Skip to main content

West Ham in new London Stadium dispute

Relations between West Ham and the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC) seem to have deteriorated since the Moore Stephens report, commissioned by London mayor Sadiq Khan, which predicted a £140m loss over ten years. Sadiq Khan is clearly unhappy with the deal reached by Boris Johnson.

The club are already involved in a lengthy court case with the LLDC over expanding stadium capacity, but now there is a new dispute over services they say were promised to them.

The club have asked for draught beer to be provided in all stadium bars, but the LLDC insist that West Ham should pay for the pumps. West Ham pay the £150,000 licence fee to show Sky Sports on televisions inside the stadium, but some of the screens carry LLDC adverts. The LLDC wants compensation if they are displaced. West Ham say the LLDC should pay for the hosts/hostesses in the directors' and corporate boxes, but the LLDC say the club should pay.

West Ham want to replace the green cover that goes over the running track with a claret coloured one, showing the club's logo. The LLDC says this would impact on the appearance of the stadium for other events and there are issues over who owns the branding rights.

West Ham insist that the cost over-runs in developing the stadium are not its fault: 'If the landlord cannot operate the stadium to its own budget, then we are not responsible. They want us to pay more for less.' The LLDC says that it is determined to minimize costs to the London taxpayer. The lawyers are going to be kept busy.

Comments

  1. The stadium runs at a loss, Newham council and all the LLDC add on committees and quangos want shot of it, the London mayor wants the taxpayers cost minimised, there is only one outcome and that was blatantly obvious to anyone paying attention to west ham after Hearn and Levy stopped them from purchasing the stadium outright and that is that west ham will now be allowed to own the stadium, but they wont buy it at the cost people think its worth, because they don't have to, they have a 99 year lease, and unless all involved want to keep on servicing a huge growing debt to taxpayers, they will have to give it to west ham lock stock and barrel, actually west ham have played it so well that LLDC/Mayor etc might even have to pay whu to take control. good business west ham..

    ReplyDelete
  2. The first option would be for LLDC put the rent up. It's not like WH can go and play somewhere else instead. Unfortunately they will never be able to own the ground or even remove the running track due to the Olympic Legacy and the the way WH secured preferred bidder status by confirming they would rent it "as is". Tottenham proposed rebuilding it as a dedicated football stadium and continuing the athletics legacy by redeveloping Crystal Palace and this was roundly rejected. LLDC will continue to make money on the site from concerts, athletics and the MLB agreement to play baseball games at the ground.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately Sam you are completely wrong. West Ham WILL end up owning the stadium outright, just like they originally wanted to and won the rights to before Tottenham and Orient lodged complaints and the sale option was scrapped.
      The Olympic Legacy is fast becoming a distant memory, not more so than for those who promised a legacy in the first place, they have all moved on and will now quite happily wash their hands of ever being involved.
      I can guarantee you it's just a matter of time and all parties involved know that. West Ham will end up owning that stadium as the current financial losses will not be allowed to continue. The negotiation positioning has already commenced.

      Delete
  3. I don't think the contract allows them to put the rent up.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wolves get raw deal from FFP

  I used to see a lifelong Wolves fan for lunch once a month.   He was approaching ninety, but still went to games.   Sadly he passed away the other week. As football finance guru Kieran Maguire has noted, Wolves continue to be constrained by financial fair play rules.  Radio 4 this morning described them as this year's 'crisis club' and the pessimists have certainly been piling in. Martin Samuel wrote sympathetically in the Sunday Times yesterday, saying that the Premier League drives talent away with regulatory red tape: 'Why could Al-Hilal sign Neves? Because Wolves needed the money. And why did Wolves need the money? Because the club had to comply with an artificial construct known as financial fair play. So Wolves are going skint, yes? No. There is no suggestion that Wolves are in financial trouble, only that they are failing to meet the rigours of FFP. Wolves’ owners appear to have the money to run the club, and invest in the club, and in fact came up with a pow

Gold standard ground boosts Tottenham's income

The gold standard in European football grounds is the Tottenham Hotspur stadium in north London, a £1bn construction project completed in 2019. Its impact on the club’s finances has become increasingly clear as the effects of the pandemic have faded. Previously, the average fan would spend less than £2 inside the ground on a typical match day, but now that figure is about £16, thanks to new facilities including the longest bar in Europe and an on-site microbrewery. Capacity has gone up from 36,000 at the club’s previous home of White Hart Lane to 62,000.  The new stadium — built on land adjacent to White Hart Lane — has opened the door to a broad range of other events that have helped to push commercial income up from €117mn in 2018 to €215mn in 2022. Last year, Tottenham hosted US singer Beyoncé for five nights on her global Renaissance tour, two NFL matches, as well as rugby games and heavyweight boxing bouts.  Money brought in from football has gone up too. Match day income is

Charlton takeover approved

The long awaited takeover of Charlton Athletic by SE7 Partners from Thomas Sandgaard has been approved:  https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/se7-partners-obtain-efl-approval-for-charlton-athletic-takeover/ Charlton have had unhappy experiences with owners for over a decade, so how this works out will remain to be seen.  There is certainly potential there, but will it be realised? This interview with Charlie Methven gives detail not available elsewhere:  https://thecharltondossier.com/charlie-methven-on-the-record/