Future of Olympic Stadium

guyfawkes5 said:
Assuming they get the same amount of spectators that would've went to Upton Park, there is no difference in gate receipts as there is no overhead on a per-seat basis.
Click to expand...

It's going to cost them considerably more to run the Olympic Stadium than it is to run Upton Park. Therefore they're going to have to generate at least that extra amount more from gate receipts/matchday income at the Olympic Stadium to make it worth their while moving.

Whether they can generate that extra income will depend on their fans reaction to the running track.
 
BaZ87 said:
Without even considering the general costs of running a larger stadium
Click to expand...
Again, like what?

What I'm saying here is that between Upton Park and this stadium, there is no considerable expense that would make selling (for example) 35,000 tickets for Upton Park good but selling the same amount for a larger stadium bad.

I'm not really tackling the specifics of actually buying and leasing the property since that's not really what I'm disagreeing with, just the ignorant 'oh 60k stadium and they cant fill it, they will fail financially' claptrap.
 
guyfawkes5 said:
Again, like what?

What I'm saying here is that between Upton Park and this stadium, there is no considerable expense that would make selling (for example) 35,000 tickets for Upton Park good but selling the same amount for a larger stadium bad.

I'm not really tackling the specifics of actually buying and leasing the property since that's not really what I'm disagreeing with, just the ignorant 'oh 60k stadium and they cant fill it, they will fail financially' claptrap.
Click to expand...

On a very basic level, its the same differnce between buying and owning a 6 bedroom house, and buying an downing a 3 bedroom house.

Or in westhams case the difference between buying and owning a 3 bed house, and then going on to rent a 6 bedroom house in the same area with no extra income.
 
guyfawkes5 said:
Again, like what?
Click to expand...

Quite literally nearly every single cost involved from water/electricity bills to staffing.

Surely it's not that difficult to understand that there's more work involved when running and maintaining a larger space?

guyfawkes5 said:
What I'm saying here is that between Upton Park and this stadium, there is no considerable expense that would make selling (for example) 35,000 tickets for Upton Park good but selling the same amount for a larger stadium bad.

I'm not really tackling the specifics of actually buying and leasing the property since that's not really what I'm disagreeing with, just the ignorant 'oh 60k stadium and they cant fill it, they will fail financially' claptrap.
Click to expand...

Have you been drinking? :confused:

You're still asking why West Ham would need to sell a greater number of tickets (generate greater revenue) at the Olympic Stadium but you're not disagreeing with the explanation as to why? :confused:

If West Ham are already losing money how can they repay the loans, pay the lease and all other extra costs without increasing their revenue?
 
Last edited:
BaZ87 said:
Quite literally nearly every single cost involved from water/electricity bills to staffing.

Surely it's not that difficult to understand that there's more work involved when running and maintaining a larger space?



Have you been drinking? :confused:

You're still asking why West Ham would need to sell a greater number of tickets (generate greater revenue) at the Olympic Stadium but you're not disagreeing with the explanation as to why? :confused:

If West Ham are already losing money how can they repay the loans, pay the lease and all other extra costs without increasing their revenue?
Click to expand...
Again, my disagreement is that a stadium with a larger capacity does not cost proportionately more to run, ergo saying that West Ham will suffer financially from not selling the Olympic Stadium out is foolish.

The things you listed really make me think you've been drinking, firstly light and heat are proportional to the size of the stadium - are you saying that a 60k capacity stadium is literally twice the size of a 30k capacity stadium? And bills and staffing are proportional to the amount of the ground you have in operation, believe it or not they tend to close off sections when they expect to not need them. Administrative space also works the same way, if West Ham don't need them then they don't waste energy on them.

These misconceptions are fundamentally what I'm disagreeing with here. /pedant
 
Last edited:
Where did I say that the costs would increase at the same proportion per seat? :confused:

If you don't think costs will increase, you're delusional and if you continue to fail to acknowledge the importance of cost such as loan repayments and the lease agreement, it's not even worth debating this with you.

It's incredibly simple, if a club that is already losing money, does not increase it's revenue to cover the costs of moving to a new stadium, they're going to be in financial trouble.

edit: I do agree that some people are going OTT though.
 
Last edited:
I think any sponsorship of stadium naming rights would more than cover any increase in yearly cost of running the stadium, plus line the pockets of their Chairman's, that is assuming it will no longer be known as the Olympic Stadium, which when there are 100s of millions on the table for both the UK athletics etc and WH I don't think it will.
 
Didn't imply anything; my disagreement predates your involvement with the thread and I was restating that original point as I said.

I have a feeling you more want to talk about what this means for West Ham in general but I wasn't really going for that, just saying that the 'won't sell the huge stadium out so they can't afford it' criticism is stupid. :)

Stupid Spurs fan on BBC News just said the same thing FFS :mad:
 
How much are West Ham likely to get from naming rights if they can and choose to sell them? Can't imagine they'd get a great deal tbh.
 
guyfawkes5 said:
I have a feeling you more want to talk about what this means for West Ham in general but I wasn't really going for that, just saying that the 'won't sell the huge stadium out so they can't afford it' criticism is stupid. :)
Click to expand...

As I said in my edit, I agree there are some people going ott but your response to them is far to simplistic.
 
Meh, fair enough. There would probably a relatively small increase in operating costs, but in general people seem to misunderstand what this means and assume each seat has a set cost to operate as if each one has a private heating system and vibrates. :p
 
_51178358_olympicstadiuminterior.jpg


the telegraph went more indepth but essentially, where is the running track and why are the adverts showing the premiership, let alone the champions league? lolz
 
guyfawkes5 said:
People seem to be nit-picking DM's reasons for West Ham to not go down rather than actually pointing out what is inherent about West Ham that they should go down. All he said is that they wouldn't be likely to be relegated and not come back up - do people think that it is likely? If so, why (rather than just saying it happened before... well, duh)?
Click to expand...
All I did was attempt to point out that DM's utter speculation had no grounding in historical accuracy, and there was therefore absolutely no guarantee that things would happen as he said they would.

Even though you want me to, I'm not going to play his game and mindlessly guess as to whether West Ham would come back up if they got relegated next year. Given that we cannot possibly know who they'd sell, who they'd buy, and who they'd get in to replace Cuddly Ol' Avram, how can I?
 
Spurs looking for West Ham to write in a guarantee that they will keep the track.

Wouldn't be surprised if they ended up removing it a few years after moving in.
 
atpbx said:
On a very basic level, its the same differnce between buying and owning a 6 bedroom house, and buying an downing a 3 bedroom house.

Or in westhams case the difference between buying and owning a 3 bed house, and then going on to rent a 6 bedroom house in the same area with no extra income.
Click to expand...

Using your example West Ham will be selling their "3 bed house" which will pay for many years rent on a "6 bed house".

As long as they're in the PL then it won't be a problem. A few years out of it and they'll be in administration, bye bye debt and there's no way they'll be kicked out so a 60k stadium that they'll then get at a cheap rate on as no one else will want it and it'll cost us (tax payers) dearly.
 
cm1179 said:
the telegraph went more indepth but essentially, where is the running track and why are the adverts showing the premiership, let alone the champions league? lolz
Click to expand...

That picture amused me when i saw it, in addition to the disappearing running track they also show it as full...i'm pretty sure no championship team will ever fill a 60k seater stadium :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom