-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
The London Taxpayers' Stadium Shambles
- Thread starter ArcspacE
- Start date
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
Why would any company want to be associated with that brick show of a stadium
greatwhitenorf
Vedran Corluka
That's a nice deal for a Championship League club.
Wonder how proud the sponsor will be when Millwall come over?
Wonder how proud the sponsor will be when Millwall come over?
inkpenspur
Allan Nielsen
West Ham don't get a penny of stadium sponsorship revenue unless the deal is in excess of £4M pa, in which case they get 40% of the incremental revenue over and above the £4.0M pa... the Vodaphone deal is apparently below the £4.0M pa so I suspect will be worth sweet FA to West Ham and the money stays with the stadium owners!
jabbathehut
Luke Young
ha ha
Glenda's Legs
Les Ferdinand
I think I'd prefer that the owners did secure a stadium naming sponsor - just one at below the revenue threshold that would give WH a share, as it seemed would be the case with the proposed Vodafone deal. I dislike it being referred to as the 'London' stadium.
7percent
Pascal Chimbonda
A company with a really embarrassing name/reputation that West Ham can't veto?
Robspur12
John Lacy
The Tena lady stadium. That should do it...
greatwhitenorf
Vedran Corluka
In honour of the wonderful optical enhancement devices needed to cope with the long-range, sightlines offered to most fans, surely the Bushnell Bowl is only fitting.
Either that or Fort Bongo.
Either that or Fort Bongo.
JerusalemMan
Johnny Morrison
The Domestos Bowl?
West Ham United’s ‘deal of the century’ on stadium just got worse for taxpayers
The club will pay additional rates on just the retail and office space it occupies in the stadium, rather than the whole site.
West Ham United has become embroiled in further controversy after it emerged the club will pay just a fraction of the £2.3 million annual business rates bill on its London Stadium home.
Owners E20 Stadium, a joint venture between publicly funded London Legacy Development Corporation and Newham Council, have revealed the Hammers will pay additional rates on just the retail and office space in the 66,000-capacity stadium.
In a response to a Freedom of Information request seen by the Press Association, E20 confirmed it will pick up the bill for the rest of the entire stadium, dealing yet another blow to the taxpayer after West Ham secured the lease last year for just £2.5 million a year in rent.
E20 declined to reveal how much West Ham would contribute in business rates, saying this was still under discussion, despite West Ham having relocated last year.
It is likely to be far less than the £1.3 million it would have forked out in rates each year for its former home at The Boleyn Ground, according to business rent and rates specialist CVS.
The annual rates bill for the London Stadium was £2.1 million in 2016/17 and surged to £2.3 million after the tax shake-up on April 1, according to CVS.
A spokesman for E20 said: “West Ham United does not own the stadium and only has full use of it on a certain number of days each year, for which they pay £2.5 million annually.”
A spokesman for West Ham United said: “West Ham United only use the stadium facilities on matchday so, as tenants, we pay for the share of rates on those matchdays.
“We also, as tenants with our own specific areas, are liable for rates on the club offices, shop and warehouse. We will be separately assessed on this by the Valuation Office and this will be backdated to when we first moved in.”
Rivals clubs are also facing steep hikes in their rates bills, with new Premier League Champions Chelsea paying £2 million this year in business rates for Stamford Bridge, while Arsenal will pay £3.3 million for rates on the Emirates Stadium.
The £700 million London Stadium has been dogged by negative headlines about its expense for almost a decade. Last year, London mayor Sadiq Khan ordered a review into the spiralling costs of converting it from an athletics arena into a multi-purpose venue with football at its heart.
http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/wes...m-just-got-worse-for-taxpayers-11364181948327
The club will pay additional rates on just the retail and office space it occupies in the stadium, rather than the whole site.
West Ham United has become embroiled in further controversy after it emerged the club will pay just a fraction of the £2.3 million annual business rates bill on its London Stadium home.
Owners E20 Stadium, a joint venture between publicly funded London Legacy Development Corporation and Newham Council, have revealed the Hammers will pay additional rates on just the retail and office space in the 66,000-capacity stadium.
In a response to a Freedom of Information request seen by the Press Association, E20 confirmed it will pick up the bill for the rest of the entire stadium, dealing yet another blow to the taxpayer after West Ham secured the lease last year for just £2.5 million a year in rent.
E20 declined to reveal how much West Ham would contribute in business rates, saying this was still under discussion, despite West Ham having relocated last year.
It is likely to be far less than the £1.3 million it would have forked out in rates each year for its former home at The Boleyn Ground, according to business rent and rates specialist CVS.
The annual rates bill for the London Stadium was £2.1 million in 2016/17 and surged to £2.3 million after the tax shake-up on April 1, according to CVS.
A spokesman for E20 said: “West Ham United does not own the stadium and only has full use of it on a certain number of days each year, for which they pay £2.5 million annually.”
A spokesman for West Ham United said: “West Ham United only use the stadium facilities on matchday so, as tenants, we pay for the share of rates on those matchdays.
“We also, as tenants with our own specific areas, are liable for rates on the club offices, shop and warehouse. We will be separately assessed on this by the Valuation Office and this will be backdated to when we first moved in.”
Rivals clubs are also facing steep hikes in their rates bills, with new Premier League Champions Chelsea paying £2 million this year in business rates for Stamford Bridge, while Arsenal will pay £3.3 million for rates on the Emirates Stadium.
The £700 million London Stadium has been dogged by negative headlines about its expense for almost a decade. Last year, London mayor Sadiq Khan ordered a review into the spiralling costs of converting it from an athletics arena into a multi-purpose venue with football at its heart.
http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/wes...m-just-got-worse-for-taxpayers-11364181948327
I'm sure Gold or Sullivan have some suitable companies already.
Looking at the season ticket renewal thread on KUMB and it seems everyone who is renewing has managed to be relocated into the lower tier (if they weren't there already). Think there will be lots of empty seats next season even if they have 55,000 on the waiting list.
