Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand

[metalgear]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Football is no longer for the working man though.

Why the assumption that standing areas will automatically translate into cheaper tickets? They would probably be slightly less expensive, but they wouldn't be cheap. The clubs will still charge as much as they can while being able to sell out.

Going the same way as concerts. Televised for the working man.

Live venue = premium experience

 

[Notmegov]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Bloke in the hat looks familiar..

Guy with his Apple tablet bottem right is probably bitching on here.

Sent from my GT-N8010 using Fapatalk

 

[Gutter Boy]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Going the same way as concerts. Televised for the working man.

Live venue = premium experience

Not a good comparison IMO. Live music is at its healthiest state pretty much of all time. P2P and torrents killed recorded music, so the only way to make money is through live music.

The football equivalent would be subscription tv being collapsing because of streams, so the game having to make its money by doubling capacities at grounds and doubling the number of fixtures every team plays.

It may be expensive to see Paul McCartney in the Albert Hall, but you can still rock up a pay £3-10 on the door any night of the week to see thousands of great bands. There's been a huge democratisation and it would be great if that was replicated in football.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Hard one this.

I want this new stadium like mad, always wanted spurs to increase capacity (one way or another) since the New East Stand was approved 13 years ago but I've never been able to approve of CPOs for the private sector. If it was Tescos or Barrett Homes not THFC that was the catalyst for the regeneration would you approve?

Yes I know Tottenham is s sh!t hole and needs this but I get sick to death of this constant complaints of interference from government with cries such as "Stop taxing us and let the wealth trickle down!!!!!!!" But then demand that government helps in other areas such as land purchase with CPOs which should be for the state for emergency uses such as war or demand for new hospitals etc.

Deep down inside I want Spurs to win this case and feel that in part Archway are being greedy but I also feel a review is needed of the CPO process because Eric Pickles gave this CPO despite THFC back peddling on Section 106 agreements such as affordable housing. On top of this Arsenal were given CPOs from the top (then Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott) for a project that would 'benefit the local area' and involved a Stadium version of the IPhone (revolutionary in both spec and astonishing revenues) and 1,000 homes, how that could benefit anyone but themselves I'll never know.

In a way I am with you here but I think you have to judge each case on it's own merits.

If we were turfing people out of their homes without offering an acceptable alternative (for example Hackney council's current CPO'ing of the residents on the Coalville estate in prime "De Beauvoir" country) then I wouldn't be happy.

However in this case the business who currently operate on Paxton road have been offered a new (larger) premises in a very similar location (perhaps even a better location as it would suffer less disruption on match days). The business have also been offered an amount of money for their premises that far exceeds a realistic valuation. This isn't one private company forcing another to close via a CPO. It is one private company offering to move another private company to a better location and also compensate them very well indeed for their trouble.

I don't think the real issue here is that the Josif's want to remain where they are and continue to operate as normal. I think instead the real issue here is that the Josifs want to receive enough money to make themselves and their families rich so that they don't have to operate at all.

I still believe that Archway and THFC will do a deal prior to it going to CPO. If Archway's appeal is successful then I'm sure THFC will be forced to get back round the table and pay something closer to the extortionate amount that Archway are demanding. If the Josif's appeal is unsuccessful and they move a step nearer to only receiving the CPO (market rate) valuation for their premises then I'm sure they will want to get back round the table with Spurs to negotiate a deal that, while not being the extortionate amount they were originally demanding, at least pays them a good premium on the likely CPO valuation.

Additionally THFC did not back peddle on S106 agreements. The S106 agreements were removed by the council. I'm sure their thinking here was that the development going ahead would provide more benefit to the local area than the original S106 agreements would've provided. I think it is also worth considering here that many of the original S106 stipulations were extremely frivolous, in particular demanding that THFC pay £10 million (it may have actually been more than this?) for improvements to Tottenham Hale station, which is hardly used at all by fans travelling to/from the game. Remember also that THFC are helping to build affordable housing in other locations around North Tottenham. Consider also that Harringey (and North Tottenham in particular) already has an extremely high percentage of social housing, so perhaps the local council would welcome a different type of housing stock along with the council tax that this will help generate.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

In a way I am with you here but I think you have to judge each case on it's own merits.

If we were turfing people out of their homes without offering an acceptable alternative (for example Hackney council's current CPO'ing of the residents on the Coalville estate in prime "De Beauvoir" country) then I wouldn't be happy.

However in this case the business who currently operate on Paxton road have been offered a new (larger) premises in a very similar location (perhaps even a better location as it would suffer less disruption on match days). The business have also been offered an amount of money for their premises that far exceeds a realistic valuation. This isn't one private company forcing another to close via a CPO. It is one private company offering to move another private company to a better location and also compensate them very well indeed for their trouble.

I don't think the real issue here is that the Josif's want to remain where they are and continue to operate as normal. I think instead the real issue here is that the Josifs want to receive enough money to make themselves and their families rich so that they don't have to operate at all.

I still believe that Archway and THFC will do a deal prior to it going to CPO. If Archway's appeal is successful then I'm sure THFC will be forced to get back round the table and pay something closer to the extortionate amount that Archway are demanding. If the Josif's appeal is unsuccessful and they move a step nearer to only receiving the CPO (market rate) valuation for their premises then I'm sure they will want to get back round the table with Spurs to negotiate a deal that, while not being the extortionate amount they were originally demanding, at least pays them a good premium on the likely CPO valuation.

Additionally THFC did not back peddle on S106 agreements. The S106 agreements were removed by the council. I'm sure their thinking here was that the development going ahead would provide more benefit to the local area than the original S106 agreements would've provided. I think it is also worth considering here that many of the original S106 stipulations were extremely frivolous, in particular demanding that THFC pay £10 million (it may have actually been more than this?) for improvements to Tottenham Hale station, which is hardly used at all by fans travelling to/from the game. Remember also that THFC are helping to build affordable housing in other locations around North Tottenham. Consider also that Harringey (and North Tottenham in particular) already has an extremely high percentage of social housing, so perhaps the local council would welcome a different type of housing stock along with the council tax that this will help generate.

And remembering every single one of the other 70 businesses on the old Wingate estate accepted our generous original offers 6 years ago.

CPOs aren't market rate. They are market rate + an uplift. Though a long way from the 1250% of market value Archway are demanding!

And re the last para, yes - the last thing East Haringey needs is affordable housing and I think that's exactly the reason the Council dropped that requirement; nothing to do with affordability

 

[Finney Is Back]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

And remembering every single one of the other 70 businesses on the old Wingate estate accepted our generous original offers 6 years ago.

CPOs aren't market rate. They are market rate + an uplift. Though a long way from the 1250% of market value Archway are demanding!

And re the last para, yes - the last thing East Haringey needs is affordable housing and I think that's exactly the reason the Council dropped that requirement; nothing to do with affordability

While your first sentence is true - most of the businesses had no other option as they were owned by a single landlord who THFC bought out.

Why do you state that CPOs are not market rate but are actually market rate + an uplift? From where have you got this?

 

[jts1882]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

The idea about the league games having to take priority I think can be got round. We could ground share with Arsenal hypothetically, as we are never at home the same day as them. This sort of problem is sorted out at a different stage. So the guy who does the PL fixtures will need to talk to the guy who does the FL fixtures (possibly the same chap) and add in this parameter.

In Arsenal's case it would be trivial as we rarely play at home on the same day to ease policing issues. The PL draw is arranged to make this so. A similar arrangement could be made so Spurs and West Ham were not at home on the same day. The only complication would be rearranging postponed games at the end of the season.

As to West Ham, they will have a bigger, newer stadium than us for a year or two. So what? Their income will remain considerably below ours; they will be paying £2m rent per annum; they will struggle to fill the stadium for the majority games other than by giving away tickets; they will no longer own their stadium (and will never again do so); the stadium that they rent will be a poor compromise of an all purpose stadium - not a place that fans will love; it has only 3500 corporate seats (same as the current WHL and half the number as at the proposed new WHL); they will not earn from other events held at the stadium; they will not earn from catering concessions at the stadium, even when West Ham are playing; they will only take a small share of any naming rights deal.

No longer owning their stadium should be a concern for West Ham fans. Who will take the money from selling or developing Upton Park? The owners or will it be used to clear debts. Either way they lose a major asset. They had better hope the OS has a long life.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

While your first sentence is true - most of the businesses had no other option as they were owned by a single landlord who THFC bought out.

Why do you state that CPOs are not market rate but are actually market rate + an uplift? From where have you got this?

Just personal experience. People I knew whose houses got CPO-d to build an entrance road to a new estate or something - the valuation tended to be market + 15-20%.

People I know living close to the HS2 route are hoping to fall inside so they make a few £10ks from the uplift.

 

[chicken_badge]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Brisbane ****ing Road????

You're taking the ****, right?

Not quite but I think it definitely should be explored as an option. The more options we have, the better position we are in to negotiate with MK Dons or whoever.

Priority is a stadium, any stadium. Walthamstow dog track would have done if the pitch was big enough and the stands could meet PL standards. It could be Carlisle or Barnet or Twickenham. Just need a stadium somewhere.

After that, it's a compromise between distance and capacity. But it's not an essential.

Personally, I can live with a season in a 10k stadium. I'd like a Wembley kicker on top. But if BR was our only option then fine. I can live with 14k season ticket holders fuming about their divine right to a ST gone. If actually have no STs that year and offer by a LPs system to STs and members on a pro rata basis of some sort. If it means I have a season not at a home match, I'd put up with it.
Get the season out of the way, greater good.

I think Wembley is key. Think about when we are attracting players for that season, or trying to keep Lloris or whoever our star player is come then. Who wants to play at MK? Or Upton Park? But Wembley is not only a great stadium the interest in broadcasting will be the opposite of games at our temporary home.

Hypothetically, if the PL would change their rules it would be interesting to see us play at a couple of venues around the country. Let's say Goodison for our Liverpool home match. Bring back the old Super Spurs Roadshow I say!

 

[jimmyb]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Not quite but I think it definitely should be explored as an option. The more options we have, the better position we are in to negotiate with MK Dons or whoever.

Priority is a stadium, any stadium. Walthamstow dog track would have done if the pitch was big enough and the stands could meet PL standards. It could be Carlisle or Barnet or Twickenham. Just need a stadium somewhere.

After that, it's a compromise between distance and capacity. But it's not an essential.

Personally, I can live with a season in a 10k stadium. I'd like a Wembley kicker on top. But if BR was our only option then fine. I can live with 14k season ticket holders fuming about their divine right to a ST gone. If actually have no STs that year and offer by a LPs system to STs and members on a pro rata basis of some sort. If it means I have a season not at a home match, I'd put up with it.
Get the season out of the way, greater good.

I think Wembley is key. Think about when we are attracting players for that season, or trying to keep Lloris or whoever our star player is come then. Who wants to play at MK? Or Upton Park? But Wembley is not only a great stadium the interest in broadcasting will be the opposite of games at our temporary home.

Hypothetically, if the PL would change their rules it would be interesting to see us play at a couple of venues around the country. Let's say Goodison for our Liverpool home match. Bring back the old Super Spurs Roadshow I say!

It has a capacity of 9.5K!!

 

[Jordinho]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

It has a capacity of 9.5K!!

Let's go for it. Just ban all ST holders for a season.

 

[JerusalemMan]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Just personal experience. People I knew whose houses got CPO-d to build an entrance road to a new estate or something - the valuation tended to be market + 15-20%.

People I know living close to the HS2 route are hoping to fall inside so they make a few £10ks from the uplift.

While your personal experience (or experience of other people you have heard about) is interesting, it's probably not enough to speak about the uplift as though it were a guaranteed thing, a bona fide fact.

Like the mention of a £25m offer to Archway, I'm curious where that has come from.

 

[We are Tottenham]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Copensation....?

 

[We are Tottenham]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Yeah. Most prefer standing, so they could even be in greater demand! But then I guess you'd just create more standing sections to satisfy demand. What would WHLs capacity be if it was standing? My grandfather went to games around the time of our record attendances. Wasn't it around 70,000 Spurs fans packed into the lane?! Can you imagine - 70,000 all standing, shouting, singing.

My dad was at spurs record crowd 75,400 aprx..we lost though.

incidently..this was bigger than arses..some record books has our attendance
Wrong !

 

[Shelfie]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

IIRC it was v Sunderland in the Cup in the 1930s, 75,038 from memory. But of course all figures were very approx in those days, probably more like 80,000 in there.

EDIT, just googled it. 75,038 v Sunderland, FA Cup, 5 March 1938.

Well pleased the old memory is hanging on in there

 

[SpurMeUp]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Some interest posts re standing being overrated. No doubt when things kick off on the pitch you want to stand up. When a goal is scored, you stand up, and if you can..jump around. For me, standing suits football. Atmosphere improves, engagement improves. Sitting is passive.

I guess in an ideal world you'd have both. Being able to sit before the whistle but stand when you want. Of course that's not practical with people behind etc. It would be interesting for someone to start a separate thread with a poll. I think giving fans the option to spectate on their feet - which was how it used to be - or sit makes perfect sense.

When safety was not such a concern, no doubt terraces were dangerous. My grandfather, rip, told me his dad and uncles would form a barrier for him and his cousins to protect them ..and he took me to my first game...how I miss the guy. But there is no need for terraces to be unsafe - safe standing. Just see it working in Germany. Any riots?

 

[Spur of the moment]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

IIRC it was v Sunderland in the Cup in the 1930s, 75,038 from memory. But of course all figures were very approx in those days, probably more like 80,000 in there.

EDIT, just googled it. 75,038 v Sunderland, FA Cup, 5 March 1938.

Well pleased the old memory is hanging on in there

You may well be correct but that figure was not an estimate, it was the official figure supplied by the club in accordance with Football League regulations. These were introduced for the 1925-26 season and required all clubs to submit accurate data from that day forth. Doubtless there were quite a few who managed to smuggle themsalves in over fences or by some kind of a fiddle with the chap at the turnstile. I freely confess to getting into WHL that way in the 1960s.

 

[Shelfie]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

You may well be correct but that figure was not an estimate, it was the official figure supplied by the club in accordance with Football League regulations. These were introduced for the 1925-26 season and required all clubs to submit accurate data from that day forth. Doubtless there were quite a few who managed to smuggle themsalves in over fences or by some kind of a fiddle with the chap at the turnstile. I freely confess to getting into WHL that way in the 1960s.

Good history SOTM, never knew the bit about 1925-26, but still you make the point I was reffing to for me In the terracing days and cash at the gate it was generally believed that figures were usually under reported, especially for big crowds. I remember standing on the terraces in the 60s too, and while I never 'bunked in' it was well known that quite a few did. Plus others would do 'unofficial deals' with the turnstile blokes. There were also suspicions that certain clubs under reported attendances for tax avoidance reasons, naturally I'm sure our beloved club didn't indulge in such practices.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

Just personal experience. People I knew whose houses got CPO-d to build an entrance road to a new estate or something - the valuation tended to be market + 15-20%.

People I know living close to the HS2 route are hoping to fall inside so they make a few £10ks from the uplift.

Which estate is this? CPO valuations are simply market rate as judged by an independent valuation (I think 3 valuations are taken and the mean/median is used). There is no 'uplift'. There is also no consideration of the value of the land once it is purchased and then becomes part of something bigger. A good example is the Coalville estate in Hackney, where CPO valuations have been set at a rate commensurate with flats selling in other local authority buildings elsewhere in the borough, in fact it could probably be argued in most cases (as the owners generally are) that the valuations are considerably lower than the standard open market rate.

 

[Jordinho]

Re: Northumberland Development Project - Archway Have Appealed

West Ham United block Tottenham hopes of renting Upton Park

Ahead of their move to the Olympic Park, West Ham have taken steps to prevent Spurs from using Upton Park ahead of their north London redevelopment

West Ham United have “Tottenham-proofed” their contract with the buyers of Upton Park to prevent it falling into the hands of their fierce rivals.

The property developer Galliard Group agreed to buy Upton Park once West Ham make the move to the Olympic Stadium in 2016.

It has now emerged that a clause in the contract states that West Ham do not have to leave Upton Park in a fit state for football and plan to gut the stadium ahead of their exit.

That rules out Tottenham Hotspur trying to rent Upton Park off Galliard while they wait for White Hart Lane to be redeveloped, having already failed in a bid to buy West Ham’s stadium to use for a season.

A senior West Ham source said: “It is correct that the Boleyn Ground will not be fit for football after West Ham’s final game in 2016.

This is because Hammers fans will be offered the opportunity to secure their own piece of history through a special auction of memorabilia, which will cover most, if not all, of the essential parts of the stadium.

“In addition, some of the most identifiable fixtures will be coming with us to Stratford and essential equipment relating to the pitch and other areas will be taken away and reused at the club’s training facilities.”

With Daniel Levy, the Tottenham chairman, still searching for a sponsor to pay £150 million for the naming rights for the club’s new stadium, its projected opening date has been pushed back to 2018-19.

That means Spurs need a temporary home for the 2017-18 season and have been looking at ground-sharing with MK Dons and playing big games at Wembley.

However, the possibility of Spurs ground-sharing with West Ham in the Olympic Stadium for the 2017-18 campaign, the season after West Ham move in, will be debated again, with Mayor of London Boris Johnson to be quizzed on the subject.

Andrew Boff, leader of the Greater London Authority Conservatives, will ask Johnson if West Ham have the power to veto Tottenham, if the club approached the London Legacy Development Corporation requesting a ground-share deal.

Boff is a critic of the LLDC’s decision to sign the Olympic Stadium over to West Ham on a 99-year lease, arguing that it represents a poor deal for the taxpayer.

Karren Brady, the West Ham vice-chairman, has claimed that the club would block any attempt by their London rivals to share the stadium and they are insistent they hold a permanent right of veto.

It was revealed this week that the firm working on the Olympic Stadium, Balfour Beatty, had lobbied for another £50 million of taxpayers’ cash to complete the work at the site.

Under the terms of the 99-year lease deal signed by West Ham with the LLDC, the club is not obliged to foot any of the extra cost.

West Ham appeared to consider the prospect of introducing a ‘singing section’ at the Olympic Stadium for all of four hours on Tuesday afternoon.

Jack Sullivan, son of the co-owner David, posted two messages on Twitter that said: “Possibility of a singing fans section at the OS anyone got any ideas what it should be called? Also, do you think a singing section is a good idea, an area where all the passionate fans can sit together and chant throughout the game.”

However, following a host of negative responses, Sullivan added another tweet that read: “Thanks for your help – bad idea so will not be doing that.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/west-ham/11178316/West-Ham-United-block-Tottenham-hopes-of-renting-Upton-Park.html