Breaking news this morning is that the Hammers have lost the Olympic Stadium, and with rumours now circulating that the Irons will look to rent the stadium, our writer Dean Mears gives his opinion on whether this is the right option.
As your probably well aware the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OLPC) have u-turned on their decision to award West Ham the Olympic Stadium following London 2012. OLPC had been concerned with Tottenham Hotspurs legal case against the decision, claiming the £40 million West Ham relied on from Newham Council was state aid. It now looks like West Ham will rent the Olympic Stadium, which will remain part athletics, ensuring the £500 million stadium remains state owned. However, in this writer’s humble opinion West Ham should turn their back on the Olympic site and keep hold of their only asset.
West Ham only need to look at rivals Chelsea to see why they should keep hold of Upton Park, as they struggled with debt after trying to expand Stamford Bridge they had a stadium as an asset which allowed the formation of the Chelsea Pitch Owners and as a result the club are now one of the biggest in Europe. Imagine West Ham are renting the Olympic Stadium, they’ve sold Upton Park but are now having money troubles, the club would go bust quicker than you could say ‘we should never have sold Upton Park’. I know this is only a hypothetical situation, but you need to think long term in football, Gold and Sullivan won’t be around forever and the club must be able to survive without them.
There are many who think West Ham renting the Olympic Park is a good thing, better than when the club had to buy the stadium in fact. And of course there are plenty of short-term positives from a move like that, firstly Upton Park would be sold and all the cash raised from that sale would go straight into the club, clearing any debt and giving the manager money to spend. But football business should be all about long term planning and you would hope businessmen like Gold and Sullivan realise this.
Karen Brady has already said “West Ham will look to become a tenant of the stadium while Newham will aim to help deliver the legacy.” Which shows the direction the board are heading in, but this could seriously come along and bite the club on its arse, just don’t make me say I told you so.
What do you think we should do now? Let us know on Twitter @Forever_WestHam
I personally think they should tip them bo****ks and build their own 60,000 seater stadium in West Ham, not Stratford! ………………..COYI ‘><'
A) why build a stadium with 30,000 spare seats
And B) where would they get the money from?
They should remain at Upton Park and think about expanding if they get promoted