stadium?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top