Show me the way to go home
Thursday, February 10, 2011 at 4:12PM Most would agree that we could probably/possibly build the NDP but not remain competitive on the pitch, but could do so (remain competitive) if we moved to East London. Hence the reason why Levy wants Stratford. It's viable in terms of planning and fiscal reasons compared to the NDP. I'm sure we'll learn more about the reasons in the coming weeks. Perhaps the NDP is a complete non-starter because Levy failed to forecast the present day in terms of property development/value and sponsorship. Inconvenient truths and half-truths and assumptions wherever you look at the minute.
So hypothetically, if there was no Olympics and no site/stadium, if it simply was not an option (just work with me on this) - what would Spurs do to resolve the progression problem?
Levy has reached a stage where the club (on and off the pitch) is doing superbly well so he has to make a move (metaphorically, calm down) to consolidate. Mainly because football has changed and staggering progression by building on success on the field was something we completely missed out on in the 1990s and that particular brand of template is no longer on offer in these ridiculous EPL days of excess.
(It's going to bottleneck at some point I guarantee it, and we're fortunate enough to have such a loyal fanbase because other clubs have already began to suffer on the pitch and in the stands)
Anyways...
There has to be another way, right? It might not offer the immediate fix Stratford does or perhaps it's not as easy as a move to East London would be - but we're talking about a club that has been around for almost 130 years. A few more years will not cripple and kill us. We've competed at the top level every decade since the 50s and the reason we've not done better ( the upper tier top level in terms of the title) is because of the monumental cock ups that lead to us almost going under back in '91. We lagged behind and yet we are doing mighty fine now considering we were also half crippled by on the pitch bad management and lack of direction at times from the board.
Obviously we all agree we've never been a title challenging side. But to retain the ambition to be one is a good way to look ahead. Hence the reason for the NDP and (sadly) the reason why Stratford became Levy's number one choice. The emotive issue is something I want to side step for a moment.
Levy fixed us. Made mistakes, learnt from them and now we're at a crossroads where we are threatened with having to leave N17 if we don't get the OS, which according to everyone, we wont.
So surely Levy has a Plan B? And no I don't mean asking Crouch to lay down and build a 60,000 all-seater on his back.
It's become so cut-throat all this - move or be doomed - that I wonder how much of it is based on second guessing what Levy's strategy is and people accepting sentimental sacrifice for the sake of the apparent sudden urgency to be able to afford to pay someone 200k per week to play for us - because that's what it will take to compete with certain other clubs if that's the ilk of club you want. If that's what it takes to compete.
Just throwing it out there. No Stratford (in this pretend world I've created which might well transcend into our world from tomorrow morning, what with it already turning up a little early late last night).
Just a hypothetical based on Stratford never being an option. What and where do we look to take the club if WHL can not serve our ambitions? Stick or stay?
One thing I'm hoping for is that whatever happens tomorrow (11am press conference) Levy takes us forwards as one entity of Spurs fans rather than everyone playing percentages on what side of the fence the majority allegedly sit on whilst the rest.
Hypothetical. For today.
(ps - excuse the roughness of this blog article, stinking headache)
Reader Comments (125)
@ Terry Nutkins;
Interestingly enough, you are the second person mentioning conflict of interest by the OPLC board. Here is a comment I saw yesterday in Guardian (not that Spooky would care about):
“I wonder how an objective vote - or even a balanced discussion - could be taken when the legacy board has members who are West Ham season ticket holders (Nick Bitel and Newham mayor Robin Wales), a contractor hired by Newham (Tessa Sanderson), a bean counter from West Ham's own accountancy firm (Jonathan Dutton), a former president of staunchly pro-track Sport England (Philip Lewis) and a former director of Arsenal (Keith Edelman).
All of these people are clearly in positions or from backgrounds that strongly suggest a pre-disposition to West Ham. Were Sullivan and Gold were too busy mismanaging their football club to join in?
There's certainly no board member with an established connection with Spurs and, while that's understandable to an extent, there perhaps could have been a higher ratio of neutral parties on the board, neutrals with a football-only background. An ill-advised promise to a shady sporting organization might well be on course to be kept, but the optics on the board's composition hardly suggest a balanced perspective toward the Spurs bid.
Are the board members themselves aware of this and feeling guilty or worried? One wonders because on the legacy board's official website, they've removed all the lovely individual portraits that illustrated both the group and each member's profiles these past many months”.
There's some laugh out loud quality in this thread.
Loving this place at the minute.
Jim,
Whiulst I admire your optimism, your maths fails on two basic levels.
One is a statement of 'fact' that it will cost £250million. Architects can say what they like, they can give ball park figures, but they are not estimators, surveyors, nor are they able to predict the future.
Try this for starters: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/758d30da-2720-11e0-80d7-00144feab49a.html#axzz1DaVmnehx
(In a nutshell steel prices to rise by 66% this year alone.)
Secondly, you seem to have left out money for player trading to a level to keep usin contention for any sort of honours (including just qualifying for CL) which in turn is what wil be needed to keep the attendance high for the revenue.
Add into the mix a revenue forecast that is heavily reliant upon media, what happens ifhte EU ruling slashes sky's dominance and they stop pumping money into the EPL in a decade. We'd be propper fucked.
No, I'm afraid its very easy to provide a simplistic view of the world. Thing is, it's always been far more complicated. Annoying and inconvenient but true.
How can a bloke that tried to take a north London club to east London without fan consultation be trusted to do anything that isn't solely in the interest of him and his mates?
oh yes, and as for the rest of your 'mythical magic made up numbers' based on nothig more than hypothetical straw plucking and conjecture.
To coin your own expression 'Utter, utter bollocks.'
Sorry.
TMWNN, simple answer is that he can't, but then I wouldn't trust 99.9% of our on fan base to run something as complex as our club either (I very much include myself in that 99.9% as well for the record). Yet some of them seem to know better.
The question is not whether I trust him (which I don't) but whether or not the decisions he makes turn out to have been the right ones in the long run. And that's not something any side can say with certainty as we sit here today.
Things moving fast my friends, we look for new home soon. I talk to my son about making NDP viable in London with the famous pie with chipps.
I want to tell you about last daughter Hozni, she need huband. She fine cook, has 4 teeth all her own and only 49. She can't find huband. She has vagini like Suez canal due to camel incident. She make fine wife for you no?
Ok knocking on door now I go now.
It is utter bollocks to say that a bigger stadium on the current site isn't possible without bankrupting the club.
Headache? right
Thinking? wrong
Your plan? None
Levy's plan? Let's wait and see
Just what is so attractive about a barrio like N17. The postcode twats have just buried Spurs progress for at least a decade... or until WHUFC folds next year and AEG/THFC are invited by HMG to bail us out before IMF steps in.
Let's not be twats. In 5 years there'll only be one team in NE London and it won't be any of our "contenders" let alone the Arse.
Hang loose, COYS and FFS stop slagging Levy
Mubarak's Mum - Your daughter Hozni sounds like she would be agood match for our famous Mr Grant from East London Shithole. They will definitely get along as it sounds like they look very similar. There may be some cultural issues but your son has overcome these in your country so I think anything is possible. Mr Grant has a new house now complete with new running track. It has a sculpture of a vagini just like your daughters next to it so she will feel very honoured. Let me know if you think he will be suitable for a good match.
Oh Roy this is most wonderful news! A strong Muslim huband Hozni!
May your children be showered gold. I can picture the happy face of this Mr Grant!
I see myself in years to come telling my grand children about the time in our history when everything almost went to shit.
Eruga,
Are these the same twats who want to keep the club in the same place where it's been for over a century, the place the club is named after and continues to attract full houses game in game out, the place where there is space to build a bigger stadium where the club can compete and continue to remain a proper football club, rather than a plastic copy, for the next 100 years and more.
What twats they are! Much better to go to east London where no one wants us (even some/most of our own fans) and throw away everything we have going for us now in the name of progression, at best, opportunist land grabbing for profit, at worst.
Perhaps the Plan B is to simply go with the law of supply and demand -> no new stadium + waiting list of 60k = double all ticket prices? At least until we fade back into a steady lower mid-table state.
Any chance of a chat about next weeks CL fixture ?
If it goes tits up, we may not be in this competition again for a while so lets make the most of it.
Feel like I've heard both sides of the OS debate about a thousand times now.
If the BBC are right, we will not win the bid so no move to E15 and either way, we should all find out tomorrow.
,
What changed in the last 3 months is that England WC bid failed. DL banked on that to fund NDP
Hi Jim. The global economy may have been wobbling at the time of the announcement but it wasn't until the collapse of Freddie Mac & Fannie May in the States that the true scale of the problem started to become an issue with the banking sector here. Indeed, up until the bank bail-outs in October 2008, the UK banking sector were still talking about it being merely a 'cashflow crisis'.
In hindsight, I guess the club could have pulled the announcement but hindsight is a wonderful thing & the proposal was already widely known, so they went ahead. I don't think you can say that it 'Isn't relevant', if you take a look out of your window at the rioting people in the streets I think it is quite relevant to major capital project.
It's not like the old days, when a recession meant that toffs and people with a few quid like Nash threw up a few terraces (In fact, he went bust in a recession trying to do just that), even prime estate companies like Candy & Candy, dealing with property in the West End, Monaco & Dubai are having to go cap in hand at the moment - And that's with land value through the ceiling to back it up.
Least of all they can't gamble when the company concerned is a Plc with a share price dependant on the value of their assets - Which would be hugely overstretched by a project like this. 'Honest Joe' can't just chuck in a few quid for the same reason. He may run ENIC but nowhere does it say that means he needs to personally bankroll and guarantee our expenditure.
As for the Gooners deal, I hadn't heard that they'd undersold it - Was that deliberate? Even if it was a 'cock up', the chances of placing even a £100m value on 'Your name here' next to the Bricklayers & Chick King in the High St may be beyond even a gifted sponsorship magnet like Levy. With our without a Sainsbury's next-door.
I think to wave your hand and say 'utter bollocks' when you're not paying the bill is a bit disingenuous and I think your interpretation of the facts is possibly based around what you want the outcome to be. As I discussed with someone on another blog yesterday (We love a bit of culture), 'subjectivity is truth and truth is subjectivity'.
Hey guys how about Dublin I remember Wimbledon tried it back in the 90`s but failed & became MK Dons! not sure about Tottenham Hitchenspurs.
I think the world cup bid failing but a big dent in NDP - not so much on the stadium front but getting the transport right.
It's a bit ironic, a few decades ago White Hart Lane could take 50k but now it does not meet modern planning standards, the area can't handle the influx of people. The Stratford site has been set in place over a number of years and TFL are geared up to get people in and out in large numbers, much like the Milennium dome. Tottenham does not have that, even extending the Victoria line does not cut it, look at Arsenal, they have Finsbury Park and several mainlines and tube lines running in to it. Had England ran the right to host I think there would have been a serious investment in getting the lane's access up to scratch.
I don't think we can stay in Tottenham and that a lot of fans might regret this day, especially if we see ourselves moving all the way out of the borough and more than the 5 miles that Stratford is.
Maybe there is some kind of different way forward, if we can extend to say 45k, can we afford that, will that be enough to keep us at the top of our game???
I think Levy has genuinely quit a long term future in N17 and now I have no idea where we might look to next, that's my worry.
How wrong was I with this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lts7zHc1o2Y
jimB, interesting posts, keep it up.
Taking a closer look at AEG may shed some light on our plight at THFC. AEG are big players in the entertainment industry, At this moment, in California, AEG sre involved in another venture involving a new stadium and the relocation of an NFL club. The "drama" over there, is the same "drama" over here at THFC.
Now, lets say the owner of ENIC has sold our club to AEG. AEG are renowned for uprooting /relocating clubs and re-branding them, new name, new badge,new colours. AEG are now involved at THFC. Our Mr Levy is just an employee of Mr J Lewis, so Levy has to carry out "orders",(AEG tells Levy what to do, not the other way round).
This could explain why Mr Levy was enthusiastic about the NDP project,but the moment AEG got involved, everything changed, NDP has now become unviable. The "drama" at THFC may begin to make senes once you take a good look at AEG, what they do and how they do it .
So... (and rubs tired eyes) in the middle of your conspiracy theory are you saying you want ENIC to remain? ENIC to sell to AEG? That AEG have manufactured the Stratford scenario to move us to California or what?
I think we can all start seeing Reds under the Bed but the minute we start treating the club as 'The Enemy' then we're all on a slippery slope to nowhere.
Remember, this was all meant to be about more people being able to get in to see a football match.
1. Given that Spurs have been trying desperately to put a positive spin on the move to Stratford and a negative spin on staying in Tottenham, I think it's fair to say that David Keirle would have erred towards the worst case scenario when discussing the estimated cost of building a new stadium in Tottenham.
2. I haven't ignored the need to continue to invest in the team. Spurs have been one of the two or three highest net spenders in the Premier League over the past few years. Possibly the highest, if Man City and Chelsea are taken out of the picture. If, after loan repayments and interest, Spurs are at least as well off or even as much as £40 million per annum better off, then they will be able to spend at least as much as or more than they do now on player transfers and wages.
3. If the EU were to force the Premier League to give up collective bargaining for TV rights, then I suspect that Spurs would be one of the big winners. Because of the club's high profile and huge and loyal fan base, Spurs' media rights would be much in demand. We could be considerably better off if we were free to sign our own deals. I hope it doesn't happen, though, because most of the other clubs would be fucked and the Premier League would be a poorer competition as a consequence.
4. I pointed out, from the start, that mine was only a hypothesis. But the figures are based on known facts, comparable examples and past form.
- David Keirle said that it would cost £250 million to build the stadium in Tottenham. He also said that Spurs would be able to build the stadium for less than Arsenal spent on the Emirates (£230 million).
- Arsenal's revenues from gate receipts, corporate hospitality, catering concessions and other stadium usage rose by some £50-60 million after moving to the Emirates. It's therefore not unreasonable to estimate a conservative rise of £20-40 million for Tottenham once they have built their new stadium.
- Daniel Levy has proved himself very adept at signing sponsorship deals that see Spurs punch well above their weight. It is therefore not unreasonable to expect that he could secure a deal of at least £5 million per annum for the naming rights to the new stadium.
- ENIC underwrote the CRP share issue back in Jan 2004, partly in order to provide funds for transfers but mostly so that they could massively increase their percentage shareholding at a bargain basement price. They pulled the same trick in 2009 with a further £15 million share placement that helped pay for the costs of preparing the NDP (including property purchases). It's therefore far from beyond imagination that they could do so again in order finance the stadium build and, crucially, to take their shareholding beyond the critical 90% threshold.
If you disagree so strongly with my hypothesis, fine. But perhaps you would care to present us with compelling figures that explain why you think that a new stadium in Tottenham is not viable. Until someone has done so, such talk will inevitably be viewed with suspicion and disbelief.
So was the NDP.
If we were to judge a move to Stratford purely in terms of enabling more fans to watch Spurs (and I think we all know that it is really mostly about money), then we would have to remember that it would have come at the expense of a significant section of fans that felt that they could no longer continue to watch Spurs.
So hardly a victory for the fans.
Whatever Spurs do - even the move to Stratford - they will have to take on debt.
David Keirle has said that building the new stadium in Stratford and the new stadium in Crystal Palace will cost as much as building the new stadium in Tottenham. And, again, I think it's fair to say that David Keirle was erring towards the best case scenario for the move to Stratford.
And if property development is, as you say, too risky, what on earth were Spurs going to do about the plans they supposedly had for the White Hart lane site (and God knows how they proposed to attract any serious interest in the area once the only worthwhile focal point - THFC - had buggered off to Stratford)?
As to the gooners, they signed a £100 million deal for 8 years shirt sponsorship and 15 years stadium naming rights at a time when their shirt sponsorship for 8 years alone was worth not far short of £100 million. It simply isn't comparable to what Spurs could get if they were to sign a similar combined deal now. After all, Spurs have just signed two shirt sponsorship deals worth a combined minimum of £12.5 million per annum and as much as £15 million per annum.
I cant stop watching Kranjcers goal against Bolton. I think its goal of the season, the technique is amazing he hardly takes any backswing. Such a good goal and so important.
The commentary from John Motson on match of the day is great as well -
'Pavlyechenko, lays it of for Kranjcer, he cuts inside, Its Niko Kranjcer !!!!!!!!!!!'
Sorry, but you can't compare us to arsenal, the massive difference is the cost of development, the value of assets and the pubic supporting funds avbailable at the times they made their decisions. Also they have had CL since redeveloping, I'm not sure we could guaruntee anything of the sort even for next season.
And no I can't give specific figures, because to do so would be reckless. Actually no, to do that would be to put together a full costed business plan, which I don't have the time to do, and no-ones paying me to do it, so that's never going to happen.
But fundamentally to apply the 'it will cost £250mil to build because someone says so', when levy has already come out and said that it has escalated to '£450mil,' is misleading and so the starting point is flawed. That's the first fundamental 'assumption' that cannot be relied upon. SO much of what has come out of THFC in recent months has been 'positioning' with a geater purpose.
The availability and cost of finance itself is also relatively speaking 'more expensive' than 5 years ago in real terms.
Would the club have had it fully costed? doubt it as it is a very expensive exercise and still won't give a true reflection give market uncertainties of the raw materials. So in essence a pointles exercise at this time.
But in specific answer to your points:
1) is an assumption based on nothing other than 'i think' and 'it is safe to say'. Why would anyone put out an estimate that 'erred towards caution' if you don't know what the overall agenda is (which none of us do at this time)? It might be in their interests to err on the side of the rediculously low, pure positioning to get contracting organisations to think lower.
As an aside, building in the main cost what they cost at the time they are built, sounds rediculous statement, but you have to understand the process of value engineering, design development, the difference between procurement routes and construction inflation. It's all really boring and inconvenient stuff.
2) another assumption, based upon mythical figures. Can't really say they have any validity.
3) is an interesting one, if Sky lose collective bargaining rights, and therefore market dominance, wil lthey be interested in paying as much, or perhaps more pro-rata, given that they have the brand, the infrastructure to broadcast? don't know, I suspect probably not, as the poential suitors to sky would know that they couldn't pay over the odds. I do agree that our brand is strong, one of the things we probably should credit levy for.
4) see above. You seem very ready to bandy about 'known facts' based upon past performance. I would be interested to hear what the current cost of financing both 250million and 450 million is today, not in the past, today with inflationary pressure, a stagnating economy and banks less likely to take perceived risks?
Plus the CL inclusion point from above is still valid, when trying to compare like for like. Because I can't see us finishing anywhere but 5th at best this season on current evidence. Sure we might sneak it, but have you seen our run in? Given that you ar comparing our revenue to theirs it's quite important to increase the number of competitions we are in as well as the revenue, a drop of say £30 mil from gate and media combined puts quite a strain on the business.
There are some compelling figures I can give you though:
Wembley - fixed price contract £757million
Emirates - design and build £390 million
Olympic stadium - cost plus contract £500 million plus
now tell me how much do you think NDP will cost?
I'm not arguing for the sake of it, you just seem to be confusing 'facts' with 'conjecture'.
or to put it more simply as Public Enemy once said 'dont believe the hype'. Yeah, get me goin' all old school on your ass.
God that seems like such a long time ago, the world seemed so much simpler back then........
Jim, can you find anywhere in my comments where I'm talking about a move to Stratford? I don't want to move to Stratford, I'm just saying that the NDP in it's current form, in the current money market would be financial suicide and that the capacity & limitations at WHL has already been shown to be possibly too restrictive. Way too many of the arguments to say it should be fine are based on a fair wind and 'if's'. While they have a lot of trust in Levy, you can't conduct the business of a Plc entirely on 'if's'.
As for the cost, yes they take on debt regardless but were taking on a lot less at the OS because of retaining the value of the land at WHL and not having the groundbreaking costs... Which I'm sure you will agree are considerable on ANY building project. Building the stadium will cost about the same anywhere (although the confined spaces of WHL will present unique transportation problems, especially for large pre-fabricated steel structures), but the preparation of a fresh site or working around the existing structure at WHL will add a hefty chunk of change - Is this not true?
If we progress with the NDP then it either has to be on completely different terms i.e. English Heritage drop their requirement to redesign & we get back the housing we had to take out and the infrastructure costs are partly met by the LDA or similar... OR, we need to accept that we have to look at another site, hopefully in the Borough.
If either of those happens, then I hope that everyone will get behind the project accordingly.
My original post (If you read back) was about somebody asserting that Levy might possibly be a liar because nothing could have changed in three months. I was simply making the point that the timescale involved is a lot longer than 3 months - It's over 2 years, and in that time the world of capital projects has changed one hell of a lot.
I believe that when the project was launched, Levy believed in it and had genuine enthusiasm to make it happen but that factors came into play after the launch that made the whole thing tip toward the unprobable and then the unviable.
Please look back through the posts.
AT NO STAGE have I backed a move to Stratford, but I do want to see a fair and balanced argument rather than a mob with pitchforks demanding Levy's head on a plate, as you will agree some of these debates can often turn into. He's done fair by us more times than not - And there's not a lot of EPL chairmen you can say that about.
mes, can we not do both reasoned debate and pitchforks? I have a thing about public lynching, perhaps a trip to islington is on the cards?
I too never wanted us to move to stratford, albeit I was prepared to follow if the only oher option was not supporting spurs.
But what I want now, is a rational decision moving forwards about how the club can compete and expand, if it can't then maybe we should scale back everything else (including on pitch performance as a result of palyer sales) to suit and just stay where we are, never flirting with CL or it's likes again. Rather than gamble and become the next leeds.
I cant handle Jason Dozzel again. From Modric to Dozzel.
Everyone make sure they do the Euro millions this week.
We're playing Sunderland away this weekend. COYS!
matchy previewy of sorts coming up
Can it omit the words Olympic, Stratford, Brady & Dog with a face like a kicked in Fridge? (Ok maybe not the last one)
Decision appears to be delayed. Dragging this out now. We all know what they're going to say and that they made up their minds days back so just get on with it.
I want to read an open letter from Levy.
Big debate going on in there at the moment is "who spoke to the journalist?".
uh oh, we're in trouble now.
Just read that Lawro has us down for an away win!
Damn it, and we were just turning a corner with the Bolton result.
Take the seats out of all but the West Stand, bring back terracing, capacity goes up to 70,000.
Problem solved.
PLN, if we had the mentality (on and off the pitch in terms of running the game and the fans attitude) we could perhaps have terracing, build a mental Kop like the NDP had. But alas - not a chance in hell.
Still struggle to understand the issue with terracing. It would work in the modern era based on 'not' overcrowding. Probably harder to police and keep track of people which is why it's a no go.
When its an all ticket game, i dont see how its a problem. When clubs just used to let anyone in and people were climbing over fences to get in games were where the problems arrived.
Obviously it's never going to happen, but it would pretty much keep everyone happy on the basis that we increase capacity, keep redevelopment costs down and stay at WHL.
just a weird coincidence.
WEST HAM UNITED is an anagram of THE NEW STADIUM.......omg! LOL
God love you but standing terraces were not fun, they were hell-holes of initiation which we just about survived... And some people didn't. Nostalgia is one thing, lunacy is another altogether.
@twitter
legacy board not yet announced decision but bodies related to west ham already sending out embargoed press releases re victory
Anybody believe the "debate"? All for show.
Mes - the Germans do it very well.
And so it begins!!
"Having declared the club’s proposed new ground at Northumberland Park unviable he will look elsewhere as he attempts to permanently close the gap on Arsenal and the other perennial Champions League contenders.
Speaking last week, Levy told Telegraph Sport that new sites away from Haringey were an option if the Olympic Stadium bid failed, but said he would also seek new talks with the council about reducing the cost of the Northumberland Park site adjacent to White Hart Lane.
Club sources have confirmed that at present the Northumberland Development Project is too expensive to attract support from lenders, largely because of development restrictions put in place by English Heritage and the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment."
I keep getting told, those poxy building English Heritage want to maintain, according to someone I know who works in civil engineering and deals with these types of scenarios - in many cases, 5 or 10 years down the line - the buildings get knocked down anyways.
Watch how NDP goes from non viable to viable again.
spooky, the germans have something of a track record of being rather organized approach to many things.
We english aren't quite so, well, germanic about crowd control.
Does this mean we wont get to see the rotating chirpy head club shop and restaurant?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12424549
Its official, can all breathe a sigh of relief!!
COYS