OUR NEW HOME

rearrange the following

Organise Brewery A Up Not Could Piss In A

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Its gonna be appeal appeal appeal if that **** Hernia has got anything to do with it , this could drag on and how the fcuk can they even consider London Orient

Suppose it would give me a better chance in seeing UP live.

Certainly would dude , could mean they would loose a few squids on memberships though

If we are going to be tenants, it's not us that pays for the alterations it's the landlord, and they get back the costs in rent, that's bleedin' obvious. Trouble is that LOCOG have promised things that they just can't deliver, and are having to face up to the fact that the sums just don't add up. The ONLY thing that can make the OS pay for itself is Premier League football, so the place has to be configured for Premier League football as its first priority. I doesn't matter what they have promised to the athletics mob, they have no money and athletics can't make the place pay for itself, and that unpalatable fact is going to have to be swallowed.

totally agree, but lord coe (wnak) and his mates will prob still stuff this up!

"as well as a group wanting to host a Formula One race at the Olympic Park." - I genuinely cant imagine how that would w**k

alfiehammer wrote:"as well as a group wanting to host a Formula One race at the Olympic Park." - I genuinely cant imagine how that would w**k

It's probably another of Hearnia's brilliant wheezes.How anyone with an ounce of common sense could even suggest it is beyond me.

Just can't see this happening. Place is the wrong shape for a football ground.
Might be a good thing for us as I can just see this ending up as a big white elephant.

I really wish the Daves and Karren would fcuk this idea off. Too much time has been wasted already, and any further delay will not get us in by 2013/14. Retractable seating, not only expensive, horrendous too, a beautiful stadium with some meccano round the edge?

Jiggs wrote:

I really wish the Daves and Karren would fcuk this idea off. Too much time has been wasted already, and any further delay will not get us in by 2013/14. Retractable seating, not only expensive, horrendous too, a beautiful stadium with some meccano round the edge?

Sorry, the sale of the Boleyn is essential for GaS to get back some of the money they have put in to date, they're not going to give up on this IMO. But it might well take another year before LOCOG finally admit that they have no option but to make the place suitable for PL football, and that we are not going to pay for it all.
If I understand correctly,( and if I haven't I'm sure somone will correct me!) the OS has around 80,000 seats but all the toilets and refreshment outlets are outside.It will never need 80,000 seats again. We only need 40-50,000 seats max, but we need them closer to the pitch. So the top outer seating has to be removed and the shops, bars, bogs, etc put in their place, the current inner seating has to be lifted, and new extendable seating has to be built over the running track, that can either go forward for football, or retract for athletics when they won't need so many seats anyway. Could be brilliant, could be a dog's breakfast, just depends how much time, care , design effort, and above all money is put into it. Keep your fingers crossed....

SemiOldIron wrote:If we are going to be tenants, it's not us that pays for the alterations it's the landlord, and they get back the costs in rent, that's bleedin' obvious. Trouble is that LOCOG have promised things that they just can't deliver, and are having to face up to the fact that the sums just don't add up. The ONLY thing that can make the OS pay for itself is Premier League football, so the place has to be configured for Premier League football as its first priority. I doesn't matter what they have promised to the athletics mob, they have no money and athletics can't make the place pay for itself, and that unpalatable fact is going to have to be swallowed.

Tony P wrote:

SemiOldIron wrote:If we are going to be tenants, it's not us that pays for the alterations it's the landlord, and they get back the costs in rent, that's bleedin' obvious. Trouble is that LOCOG have promised things that they just can't deliver, and are having to face up to the fact that the sums just don't add up. The ONLY thing that can make the OS pay for itself is Premier League football, so the place has to be configured for Premier League football as its first priority. I doesn't matter what they have promised to the athletics mob, they have no money and athletics can't make the place pay for itself, and that unpalatable fact is going to have to be swallowed.

yep me too

Suzanne Claret wrote:

Tony P wrote:

SemiOldIron wrote:If we are going to be tenants, it's not us that pays for the alterations it's the landlord, and they get back the costs in rent, that's bleedin' obvious. Trouble is that LOCOG have promised things that they just can't deliver, and are having to face up to the fact that the sums just don't add up. The ONLY thing that can make the OS pay for itself is Premier League football, so the place has to be configured for Premier League football as its first priority. I doesn't matter what they have promised to the athletics mob, they have no money and athletics can't make the place pay for itself, and that unpalatable fact is going to have to be swallowed.

yep me too

Me three (sadly as i would love to stay at a bigger UP, wont happen so sort this dogs sinner out asap)

West Ham 's move to the Olympic Stadium has been thrown into doubt after European Commission officials wrote to the UK Government asking for details about potentially illegal state aid to football clubs.

The Commission, an arm of the European Union, has power to halt West Ham's bid and has written to all EU countries with the same request but The Mail on Sunday understands the letter to the UK Government specifically mentions West Ham's potential use of the Olympic Stadium.

'The Commission has sent a letter to all member states about state aid to professional football,' said a European Commission spokeswoman.


Uncertain future: New questions have been raised about the Olympic Stadium

'The aim of the letter is to provide guidance to member states, whilst at the same time asking for information about any special financial rules that may exist for professional football there.'

The EC probe could prove beneficial to Premier League clubs as it is likely to highlight subsidies paid to Spanish, French and German clubs by city councils, such as the deal by Madrid City Council to buy Real Madrid's training ground in 2001 to clear its £200million debt at a rate which critics said was preferential.

Bayern Munich got £168million from city and regional governments to develop the infrastructure around their AllianzArena.




The drawn-out process of the Olympic Stadium legacy is due to be discussed tomorrow at the board meeting of London Legacy Development Corporation, the organisation set up by Mayor of London Boris Johnson to oversee the Olympic Legacy.

A final decision on the four bidders, including West Ham, is expected to be delayed.

West Ham are expected to be win the right to rent the stadium from the LLDC having initially won the initial tendering process although that was eventually scrapped.

So now the EU are sticking their noses in , why dont they just fcuk off and sort out their own problems first , its our country and our football . EU = clusterfuck

Surely this EU shit only applies if u r getting a massive handout? We'd be paying our way?

Thought this was worth a read


This excellent piece is put together by Hammers fan Alan Carter, in which he argues that we have a simple choice to make between having things the way they’ve always been or taking a leap of faith into potential untold glories. It is a compelling read and makes a refreshing change for my ramblings (HM):

A few days ago the Olympic Legacy Committee and HRH Boris Johnson stalled on the announcement on the future tenants of the Olympic stadium, and once more money seems to be at the heart of the issue, with the proposed cost of redevelopment and who funds it.    This delay, it would seem, appears to have further polarised the views of West Ham supporters, but with some of those in favour at first, now drifting to the “nay” vote.  But what would a move for our great club to the new stadium really mean?

Firstly, our new owners are firmly in favour of the move, and have always said so.  The two David’s have in my opinion done a great job since coming to the club, giving us relative financial stability, whilst still in debt, getting rid of players on crippling contracts, and also affording the boss sensible funds for the transfer market.  They are die-hard fans of the club, but they are also successful and shrewd businessmen.

For me the move to the new stadium, and your view on it, depends on the strength and depth of your support.  That is in no way being disrespectful to any fans, but we all follow a club for a reason.  Take a look at the supporters of clubs outside the Premier League.  Whilst they will always harbour aspirations for glory, realistically for many a trip to the 3rd round of the FA Cup will be their premier league title.  And fans follow those clubs, home and away.  If they didn’t, then we wouldn’t have a football league.  My point being that those fans don’t care for the riches of the Premier League, they are truly “Over Land and Sea” fans.

So what do you, as a fan, want for our Club? The Premier League title, European football, or are you happy with the fact that as things currently stand, you are following a team that at best will likely end the season mid table or just above, and at worst, be battling for survival against the drop into the Championship?

Let’s put emotion and history to one side for the moment and concentrate on the logic.  Two weeks ago we played Arsenal, a team that most would consider belong in the category of a Top 4 team, and despite a gutsy performance, and a few missed chances, I think the honest assessment after the dust had settled, is that there is a definite gap between West Ham and the top teams.  Now if you are in the “Over Land and Sea” camp, that won’t bother you.  However, if you equally want the club to achieve more, then the reality is that gap will only ever be bridged by investment in more talent.  Manchester City and Chelsea have both proved that with investment, former mid table clubs can have massive success.

We know that DS and DG don’t have that level of funding and therefore, unless they sell up to the Sultan of Brunei, we need to generate more income, and that will have to come directly from the fans, or more precisely, from the number of fans who can come and watch.  Upton Park can no longer be developed sufficiently for this and therefore the alternative is to move to a bigger venue.

I don’t think anyone is saying that overnight we will fill a 60,000 stadium, but with more seating to accommodate the travelling fans of the bigger clubs, and the significant interest that the stadium itself will bring, there will be a gradual increase in fans to generate more income.  I will leave ticket pricing and family discounts for another day.

Of course there is the other reason that many will object to a move to this stadium, and that is the potential lack of atmosphere and the likelihood of some of the stadium being the other side of a running track.  We know the removal of the track is non-negotiable, particularly as the world athletic championships are to be held there in 2017.  Retractable seats are still being considered an option for parts of the stadium.  And as for the atmosphere, well those of us who remember the days of having a disco in the North Bank or the Chicken Run will remember that the ground was a continuous cacophony of noise for 90 minutes, something I think was sadly lost once all seat stadia were made compulsory.  Maybe anyone lucky enough to have been in the Olympic Stadium when Mo Farah was running can tell us the level of atmosphere that can be generated.

Lest we forget, the impact a move to the Olympic Stadium would have on the local business community.  There was a time when Saturday comes that local traders would shut up shop for fear of not having a business come Monday morning, but things have changed and local shops welcome the opportunity of boosting their income when football comes to town.  And not only the shops – what of our favoured watering holes?  It will no longer be a simple stagger to the ground on match days or a place to celebrate (or more often than not drown our sorrows) afterwards.  Instead we would more likely be lining the pockets of some multi-national retailer in the Westfield.

I would like to forget the other option that has been suggested but it should at least get a mention. Leyton Orient, who let’s remember were the team that prevented the first award to West Ham from being completed, have proposed a ground share arrangement.   This would, to a very small degree, reduce the financial burden on West Ham.  Should we give this consideration?  I personally think not.  The Clubs chairman quite clearly has a green streak of jealousy coursing through his veins.  What of his assessment of the loyalty of his own fans?  His only argument for West Ham not moving to the stadium is that his team will lose supporters.  Orient fans should be ashamed of him if he thinks they will switch to watch another team, just because of the stadium they would be playing in.  And as for becoming the London Orient – this just emphasises the delusions of the man.

I don’t think I have said anything here that isn’t really already obvious, but merely laid out the pros and cons as I see them, and hopefully sparked a debate.  If you are a die-hard “Over Land and Sea” fan, then a move to the Olympic Park is most likely out of the question, but if you want to see the club in the top four challenging for honours, then the move to the Olympic Park has to be given serious consideration. That or hope that the Sultan of Brunei is an Over Land and Sea West Ham fan.

Alan Carter – (A Twitter regular; @hammer4life2010)

The Olympic stadium in Stratford could become the London home of the NFL after talks involving Mayor Boris Johnson.

The ambitious plan is for NFL franchises to become the 'anchor tenant'. It would leave West Ham scuppered in their attempt to turn the East End venue in their new home.

'Sunday’s game at Wembley, in front of more than 80,000 fans, further cements London’s reputation as the natural home of American football outside of the US,' the mayor's spokesman said.


Mayor Boris Johnson is heckled by protestors as he visits Bristol yesterday. West Ham fans may feel the same way about him.

West Ham's bid to take on the tenancy has hit a stumbling block and Johnson - the chairman of the London Legacy Development Corporation who operate the stadium - opened talks last weekend when four NFL teams were in London playing regular-season games at Wembley.

A spokesman for Johnson added: 'Given the ever-growing popularity of gridiron this side of the Atlantic the mayor and his team have held a number of meetings with senior executives in the last few days to explore further opportunities for NFL in London.


Up in the air: The future of the Olympic Stadium remains unclear

'The talks were exploratory and we are at an early stage but the signs are encouraging.'

West Ham are also looking to take over the anchor tenancy but the Treasury’s refusal to hand over the £337 million Olympic-contingency underspend to help install retractable seating is hampering their bid.

The retractable seating is expected to cost in the region of £200 million and the Mayor will be expecting any anchor tenant to make a significant contribution.

Despite remaining favourites to take over the tenancy of the stadium, West Ham are thought to be unwilling to cough up funds to help convert it into a football-friendly environment, believing that it should be the responsibility of the landlords and not the tenants.


Touchdown: The NFL arrived in London last weekend

West Ham also believe that as several other events will be taking place at the Olympic Stadium throughout the next few years - such as the 2015 Rugby World Cup and the 2017 World Athletics Championships - they should not be the sole party asked to foot the bill.

A decision on the future of the stadium was expected to be announced by the end of October but negotiations are ongoing. Other contenders for the stadium tenancy are Leyton Orient, a football business college and a group wanting to host a Formula One race at the Olympic Park.

The NFL proposition is an attractive one as the stadium would only be required up to 10 times per year - compared to up to 25 times a year for football. This would free up time for other events such.


In talks: The Mayor's office are keen to keep bringing the sport back to the capital

Bringing in other sports such as gridiron to the capital on a more regular basis is something that the Mayor's office are keen on exploring.

'Only last week the mayor, in conjunction with the NFL, announced an expansion from one to two regular-season matches in London from 2013. That means in total an additional £44 million in revenue for the capital from next year,' the Mayor’s spokesman added

Not sure what the hell he is talking about. There's no prospect of a team moving to London anytime soon, and an owner sure as hell isn't going to have a running track around the field.

Honestly, that idea is more ridiculous than Orient having the stadium all to themselves.

So what was the point of the bidding process if Boris can give it to whoever he wants? I hope if NFL get a look in then our owners sue the pants off Boris and his cronies for all the wasted time, let alone the money they have spent.

it has got to the point of being a total joke now

From left to right 3,5,4,1,2 in that order

What?

id give em all 1

In what order dude ?