Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

Olympic stadium shock


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22-03-2013, 06:28
Meepers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 736

8 years after the bid was won, 8 years since it became obvious what the only long term solution would be for the stadium. 8 years since idiots started spending millions of pounds on a pointless debate, which everyone with half a an ounze of intelligence knew the outcome of, the stadium is finally, millions of pounds of hardworking taxpayers pounds later, West Ham have the stadium.

Never mind the G4S scandal, the real scandal of the games were how they threw away millions of pounds on this debacle, when the outcome was clear from the start
Meepers is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 22-03-2013, 06:30
Mark F
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,667
Leyton Orient fans won't be happy ,nor some of the Hammners or non-football fans either I suspect but it seems after all th messing around this was the only option open in terms of making sure the stadium didn't turn into a "white elephant"

At least they are keeping the track as some sort of legacy...
Mark F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-03-2013, 07:04
Meepers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 736
All of those points are true, and all were clear 8 years ago.
Meepers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-03-2013, 08:11
mlayzell
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Luton
Posts: 435
8 years after the bid was won, 8 years since it became obvious what the only long term solution would be for the stadium. 8 years since idiots started spending millions of pounds on a pointless debate, which everyone with half a an ounze of intelligence knew the outcome of, the stadium is finally, millions of pounds of hardworking taxpayers pounds later, West Ham have the stadium.

Never mind the G4S scandal, the real scandal of the games were how they threw away millions of pounds on this debacle, when the outcome was clear from the start
I feel people after the games have a soft spot for this stadium, it would be a crying shame if it was left to rot and spoil the Olympic glow!

The naterial choice was always West Ham, it sould have always factored in retractable seating to please everyone, I feel this was the reel problem!
mlayzell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-03-2013, 11:29
burneside
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Isle of Dogs
Posts: 1,706
Another 25+ million from the taxpayer thrown into the Olympic pot. Will the costs never end? I can see why London council tax payers are being forced to pay the Olympic levy for another four years.
burneside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-03-2013, 14:25
crabster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 384
Why bother spending 150 million to make it usable for football when West Ham will only pay 2 million a year.

Or if the 150 million is necessary to convert it to other uses as well as football is the 2 million a year really going to make that much of a difference? Is it worth all the ill feeling it has caused that a Premier League football club has got a half billion pound stadium for next to nothing.

Seems more money after bad.
crabster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-03-2013, 15:17
yesman2012
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,330
Judging from previous games, it was always inevitable that the stadium would either:

a) turn into a massive un-used white elephant

or

b) the taxpayer would have to pay someone to make use of it


Personally, it disgusts me to see west ham pretty getting a free stadium, nothing against them personally, but it is a really bizarre scenario where the public are in effect subsidizing a private company in one of the most lucrative business sector in the world.
yesman2012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-03-2013, 15:54
LostFool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 36,956
I don't think the West Ham deal is perfect (I know Hammers fans who aren't overjoyed by it) but in the current economy I think it was the best option available and the only way the stadium could make money.

There's no doubt that West Ham have got good deal but there was always pressure on the legacy planners to find a major tenant for the stadium and they were the only realistic one out there. Orient aren't big enough and the stadium couldn't make money as an athletics venue alone.
LostFool is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22-03-2013, 20:16
Tiger Rose
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 6,258
In an ideal world then a deal would have been agreed back in 2006 with West Ham but they weren't jumping up & down to get into the stadium back then, though i appreciate that West Ham was under different ownership.

The Olympics obviously has an immovable deadline so LOCOG & the ODA couldn't afford to sit around for 2 or 3 years negotiating otherwise we would have been in an Athens type situation with regards to building the stadium & nobody would have wanted that. In addition delays would inevitably have increased the costs even more so you'd have ended up with a far worse deal for the taxpayer. And remember the initial legacy plan for the stadium was to reduce the capacity to 25000 not leave it at 80000.
Tiger Rose is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-2013, 06:15
Eater Sundae
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,779
I don't think the West Ham deal is perfect (I know Hammers fans who aren't overjoyed by it) but in the current economy I think it was the best option available and the only way the stadium could make money.

There's no doubt that West Ham have got good deal but there was always pressure on the legacy planners to find a major tenant for the stadium and they were the only realistic one out there. Orient aren't big enough and the stadium couldn't make money as an athletics venue alone.
But it isn't going to make money. The rental income will not come remotely close to covering the conversion costs.

It should have been designed with an already determined future use (like in Manchester). If that was not possible, then it should have been designed as a temporary structure, as some of the other venues were. However, there seemed to be some notion that 'legacy' must mean athletics at the olympic stadium site, and so everything else is compromised to achieve this.

Spurs' idea for the site was a much better option.
Eater Sundae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-2013, 14:45
burneside
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Isle of Dogs
Posts: 1,706
But it isn't going to make money. The rental income will not come remotely close to covering the conversion costs.
So, despite all the promises to the contrary before the games, we HAVE ended up with a white elephant stadium. And, as ever, the taxpayer is footing the bill. Who couldn't see this coming?
burneside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2013, 11:27
Opaque
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 5,221
If you build an stadium that has an athletics track round it of course it is going to be a white elephant, but funnily enough you can't have a wonderfully successful Olympics without one!
Maybe they should have just knocked it down, but then people would be moaning about the waste of money and lack of resources for major sporting events, like the ones coming to the stadium over the next few years.
Opaque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 19:14
RegTheHedge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Docklands London -Marais Paris
Posts: 2,422
Why bother spending 150 million to make it usable for football when West Ham will only pay 2 million a year.

Or if the 150 million is necessary to convert it to other uses as well as football is the 2 million a year really going to make that much of a difference? Is it worth all the ill feeling it has caused that a Premier League football club has got a half billion pound stadium for next to nothing.

Seems more money after bad.
Indeed .Should have been handed over to West Ham almost immediately .Personally i quite the idea of spacious seating
RegTheHedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-04-2013, 02:02
jake lyle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,883
But it isn't going to make money. The rental income will not come remotely close to covering the conversion costs.

It should have been designed with an already determined future use (like in Manchester). If that was not possible, then it should have been designed as a temporary structure, as some of the other venues were. However, there seemed to be some notion that 'legacy' must mean athletics at the olympic stadium site, and so everything else is compromised to achieve this.

Spurs' idea for the site was a much better option.
The current stadium is a temporary structure. That is why there is no toilets or facilities inside the stadium.The original plan was to tear it down and leave a small 25k athletics venue. The 150m is to convert it into a permanent structure.

Boris didn't want to tear down a 400m structure. You can thank Ken Livingstone for ****ing up. West Ham did express interest in the stadium 7 years ago but he snubbed them. If he had worked with them then the existing stadium could have been altered for permanent use.

Spurs' idea for the site was a much better option.
How was dumping the athletics track/legacy a better option?? It was one of the biggest promises made by the UK in order to get the games in the first place! How would Britain ever bid for another sporting event again haven broken that fundamental promise?

Is it worth all the ill feeling it has caused that a Premier League football club has got a half billion pound stadium for next to nothing.

Seems more money after bad.
Everybody said the same thing in 2002, when Man City got the Commonwealth stadium for absolutely nothing.Not even an annual rent!
99% of Britain don't even remember the stadiums origins now. Today's outrage will soon be forgotten.
jake lyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2013, 09:45
bluesdiamond
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,135
If you build an stadium that has an athletics track round it of course it is going to be a white elephant, but funnily enough you can't have a wonderfully successful Olympics without one!
Maybe they should have just knocked it down, but then people would be moaning about the waste of money and lack of resources for major sporting events, like the ones coming to the stadium over the next few years.
Thankfully this year a fantastic response to the Diamond League.
bluesdiamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-05-2013, 17:03
Phil S
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,713
http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news...deal_1_2214880
Phil S is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 21:00.