[Football] West Ham situation. Is it the same?

[Guy Fawkes]

They sold their ground. They didn’t buy a new one.
What’s that if it’s not asset stripping ?

Where did the money from the sale go?

Asset stripping would mean it went directly into the owners pockets with zero investment in the team or elsewhere in the club

Using it in terms of Investment in overpaid, under-performing players who are failing to deliver wouldn't be

 

[studio150]

They sold their ground. They didn’t buy a new one.
What’s that if it’s not asset stripping ?

Sounds business decision if the money from the ground sale and the savings from the low rent and running costs had been used to improve the team into the European challenging team that was promised at the time.
Just brought the wrong players

The move to the new ground gives the opportunity for more fans to attend home games.

We all know what it is like watching football from beyond a 400m running track, and being that far away from the pitch doesn't really work.

However, the West Ham fans should compare their position to say those at Blackpool and our position in the past, and they are not in that bad a position. They still have a ground, and haven't been stripped of investment and dropped down the leagues.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Depends what they do with the money. Trouser it (like archer et al), that's asset stripping. Spend it, that's a commercial decision. In this case a bad one.

I take your point but it’s a commercial decision taken by Gold/Sullivan not the fans and I don’t think owners should be taking such risks with football clubs. Football really isn’t a business even if it is increasingly operated as such. A club is part of people’s roots and selling a ground without replacement is, in my view, a betrayal.

 

[stewart_weir]

I suspect that had there been a spare 'Olympic' stadium in BN1, BN2, BN3 etc then we would have done the same as West Ham. The error of the owners was to not spend £200m buying players.. Fans are a very basic bunch and the equation is simple.. win more than you lose, win a cup every 5 years and don't flirt with relegation/or get promotion every few years etc. and everyone is happy.

 

[5mins-from-amex]

Well I do feel that the club has lost its soul, and identity and I believe that is the main problem not there current league position. I would not like that stadium no matter how cheap the rent is.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

They are a proud old club with a wonderful history, but their current owners have asset stripped them by selling their home and renting a new one. The profit from this deal went straight into their pockets. They try to appease the fans by promising to spend huge amounts on the team, but never do.

I have much sympathy for their fans.

The issue to me is more like the one that some of our fans had when we first moved to the Amex, it felt it's too different to what they knew before and there were many who complained it was all too corporate and all too sterile but, after several seasons here now, it feels like home (granted having a running track there is far from ideal)

West ham fans have moved from somewhere they really liked and had fond memories of to somewhere that doesn't feel like home (yet)
They have gone from the Boleyn ground with a capacity of 35,016 to the London Stadium with a capacity of 66,000, and if they were ever going to compete with the likes of Spurs (new WHL = 61,000), Arsenal (59,867) Man City (55,097) Man Utd (74,994) and Chelsea (redeveloped Stamford Bridge 60,000)

They have got a massive stadium for a fraction of the cost that their rivals have paid for their grounds which should help them to invest in players and elsewhere in the club (like training facilities) without the massive debt that their rivals will be or have been saddled with as a result of that investment in infrastructure

The team will take time to evolve too, yet, once again football fans expect everything to happen overnight, it would be like the Albion staying up this season and then our fans expecting us to win the league next season, and if we don't look like doing it, they get angry at the board, the club, the players and so protest & complain, which has never benefited a club and , as seen will Arsenal, can adversely affect at team

 

[Uter]

I think we are likely to see similar things happen in the next few years at other well established premier league clubs.

There are plenty of ambitious clubs in the Championship with wealthy backers (E.g. Wolves and Bristol City). If and when they make it to the Premier League the way the TV revenue is distributed means they can compete financially with all but the select 6 or 7 top clubs. Clubs like Everton could find themselves struggling in years to come and possibly relegated if they are unlucky or complacent. The fans won't like it and similar feelings will surface. I can even foresee Arsenal having a difficult few seasons if they are without Champions League revenue for a prolonged period.

 

[Beach Hut]

The issue to me is more like the one that some of our fans had when we first moved to the Amex, it felt it's too different to what they knew before and there were many who complained it was all too corporate and all too sterile but, after several seasons here now, it feels like home (granted having a running track there is far from ideal)

Is the right answer however their move has gone bad from day one which is down to the club management so you can kind of see the distrust and anger from fans.

They had issues with stewarding, having kids in areas where people were used to standing and swearing etc etc they need to get these issue resolved and move on.

 

[amexer]

Anybody know how much Upton Park sold for and where proceeds went.
Understand when they took over club it had loan about 10m from bank at 10% Sullivan and Gold took over loan and charge 4% Cant see whats wrong with that and must be better for club

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Anybody know how much Upton Park sold for and where proceeds went.
Understand when they took over club it had loan about 10m from bank at 10% Sullivan and Gold took over loan and charge 4% Cant see whats wrong with that and must be better for club

If your figures are correct that’s an annual interest payment of 400k. Not sure how that translates into the 10 million that has been quoted as the recent payment taken by the owners. Granted we aren’t basing this on much actual knowledge of West Ham’s finances.
Perhaps [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] can fill in the gaps ?

 

[Icy Gull]

Will nobody think how Orient were affected by West Ham moving just down the road from them? I bet West Ham fans and board didn’t give a ****. I feel the same about their problems

I have way more sympathy for Leyton Orient, a club who have truly been fecked over.

 

[Acker79]

If your figures are correct that’s an annual interest payment of 400k. Not sure how that translates into the 10 million that has been quoted as the recent payment taken by the owners. Granted we aren’t basing this on much actual knowledge of West Ham’s finances.
Perhaps [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] can fill in the gaps ?

He already has http://priceoffootball.com/west-ham-united-2017-financial-results-fools-gold/
https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showt...-deduction-surely/page4&p=8374954#post8374954

 

[Giraffe]

They are a proud old club with a wonderful history, but their current owners have asset stripped them by selling their home and renting a new one. The profit from this deal went straight into their pockets. They try to appease the fans by promising to spend huge amounts on the team, but never do.

I have much sympathy for their fans.

This. It is not as bad as our situation was. But nonetheless I can see why their fans would not be happy. The move to the Olympic Stadium was entirely money driven, with the benefit to the owners rather than the club or fans.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

He already has http://priceoffootball.com/west-ham-united-2017-financial-results-fools-gold/
https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showt...-deduction-surely/page4&p=8374954#post8374954

Thank you, I had missed that. So they borrowed money at 6% in order (in part at least) to honour previous loans made by the owners. In football terms these seem like quite small sums so seems odd that a new loan would be necessary. It would appear that they have indeed squandered their inheritance (the Boleyn) to buy and pay average players.

 

[El Presidente]

If your figures are correct that’s an annual interest payment of 400k. Not sure how that translates into the 10 million that has been quoted as the recent payment taken by the owners. Granted we aren’t basing this on much actual knowledge of West Ham’s finances.
Perhaps [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] can fill in the gaps ?

Funny you should say that. I contribute to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION]'s Price Of Football finance site, and here's a couple of stories on the Hammers

http://priceoffootball.com/west-ham-united-2017-financial-results-fools-gold/

http://priceoffootball.com/west-ham-and-the-london-stadium-flares-n-slippers/

 

[Uh_huh_him]

No it's not the same. Nowhere near the same.

I have sympathy for their fans, because having bad owners sucks.
But I have no sympathy for their fans behaviour yesterday.

It wasn't a planned disruption of the game to make their point.
It was an angry mob that had just gone 1 down in a crucial game that they had been bossing up to that point.
It all felt a bit entitled to me.

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

Arnautovic, Hernandez, Hart on loan plus a few more I'm sure.

Thier most expensive signings are Ayew and Hernandez, each cost £20m. That's less than we were willing to spend on Jansen, so hardly the kind of signings that would propel them into champions league contention as promised.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Thier most expensive signings are Ayew and Hernandez, each cost £20m. That's less than we were willing to spend on Jansen, so hardly the kind of signings that would propel them into champions league contention as promised.

Signing the kind of players that will get you into the champions league, takes more than just having the money though doesn't it.
In fact, signing the type of C list players that are available to you, could well have the opposite effect.

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

No it's not the same. Nowhere near the same.

I have sympathy for their fans, because having bad owners sucks.
But I have no sympathy for their fans behaviour yesterday.

It wasn't a planned disruption of the game to make their point.
It was an angry mob that had just gone 1 down in a crucial game that they had been bossing up to that point.
It all felt a bit entitled to me.

I too have sympathy for their fans, but the behaviour of a small minority yesterday was unacceptable.

For those who query the fans displeasure, when they were at the Amex they were chanting 'Where's the money gone?', so it's a fairly simple leap of intellect to work out the underlying problem. They were sold a lie and now the owners are reaping what they sow. They'll end up being chased out of the club, making a huge profit on a small investment having taken advantage of the previous Icelandic ownership which was scuppered by the global credit crunch.

The majority of West Ham fans deserve our sympathy, or at least our empathy.

 

[Hampster Gull]

They sold their ground. They didn’t buy a new one.
What’s that if it’s not asset stripping ?

They signed a 99 year lease, it’s theirs for 99 years. Most who own a flat will know about leasehold. I think the AMEX depreciation period is less than that. They paid £15m for the £272m coversion costs so got a great deal which the majority of their supporters backed at the time. They are net spenders on players. Struggling to see any asset stripping but let’s not forget these are commercial businesses that are run to make returns. The fact is it’s a toxic club that not performing on the pitch and whose fans think they shouldn’t be losing to the likes of Burnley. They would be a great addition to the Championship.