Forum | General Discussion

After delaying the meeting for months, London mayor Sadiq Khan finally sat down with Lady Brady to discuss the impasse that is the London Stadium and the commensurate financial fall out that is grabbing the headlines. The prime detail to initially emerge is that E20 the company who 'manage' the London Stadium are liable for all the staffing costs, not West Ham United. As Hammers pay 'only' £2.5 Million per year in 'rent' most observers feel the club negotiated too good a deal and that the long suffering tax payer is footing the bill for Hammers' swish rented accommodation in Stratford.

The feeling that West Ham are 'getting away with it' is generally held by the public, however in this instance it is doing the much maligned Hammers' hierarchy a disservice, quite simply West Ham may have negotiated a good deal but the finances would not be called in to question if the stadium was being run correctly for all the rest of the time that it is not being used for football. One of the main reasons that the London Stadium is not viable is that it is not fit for purpose in it's current format, and without massive investment it never will be. Currently running at around an £18 Million loss annually, the stadium needs to be redesigned if it is ever going to make money, and the first action should be the sale of the stadium to West Ham United with the proviso that the club run the facility as a business utilising specialist partners to maximise profitability.

Most Olympic facilities become 'white elephants' for their host countries, but it doesn't have to be that way, the Russians despite their political aims and the odd assassination attempt, dealt with the issue of redundant facilities very efficiently when converting their 'show case' stadium from hosting athletics to football. They realised that the appetite for athletics on a continued basis was non existent and that football was the only realistic path to pursue when it came to making the stadium viable. The sooner a similar conclusion is made about the London Stadium the better, currently it is neither one thing nor the other despite the 'beautification' of the stadium for match days, surely an arrangement can be reached that ensured the tax payer no longer had to support the running of the stadium, after all the Olympics finished years ago!

To conclude, the only sensible realistic outcome of the discussions between the Mayor and the Baroness would be the drawing of a line in the sand regarding past events and confirmation of a mutual desire to move forward effectively. The 'bad blood' surrounding the move from the Boleyn will take a generation to over come, but it will come sooner if the London Stadium is finally fit for purpose!

Perhaps West Ham United are not capable of 'running' the stadium 365 days a year?, perhaps they do not possess the necessary funding?, but surely they can make more of a go of it than the shambolic organisation that currently runs it?
West Ham have repeatedly offered to pay for visual improvements but have been refused permission, this is an area that is of particular interest to the London Mayor and one of the reasons for the initial delay in his first meeting with West Ham, as his 'assistants' trawled through the mine field of information pertaining to the stadium's running and finances, it seems clear now that on inspection the 'faults' all lie away from West Ham, and if Lord Coe and Co hadn't been so hard headed this ridiculous situation would never had occurred.

This coming Saturday will be massive for the club and the Stadium, defeat to fellow premier league strugglers Southampton would leave West Ham firmly mired in the relegation battle and in the bottom three. The term 'six pointer' is often used to describe relegation tussles, but this really will be a six pointer, actually a 'twelve pointer' if you take in to consideration the importance of the match. It will be three weeks since the defeat to Burnley and the pitch 'incursion' that happened, we use the word incursion rather than invasion because that's what it was, a pitch 'incursion' by four individuals!

David Moyes has had to juggle his squad to compensate for it being threadbare due to injuries and senseless player sales, he may well be without at least two key players ahead of the Saints match. Manu Lanzini and the ginger pele James Collins are doubts to face what will probably be a resurgent Southampton side as they play their first league game with ex-Stoke City boss Mark Hughes in charge. Results wise you can see what the projected outcome of the match will be by using football tips, it will be interesting to see if Mark Hughes is as ' industrially verbal' to Marko Arnoutovic as he was when they last met during Hammers' 3 -0 victory over Stoke.

There is always anxiety associated with sending players away on International duty especially if the club is embroiled in an epic relegation battle, they can come back tired or sometimes injured, hardly ideal preparation for the crucial games ahead. It is to be hoped that all of Hammers International players who went away on duty come back unscathed, so the news yesterday that Manu Lanzini had picked up an injury was not well received, although he has apparently made a remarkable recovery that has enabled him to be available for selection for the second of Argentina's friendlies, he is keen to share game time with Lionel Messi and did his future hopes no harm by scoring with a delightful chip over Bufon in goal for Italy as Argentina ran out 2 - 0 winners.

James Collins was also injured in a friendly, the match he was injured in was the fund raiser for Dagenham and Redbridge which was played in a very 'unfriendly' way by the home team who were NOT being managed by John Still but by a 'fan' who had paid handsomely for the privilege and obviously wanted his money's worth. Unfortunately Hammers' are really down to the bare bones as 'H' used to love saying, the January departure of Jose Fonte has come back to bite David Moyes in the proverbial as there is very little senior defensive cover available. Declan Rice, fresh from his man of the match appearance for the Republic of Ireland, has surely earned his place in the starting line up for the side to face Southampton, he has come on leaps and bounds this season and although prone to the odd error is an exciting prospect, let's hope he can further develop his undoubted skills in the Barclays Premier League next season! - Ed

In an unprecedented statement released through City Hall, the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has laid out his 'battle plan' ahead of finally meeting up with representatives of West Ham United to discuss where to go with the London Stadium impasse. Stage one will be the sub committee questioning of David Edmonds CBE, former Chairman, LLDC and Neale Coleman CBE, former Deputy Chairman, LLDC. The meeting will take place on Wednesday, 21 March from 2:00pm in The Chamber (The Queen’s Walk, London SE1),

Media and members of the public are invited to attend. We suggest if you are not working or otherwise busy that you trundle down and see how these sub committees really work and see how they blame!

This is where the real issues will raise their collective ugly heads, the most glaring of which is why on earth did those in control sanction such a massive expenditure on a Stadium that would not be fit for purpose after the Olympics without extensive and expensive re-seating costs. It is not as if there was no template to follow, the Commonwealth games held in Manchester yielded what is now known as the Etihad Stadium and doesn't cost the taxpayer a penny for it's existence or up keep, the main reason for which is that the Stadium was designed collaboratively between the organisers and Manchester City football club.

Back in the day, West Ham United requested a similar joint enterprise which would have seen the London Stadium being built primarily for football, and then adapted for athletics, as opposed to the ludicrous decision that was finally arrived at which saw a gigantic, expensive white not fit for more than one purpose elephant hewed out of the East End at vast expense! Why was such a decision taken? Well, Lord Coe promised there would be an athletics legacy if The United Kingdom was awarded the right to host the Olympics, and he couldn't go back on his word could he? It is not as if any other country ever goes back on it's word is it?

So the price of honouring Lord Coe's promise and therefore ensuring that he be known as a man of his word, is conservatively estimated, if you will be so kind as to ignore the pun, at approximately around £300 Million plus and still rising at around £10 Million a year. Had the Stadium been constructed with football being it's main legacy after the games then the conversion cost would have been £80 Million, furthermore as a proper football stadium it would have generated money for the tax payer instead of losing money.

Where do things go from here?
It is no secret that The Mayor would dearly like to get shot of the London Stadium and all it stands for, his target having been made a little easier by the removal of the chief of Newham Council who themselves have had to write off a £40 Million 'loan' which was supposed to be repaid with interest out of the London Stadium 'profits'! This endless money pit is no good to anyone at the moment and will continue to be so in the immediate future until a practical solution can be found. In a normal business environment an overseer would look at the situation and write off any further expenditure from the public purse straight away, they would examine the projected losses and come to the conclusion that the only realistic way for the Stadium to be viable would be if it was 'sold' in it's entirety to West Ham United and permanently converted for football, rugby and cricket. The Olympic athletics 'legacy' can be transferred to Birmingham where the Commonwealth games are due to be hosted in a new 'purpose built' track and athletics stadium which WILL have a lasting legacy because it will not be considered as a football venue at any time and will therefore become the focal point for athletics in this country, a situation that many non Londoner's have historically been campaigning for.

If West Ham United owned the Stadium as they originally tried to do but were thwarted due to legal action brought by Tottenham Hotspur and Leyton Orient, the club would be able to attract significantly more in bound finance than it currently is able, and that in turn could lead to future success. At the end of the day it will prove to be the ONLY way forward, it just depends on who is in charge of doing the 'head banging' that will be necessary in order for things to progress at a faster pace than has so far been the case. Don't forget Wednesday, 21 March from 2:00pm in The Chamber (The Queen’s Walk, London SE1) if you can make it - Ed

The City Hall press release in full:
The full cost of West Ham’s Stadium 20 March 2018 The cost of retrofitting the Stadium has risen from a budgeted £190 million to £323 million The stadium’s approved business case forecasted a surplus, but it will now lose over £10 million every year On 1 November 2016, Sadiq Khan announced an investigation into the rising costs of West Ham’s London Stadium[1]. On 1 December 2017, the report into the Stadium was published,[2] revealing for the first time the depth of its financial difficulties. The Mayor’s review covered three distinct phases of the Stadium’s life:
Olympic bodies’ original decision making in the design of the Stadium The London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC)’s (and its predecessors’) decisions in tendering for and delivering the Stadium transformation Decisions made about the current operational arrangements of the Stadium Following on from sessions with the Mayor’s Chief of Staff and the LLDC Chief Executive in December 2017 and January 2018, tomorrow, the London Assembly Budget Monitoring Sub-Committee will question two of the key decision makers associated with the London Stadium, who were in post before the Olympics took place:
David Edmonds CBE, former Chairman, LLDC Neale Coleman CBE, former Deputy Chairman, LLDC. The meeting will take place on Wednesday, 21 March from 2:00pm in The Chamber (The Queen’s Walk, London SE1). Media and members of the public are invited to attend The meeting can also be viewed LIVE via webcast. Follow us @LondonAssembly and take part in the meeting discussion using #AssemblyBudget and #LondonStadium.

The 'spontaneous' pitch invasion at The London Stadium during the ill fated 3 - 0 defeat to Burnley initially appeared to be a boiling over of emotions following the thwarted March in March, however it now seems that there was more than an element of organisation particularly with regards to the 'siege' of the directors box. We at The Org witnessed as yet unreported scenes in the Bobby Moore stands of groups of 'angry' men running at the stewards, creating a really ugly atmosphere that would have been very intimidating for anyone who hadn't experienced worse scenes during the seventies.

Fans frustration is understandable, having been 'sold a lie' on too many occasions by the board, but as many ex-players and Hammers' stalwarts have mentioned of late, now above all is a time to stand together. The alarming progress of teams around the foot of the table and West Ham's proximity to the drop zone should focus the minds of all those concerned, fans, players and owners will all suffer if such a toxic environment continues to prevail at The 'ironic' London Stadium, there will be plenty of time during the summer to hold an autopsy on the club's development since the ill judged move from the Boleyn Ground which the club owned to the London Stadium which they don't.

The media and political vultures are already circling over head, Liverpool supporting 'Saddy' Khan, the London Mayor, was very quick to jump on the band wagon describing the scenes as despicable. Almost as despicable and obscene as a very poor borough losing £40 Million because of Lord coe's vanity then? There is such a huge agenda surrounding West Ham at the moment that the players are probably better of in Florida, even though their presence has generated much discontent among supporters who feel the players should be 'punished' for under performing so woefully during the last three fixtures which were all lost by a three goal margin, these unacceptable losses and the performances the team put in will be areas that David Moyes will hope to address away from the public spotlight. It might help if someone has a word with Hammers' press and media department about the wisdom of showing pictures of Andy Carroll sunning himself on a beach, his very presence has many fans asking why is he there? He is injured isn't he? Following on from yet another lengthy injury which required surgery that made him unavailable for the rest of the season, what possible justification can there be for footing the bill for him to sunny himself while picking up in excess of £80,000 per week as he has done for the last five years!

Taken in isolation the 'Carroll syndrome' is annoying enough, but when coupled with all the other malcontent and negativity surrounding the club a head of steam will invariably build up, but it is essential that fans realise their protests will only harm the club, and those who say dropping down to the Championship will teach the owners a lesson are at best misinformed as well as being deluded. Ironically the best way to ultimately 'get rid of the board' is to ensure the club's continued presence at the top table of football, this is in order that the club represents a creditable business proposition for a wealthy owner or owners to invest in.

Despite West Ham United's current difficulties there is no shortage of potential suitors who would like to be involved in the cash cow that the Premier League has become, although recently the 'insane' TV deals have started to level off. The board have stated on numerous occasions that they are 'not for turning', but if fans play it cleverly the club's hierarchy might just decide to take a permanent back seat and let someone else take the flack. Irrespective of how fans feel about David Sullivan, and let's face it he is definitely not everyone's cup of tea, there is no excuse for the cowardly act of throwing coins that he was subjected to, apart from the fact that other 'innocent' parties could have been blinded as a result of the coin throwing, the whole distasteful incident was broadcast around the globe and will not have helped potential player recruitment, after all how many players other than mercenaries would choose to go to a club where the players appear to be despised by their fans?

Of course there are those who would say that the protest wasn't against the players only the owners, but who did it effect most? It was plain to see for all those in attendance and those millions watching on TV, that Burnley benefited greatly from the pitch incursion, Hammers had been at the races and but for a disallowed penalty and some dreadful finishing in the first half could have been three nil up, as it was Joe Hart conceded a 'Worldy' goal. At that moment in time the crowd should have got behind the team and roared them on for an equaliser, as it is commonly known most teams are extremely vulnerable just after scoring a goal, however the 'fans' that ran on to the pitch destroyed any chance of a quick recovery and ensured Burnley had enough time to reorganise themselves effectively.

The remaining matches at the London Stadium could yield a bunch of points, but that will only happen if people can put their differences on the back burner until a time when their voices really can be heard, and that is ....season ticket renewal time! - Ed