Well in this they say its going to also be used for a venue for the 2015 rugby world cup but considering the fact it was built for athletics it seems a lil silly to then convert it again and they could use it as a training ground, and for european atheltics events etc
And then we forget about the fact we promised to keep it as an athletics stadium?
IMO we should never have offered something that was such a poor solution. We should have been more creative and either offered a clear way forward, ie designed up front, or said from day one that we would pull it down and build something for the future - either a smaller, fit for purpose athletics stadium, or the Spurs type solution (but not necessarily with Spurs on the site).
Of course the IOC might not have been swayed by such a submission, but seeing as they were prepared to accept the totally woolly and ill defined submission that was put forward, then I think they would have been even more accepting of a properly thought through submission.
IMO we should never have offered something that was such a poor solution. We should have been more creative and either offered a clear way forward, ie designed up front, or said from day one that we would pull it down and build something for the future - either a smaller, fit for purpose athletics stadium, or the Spurs type solution (but not necessarily with Spurs on the site).
Of course the IOC might not have been swayed by such a submission, but seeing as they were prepared to accept the totally woolly and ill defined submission that was put forward, then I think they would have been even more accepting of a properly thought through submission.
The submitted design for the OS was never wooly or ill-defined. The problems with the OS future and 'legacy' have only come about due to politcal meddling since.
The OS was designed and built around the concept of the lower tier being permenant while the upper tier was temporary. After the games this tier was to be removed leaving a single tier, 25K athletics stadium which would take over from Crystal Palace as the home of British Athletics. It would be small enough to not become a white elephant but large enough to host world-class athletics meetings and other national and regional events. The concept was completely sound and viable. Then stepped in the politicians who wanted to capitalise on the 'legacy' idea by keeping a massive ahtletics venue to host the World Athletics Championships in 2017 but that UK athletics alone could never hope to support year by year. I think they didn't want to be open to criticism from the GBP about spending £700m on a stadium that was used for a few weeks then have more money spent to convert it to a much smaller venue. I'd like to think that people are actually intelligent enough to understand that the reason the OS was expensive was because it was designed to be largely temporary so that we weren't left with a hiuge white elephant that in the long run cost much more to support.
Now that the IMO bad decision to keep the whole stadium has been made, the new multi-use design with West Ham as anchor tennants is the best solution.
Effectively West Ham are obtaining a 99 year lease on a stadium that provides them with a significant financial advantage over other clubs.
-+When the two Dave's took over the club our debt stood at over £100m and even now we are just about keeping our just about keeping our heads a abve water paying off that debt. .-+Paying just £2m a year may sound great and even with the sale of Upton Park it will still be will a good few years before we will benefit from paying such a low yearly rent.o
They are increasing their capacity from 35,000 to 56-60,000.
....
...
Which IMO is to big for us I honestly think we willstruggle to fill the stadium on a regular basis and reckon a stadium of 45,000 capacity is better suited for us
West Ham will be lucky to fill half the stadium and what will the ticket prices have to be to pay for the rent?
Over the course of a full premier league season 19 Home games and excluding Cup Games.
And providing the sell out 60,000 each game
To cover their £2,000,000 a year rent.
The Cost of each ticket will need to be the pricely sum of £1.75 each.
Suppose Tickets are £30 each on average. That's a tidy £32.7m a year profit for WHU. Add to that Sponsorship, Merchandising & TV Money and West Ham will be looking financially pretty.
You can question the rights and wrongs of the deal but one thing is for sure this should secure West Ham's future providing they manage their wage bill, and that is good for football.
Which IMO is to big for us I honestly think we will struggle to fill the stadium on a regular basis and reckon a stadium of 45,000 capacity is better suited for us
You should see what you can average in a 60,000 capacity. Then once you have a number, say 45,000 for example you should look at filling the remaining 15,000 tickets even if you're only getting a fiver for them, a full stadium and a little bit of cash is more important than maximizing profits.
But i believe you're in safe hands unlike the way some clubs are run.
Don't think it's just the Athletics driving this, it is also the novelty of a wander round the stadium and Olympic Park particulary after a lot of people were denied an Olympic ticket.
Also the fact that the government has given the likes of Usain Bolt tax dispensation and he will compete has given the ticket sales a boost. Will that always happen?
Once that novelty wears off the Athletics will attract it's usual hard core supporters which in no way would fill that Stadium, let alone on a regular basis.
Comments
Well in this they say its going to also be used for a venue for the 2015 rugby world cup but considering the fact it was built for athletics it seems a lil silly to then convert it again and they could use it as a training ground, and for european atheltics events etc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQG8qd3ZvHY#
IMO we should never have offered something that was such a poor solution. We should have been more creative and either offered a clear way forward, ie designed up front, or said from day one that we would pull it down and build something for the future - either a smaller, fit for purpose athletics stadium, or the Spurs type solution (but not necessarily with Spurs on the site).
Of course the IOC might not have been swayed by such a submission, but seeing as they were prepared to accept the totally woolly and ill defined submission that was put forward, then I think they would have been even more accepting of a properly thought through submission.
The submitted design for the OS was never wooly or ill-defined. The problems with the OS future and 'legacy' have only come about due to politcal meddling since.
The OS was designed and built around the concept of the lower tier being permenant while the upper tier was temporary. After the games this tier was to be removed leaving a single tier, 25K athletics stadium which would take over from Crystal Palace as the home of British Athletics. It would be small enough to not become a white elephant but large enough to host world-class athletics meetings and other national and regional events. The concept was completely sound and viable. Then stepped in the politicians who wanted to capitalise on the 'legacy' idea by keeping a massive ahtletics venue to host the World Athletics Championships in 2017 but that UK athletics alone could never hope to support year by year. I think they didn't want to be open to criticism from the GBP about spending £700m on a stadium that was used for a few weeks then have more money spent to convert it to a much smaller venue. I'd like to think that people are actually intelligent enough to understand that the reason the OS was expensive was because it was designed to be largely temporary so that we weren't left with a hiuge white elephant that in the long run cost much more to support.
Now that the IMO bad decision to keep the whole stadium has been made, the new multi-use design with West Ham as anchor tennants is the best solution.
-+When the two Dave's took over the club our debt stood at over £100m and even now we are just about keeping our just about keeping our heads a abve water paying off that debt. .-+Paying just £2m a year may sound great and even with the sale of Upton Park it will still be will a good few years before we will benefit from paying such a low yearly rent.o
Which IMO is to big for us I honestly think we willstruggle to fill the stadium on a regular basis and reckon a stadium of 45,000 capacity is better suited for us
Over the course of a full premier league season 19 Home games and excluding Cup Games.
And providing the sell out 60,000 each game
To cover their £2,000,000 a year rent.
The Cost of each ticket will need to be the pricely sum of £1.75 each.
Suppose Tickets are £30 each on average. That's a tidy £32.7m a year profit for WHU. Add to that Sponsorship, Merchandising & TV Money and West Ham will be looking financially pretty.
You can question the rights and wrongs of the deal but one thing is for sure this should secure West Ham's future providing they manage their wage bill, and that is good for football.
You should see what you can average in a 60,000 capacity. Then once you have a number, say 45,000 for example you should look at filling the remaining 15,000 tickets even if you're only getting a fiver for them, a full stadium and a little bit of cash is more important than maximizing profits.
But i believe you're in safe hands unlike the way some clubs are run.
130,000 tickets sold out in 75 minutes for the anniversary meeting in July, no interest in athletics?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/apr/19/olympic-anniversary-athletics-sells-out
It's amazing how some football fans are blinkered into thinking that their sport is the only one people are interested in paying to watch.
Don't think it's just the Athletics driving this, it is also the novelty of a wander round the stadium and Olympic Park particulary after a lot of people were denied an Olympic ticket.
Also the fact that the government has given the likes of Usain Bolt tax dispensation and he will compete has given the ticket sales a boost. Will that always happen?
Once that novelty wears off the Athletics will attract it's usual hard core supporters which in no way would fill that Stadium, let alone on a regular basis.