West Ham loyalists are already trying to put a positive spin on this. In true Squealer fashion, they are already exclaiming "Tactics comrades! Tactics!" but there are no tactics here. This is a right royal claret and blue cock up!
I warned all along that the loan from Newham Council was dodgy. When I posted concerns, I received the usual responses! How about this from an anonymous?
"You really are a small minded idiot aren't you? Do you actually think your arguments through before making yourself look a tit on here?"
Or this from Sav?
"And you call yourself a West Ham fan? What is wrong with you? Are you sure you are not a fanatic crypto supporter of Spurs? And yes, I really mean it this time!"
Or this follow up from the Greek economist?:
"Today 4 "noteable" persons spoke against the West Ham bid. Levy, Redknapp, Pele and you! The first three were co-ordinated and I am sure that the well known mercenary who still profits from an image of having being the World's best footballer timed his intervention perfectly as instructed by those who put him on to it. Your comments against West Ham (from someone that calls himself "Hammers Fan") were an added and possibly unexpected bonus in the shit campaign Tottenham started to discredit the West Ham bid. Brilliant. Well done! And don't insult our intelligence by presenting yourself to be the Robin Hood of Newham. These comments are totally against West Ham and they do damage despite what your personal views may be. I bet we will soon have a Tottenham PR agent pointing out the same thing as you did so as to influence the decision in their favour." (Still Sav, the deal might yet be saved - we could always ask the Germans to bail us out!)
Ot this from another anonymous?:
"Tot scum you are tot scum you are! what is you problem - why do you do it - why can't you help yourself - it's easy to wind people up - but why do it?"
Or best of all, this from our Cypriot Greek banker?:
"It is only a loan HF! It is not as if they are giving away the money to West Ham. I am surely not in a position to judge whether they could use the funds otherwise or not. But you are making it sound as if they are giving the money away. They will get it back and with interest! That's exactly how banks make money too. I know, I am a banker. (A bit of cockney rhyming slang there Sav? A Greek banker!)
This arrangement may provide the Borough with a steady income (if the credit assessment was done properly and the loan is properly secured). You make it sound as if it is the end of the world and that they are stealing the money from the people and giving it away to West Ham United. But I would probably agree with you if it was given as a grant. Moreover, I have the feeling that the loan to West Ham is not the reason why they don't seem to be doing the other stuff you mention. I thnk you should look for the answer for that elsewhere."
Bloody hell, it seems I was right all along guys! Now there's a surprise!
The wonderful thing about the OS is, of course, that there is plenty of room for us to park our caravans! All this time wasted trying to come up with a new name. Now the answer is staring us in the face: Dale Farm, the Pikey stadium for the Pikey club without a ground of their own!
Brilliant! And there are still claret and blue mugs who don't see what S&G are up to! Wake up, the redeveloped Boleyn is worth more to them than the West Ham franchise!
17 comments:
trashing West Ham fans, trashing your fellow contributors, it seems as if you Sir are displaying the characteristics of the mobile dweller and erstwhile West Ham Wanderer of the road. More than anyone it is you who puts the itinerant into the internet as you career hair-lipped into farm's way.
LOL My contributors are quick to tell me when I am wrong! The trouble is, I'm usually right when they are claiming I'm wrong, as this little sample once again shows. Just because a Tottenham PR agent says something, it doesn't mean that everybody who says the same thing is a Tottenham fan does it?
The loan from Newham Council stank from the off. The trouble is, our fans could be up to their noses in raw sewage and, providing it was dyed claret and blue, they would still be commenting on the delightful aroma from the garden of roses!
Well everybody should now be on their guard. We are one step closer to a garden of remembrance!
Ha, you're a sensationalist provocateur with more knockers than your accompanying photos. You know you enjoy wallowing alone in your pre-stirred shite more than engaging with the community that a fan base creates. However, I'll avram you that you've been right more than not recently...and as you can see I still read it. Blog on you crazy pikey!
Totally agree with the thoughts, have never wanted the OS but did not want Spurs having it. However, am trying to find a link between Dale Farm and the OS as I believe the Pikey’s own Dale farm but do not have permission for its development whereas we will never own the OS but will probably have to fork out to use it.
Does this mean also that BJ is about to withdraw £17 mi offer to Spurs. Hope so.
On the 5th of October, someone tweeted Gold: "What do you say to the fans that want us to stay at Upton P". Gold replied: "Nothing is 100%, they may end up getting what they wish for"
Now make of that what you will, but it certainly makes a change from the positivity the three have previously come out with when speaking about anything OS related.
Kevin in manchester writes..
All football clubs are private businesses; I can't think of an owner who sold out since the start of the PL who hasn't made a bundle .. maybe Hicks and Gillette but that was a special sort of cock up.. so why should G&S be any different - if they hadn't stuck their cash in when they did we could be out of business by now or worse owned by FernaQPRndez - who definitely is also only in it for the cash and glory, in that order.
People are generally neither all good or all bad and that goes for owners too - true maybe their business instincts have a gyroscoptic pull on their decisons but lacking an alternative we can do no other than bellyache and go along to see where the ride takes us. We'll be that bit more exposed as a club without owning a ground but owning a ground is no guarantee of future prosperity.
No doubt about it; its been a cock-up by all concerned and we have been undone by Levy here but what do you expect G&S et al to do admit they've bollixed it? No, it will be spin, spin spin; it's the modern way; no one is ever to blame, failure, as they say, is an orphan.
As long as there are 30,000 or so fans/punters/suckers/supporters we'll muddle on - it's what we do.
I said the stadium should be named St. Mungo's and it looks like a good bet.
Brady was far too quick to come out and say we would apply to rent the stadium anyway; something smells a bit Billingsgate to me.
This is a tactical move designed to outflank Spurs and keep the OPLC out of the courts for what could have been years.
Instead of us borrowing the money from banks and Newham Council, which is the cornerstone of Tottenham's argument the Government will now stick in the £50m to re-design the stadium and we will now only pay rental, plus running costs reported to be about £2m and £5m respectively, a year.
We were never going to have ownership so it's no biggie. I am sure we'll get a long term contract.
This is a strategic (and perhaps a little too complicated for you), there will be another bidding process - that we win, so it's the same gravy just a different meat.
We'll be at the OS - so no need worry your pretty little head.
Toodle pip
Spammersfan is right this group of freeloaders have pulled the wool over your eyes,Bradys the dragon queen from hell and couldnt give a fuck about wet spam or brum.she's money money money and would drop her knickers to anyone that pays her.She's a tea lady to the likes of levy and surgar.west ham and spurs should stay were they are and if the Brady bunch don't want to,get them out asapKevtheyid
How quickly you rush to claim you were right all along! How the hell did you deduce that? What has actually happenned today and what does it prove - let alone how does it vindicate you?
Before I start, I should add that you are stereotyping again and you try to offend me (unsuccessfully I should say) by suggesting that being Greek and a Banker is a contradiction in terms. How insightful of you!
Be that as it may, the big news today is how far legal injustice can go by penetrating the social fabric of business in order to promote the special interests of people who are willing to shower the lawyers with money in Britain.
What has happenned is that the losers in a fair and open bidding have got together and got the lawyers to find weak spots to attack and create problems for the successful bidder. After unsuccessfully trying to cash in their chips by getting subsidies and grants they were only left with the power to delay these proceeding beyond the limited time that action had to take place. They managed in other words through legal manouvres to cause paralysis.
Following that there was no other option but to force a reset to proceedings. The London Mayor actually stated that he fully expects West Ham (as the legitimate successful bidder) to still move in the Stadium by 2014.
So, how is all this destructive background work by Spurs and Leyton Orient vindicate you HF? Yes, I know, you will say that we will now not own a stadium and not even a lease of a stadium. But I would say to you that this by itself is not enough for anyone to draw conclusions.
It actually depends on the contract that will be offered and the rights (and obligations) that the tennant will have. If for example, we have a "sitting tennant" status and the price we pay by way of annual rent is economically good why is this a bad deal? We will still have the use of this super stadium and no immediate or real threat of being expelled. Such a deal will quite probably mean that West Ham as a business will be strengthened (repaying all its debts) and also creating other human and non-assets. Our balance sheet will most probably be strengthened.
As usual, you are too quick to congratulate yourself and claim you were always right and that everyone else was always wrong. You live in your world, I will live in mine.
I am not offended HF. In fact if you actually say anything meaningful that proves me wrong I would be the first to congratulate you and admit it. But you haven't done so yet. Keep trying.
you always said the money from newham was dodgy and thats why you was right???? you slag off west ham every day so it was inevitable you would get something right..just wanna be the first too say well done, its almost like you know better than everyone else..i hope you have a super fantastic day....
oh yea i forgot, you haven't slagged off qpr today? are you ok??
o
Sav, your comments were ALL in relation to the loan from Newham Council and that is the stumbling block. Whether or nor we end up in the OS is not the issue. You took me to task - and accused me of being a Tottenham fan - because I questioned the legitimacy of the local authority providing funding to a football club, be it a gift or a loan or whatever. I take it that you are now willing to accept that I was right on this point and you, despite your "I know more about this than you because I'm a banker" attitude, were wrong?
I can't see how you can do otherwise given the deal has collapsed because of that £40m loan from Newham Council that I objected to as soon as it was revealed. It was you that introduced the idea of you being a banker - I had no idea! So you can't have it both ways. You can't use that as a weapon in your argument and then object when that weapon is turned back on you.
As for a Greek Banker being a contradiction in terms, of course it isn't. We all know what a merchant banker is in rhyming slang and given the need to merge Greek banks to avoid another domino collapse that could bring down the Greek economy and the whole of Europe in its wake, I think Greek banker should now perhaps displace merchant banker in the cockney lingo. Not you personally of course, I'm not holding you personally responsible for taking Europe to the brink of economic ruin.
Anyway, I'm out for a Greek meal at the weekend with a German colleague and after eating five courses and drinking the place dry, I'm passing Fritz the bill. When in a Greek restaurant do as the Greeks do! ; }
LOL 1054, I'm not a pikey, I'm a landlord! Mind you, I own a collapsable caravan! Shit, maybe I am a pikey! The father in law was a rag and bone man. Shit! I am a pikey! Any old iron? Any old iron?
LOL AJ, have you read Animal Farm? Talk about shifting your position to accommodate the latest facts! The club have cocked up! It was "tactics" to bid on the basis of a dodgy loan was it? If it was tactics, why didn't we withdraw before the rug was pulled from under us? If is tactics, why didn't Sullivan and Gold stump up £40m to replace the loan? They can afford to can't they?
Unfortunately, I am right about West Ham most days Doubting. You just doubt me. Typical of a Thomas! You keep faith in Sullivan and Gold, then you can live up to another type of Thomas, a right John Thomas!
What we need to agree on first is whether moving into a 60,000+ seat stadium is a good or bad thing. You say no, I say yes (as long as this does not cost us half a billion plus pounds to build it). In fact, I dare say it is probably the only way West Ham can eventually join the elite of English football. We have the fans, but we are way off as far as money are concerned, because unlike Man. City and Chelsea, we do not have a billionnaire sugar daddy.
I see the Olympic Stadium as a necessary step to making West Ham great. I am also sentimental, like everyone, about Upton Park. I have probably not missed a game for the years I was studying and living in London. But that is not what is important to me. I want West Ham to escape from the mediocrity in which it has condemned itself into. The fans will soon love the new stadium and even if they don't they will feel better knowing their club is going forward.
So, you seemed to say that moving into the Olympic Stadium was all bad and I kept saying that it is a blessing. I never argued that there were no weak areas in the bid and/or the financing. How could I do that anyway since I don't have your powers of knowing everything by reading only the headlines.
With that in mind, what I was saying to you is not to joing the campaign of our enemies. That's all. But since you believed that leaving Upton Park should be avoided at all costs you started exposing the areas of the deal which you thought were not robust. Including the Newham Council involvement. Of course if that loan was construed as State aid it was bound to lead to European law problems. Something of course Spuds and Leyton Orient knew very well will lead into never ending delays, something the neither West Ham nor the Olympic Committee could afford to have.
You can be sure that West Ham probably were aware about what was to happen today and they were in full agreement. In fact this was the only way round the problem that was posed by the abusers of the legal system who targeted the sensitivities of the Committee and their preferred tennant.
You are totally wrong about ALL my comments being about Newham Council. I have probably referred to them only once or twice in response to your assertion that their loan was not really a loan.
Finally, the problems in Greece are more the making of the stupid and short sighted framework in which the Euro exists and its abuse by the Europeam Governments rather than the anyone else. You will probably see a domino effect leading to the collapse of the Eurozone. Perhaps the only wise thing Labour ever did was not join the Euro.
Sorry Sav, that is not the issue here. The issue is the £40m loan from Newham Council. Your comments related to the loan, not to whether or not moving to the OS was for the best. I said that it was disgraceful that tax payer's money was being used to finance the deal. And I was right!
Post a Comment