West Ham and the legacy committee would both agree if the finances make it viable. Money talks in this world. Do you think they will turn down the revenues for a football match every week rather than every two weeks?
Printable View
West Ham and the legacy committee would both agree if the finances make it viable. Money talks in this world. Do you think they will turn down the revenues for a football match every week rather than every two weeks?
I got us one of them over ground swimming pools this year, spent best part of a week building it, filling it, making sure the chlorine and that was alright. Went away to work for a few days, came back and the mrs had let the neighbours kids in it, scumming it all up and sh.it. Kinda how I feel about letting spuds use the OS. >:(
There's a voice that keeps on calling me
Down the road, that's where I'll always be.
Every stop I make, I make a new friend,
Can't stay for long, just turn around and I'm gone again
Maybe tomorrow, I'll want to settle down,
Until tomorrow, I'll just keep moving on
In the Guardian today.
Although the LLDC would welcome this financially as the government has cut their funding, West Ham do have the power of veto over any proposed deal. No approach has been made yet.
Wembley on a full-time basis for a season is out because of the number of events held there but the probable scenario would be playing at MK Dons with a number of prestigious games at the National Stadium.
Personally I like the idea of Brisbane Road after their love-in with Orient two years ago.
Tone you hobo.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tone_Loc
The LDDC are just a management arm, the 99 year lease is with Newham Council AND West Ham so all three parties would have to agree to let Spurs lease the stadium. Sir Robin Wales (Mayor of Newham) will not be doing Tottenham any favours at all largely due to the phone tapping and various court procedures launched by Levy & Hearn.
Don't forget that Newham Council and West Ham were meant to jointly own the Stadium which would have been finished in 6 months time but because of all the legal wrangling we are now leasing and it's delayed an important community facility for the borough.
West Ham already have a deals in place for everything from naming rights percentages to the catering booths so the costs & hassle to spurs would be huge. I'm afraid Mr Levy has painted himself into a bit of a corner and now requires favours from the very people he made enemies of. I would love to be a fly on the wall because I bet Brady & Sir Robin are pi$$ing themselves laughing at Tottenham's predicamen
What makes you think they'll qualify for the UEFA cup. Its not a forgone conclusion in my opinionQuote:
Originally Posted by bonzosbest74
Would make sense for both teams to permantly share the OS.
Dont see any issue with it myself. Works fine in other countries like Italy where both Milan clubs share the San Siro.
Hope it happens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyV66
Jimmy, it's an atrocious idea and would spell the death of our club.
Tottenham are a North London club, we are an East London Club and as such our corporate revenues largely come from Canary Wharf and other local financial institutions due to proximity. This will increase hugely once we move to the Olympic Stadium which can be reached from via the Jubilee Line within minutes thus making West Ham an attractive corporate partner with whom companies can send their clients to watch Premier Lg football.
Were Tottenham to become an East London club our own corporate sponsorship deals would naturally gravitate towards Spurs who would be seen as the most attractive ticket in town. We cannot afford to lose the Canary Wharf Group as partners
Bonzo everything about our move the OS is an atrocious idea.
Personally i see no problem with West Ham and Spurs having a ground share.
Most fans hate the idea because they know Spurs will have the better crowds, cheaper tickets and would attract more day trippers.
But if people also think Sullivan and Gold will never let it happen, dont be fooled. Offer the right money and they wont bat an eyelid in taking it.
It would also be a better deal all round for the tax payer.