Vital Football

Latest Tottenham Hotspur News

Unfair Competition.

Unfair Competition.

For some years now we have moaned about the way Chelsea and Man City are subsidised by rich owners. Well we are about to have something new, a football club subsidised by the State.

Details of the proposed deal for West Ham to take over the Olympic Stadium are now emerging. The stadium cost £429m to build, a further £130-£200m is going to be spent on improvements to make it suitable for football. West Ham will contribute the princely sum of £15m (yes £15m) towards this, the rest will be public money.

The club will then pay £9m a year in rent on a 99 year lease. Boris is making a big deal of clawing back part (not all) of the profits if the owners sell the club. Profits from redeveloping the old ground remain entirely with West Ham. Essentially West Ham will become the only club in British football partly financed by the State.

As if it wasn't bad enough having to compete with billionaires we now have to compete with the government. It gets worse because there is no such thing as public money, its taxpayers money. So any of us who pay taxes, whether we support Spurs, Arsenal or any other club, will be subsidising West Ham. No one asked for our agreement, no one cares what we think. Isn't British democracy wonderful ?

Written by jod

Click here to join in the debate on the club forum.

Date:Thursday December 6 2012
Time: 1:11PM


Looks like every Brit will be supporting West Ham then. Glad that I am a few thousand miles away.
06/12/2012 13:20:00
you can understand why Daniel Levy was so keen, based on those figures.
06/12/2012 13:23:00
what remains the most annoying aspect if all this was that the initial designers had no long term plan over what to do with the place after the games. that is another potential 200m+ wasted and that *****es me off far more than west ham getting it
06/12/2012 13:25:00
But the Olympics were great Ox!!! Who cares what West Ham are doing, we are Tottenham!!!!
06/12/2012 13:32:00
Well that's me putting an immediate STOP! on paying my taxes. I'd rather go to prison than contribute my hard earned dollar to those ******** SCUM!!
06/12/2012 13:37:00
I am not sure but isn't it illegal under EU law for the state to support a company in this way?
06/12/2012 13:50:00
Another hilarious Spurs rhetoric, almost as funny as Hearn's blabberings! £9m a year for 99 years = £891m for a stadium that we do not even own. How much did it cost to build and convert again? Hardly funded by the state is it?
06/12/2012 13:55:00
All too complicated in some ways but in a way its apositive to get a stadium full and in good use after a big event like the Olympics. In Cape Town we sit staring at a white elephant that gets used by the odd pop star and a few local football matches. It's a sad affair truthfully as everytime the stadium gets used I get the WC2010 feeling all over again! Life's unfair and in truth do we really care what wet spam do?
06/12/2012 14:00:00
Besides, haven't Spurs received a grant from Haringey Council for the redevelopment of White Hart Lane and the surrounding area? Hardly competing against the government is it?
06/12/2012 14:01:00
Typical of Britain putting money into pockets of the rich and filthy...porno united in this case...wasting so much money on a party (which was all the Olympics are) when the money could have been used for many things. Still keeps up the spirit of Emperor Nero and Marie Antoinette by the ruling class. No Premier League team should be bailed out by the government
Forever Spurs
06/12/2012 14:29:00
scott_d - Try figuring out the interest on the capital expenditure, or do you think you can borrow money for free ? Then add in the profits from redeveloping the old ground, which will only be possible because you've been given a new one.The subsidy is massive, even if you don't understand finance it shouldn't be that hard to figure out we're talking in the hundreds of millions. Redeveloping Tottenham is Haringey's job, so how are they subsidising the club ? that would only happen if they were paying towards the building of the stadium.
06/12/2012 14:34:00
Bottom line is we need to get our own b1oody stadium built. Once we are in our 56,000 seater with the largest, steepest kop in the UK with the best acoustic design creating the best atmosphere anywhere, are we really gonna be bothered about WHU? Watching football there will be completely soulless, that club will die there. Brady keeps banging on about 'sight-lines' yet you are never gonna get away from the fact the stadium is not built for football. There will be no atmosphere or intensity. It is however so annoying how the government squander money just to save face, and help a private company in the process. Ludicrous.
06/12/2012 14:55:00
StillRV - I have been to River Plate stadium in Argentina. It has a full running track, yet the view is great - because it was well designed for football. Olympic stadium has zero consideration for football, and it would be awful as a football stadium. Personally I don't care how West Ham get long as WE don't go there.
06/12/2012 15:30:00
is that why you guys were investigated for spying.pls get a life and think of how you can be a big club and stop snooping around west ham.
06/12/2012 15:41:00
stop snooping around west ham hahahahaha yeah ok
06/12/2012 16:07:00
Sorry jod, I think you'll find that the Spammers will have to pay off their debts from the sale of Upton Park, they won't directly get a penny from its sale mate.

06/12/2012 16:08:00
SRV is right. Although they're only looking at it from a monetary perspective, the soul of the club is with the atmosphere and the fans, no matter how much they spend on converting it the venue will never be suitable, I'd imagine they think they've won the lottery, fast forward a few years and the empty seats will be a joke, West Ham probably don't even have 60,000 fans in this country.
06/12/2012 16:09:00
You're chav scum anyway sunnymakcres - Why worry? or are you here because you are missing AVB :-)
06/12/2012 16:28:00
The world as a place to live is run by idoits who give people a false dawn for years easy money etc now all the useless peps who have never lifted a hand think they deserve better.countrys are a mess as is football.kick a ball and come rich,go to uni to become a smarter conn merchent.stop paying taxes?
Little spur
06/12/2012 16:36:00
Sorry about the rant guys.angry where my taxes go to and this takes the complete mick!
Little spur
06/12/2012 16:39:00
As a result of the West Ham deal, we managed to finally get some assistance from the local governments towards the redevelopment of our home stadium, so it's all worked out well for us. It would be really nice to see the new structure already going up, but then, Rome wasn't built in a day. The Colosseum in Rome was probably erected quicker, mind you. At any event, what matters to me is that we can finance the stadium and continue to grow as a club. Based on West Ham's attendance, each of the first 36k tickets per match would have 13.53 GBP going to rent. Whether the concessions are theirs or whether there is rent to pay for that as well, I do not know. Can they receive naming rights, or does that go to the government. Lots of questions and the answers may make the OS a poor choice, all things considered. If the track is removed, the government and the Olympic heritage Committee are all liars. I don't know if Spurs will sell out every night, but I'd think we'd average at least 50k per home date. I also understand that West Ham greatly subsidizes a lot of the tickets (giveaways, school kid promotions etc) so it strikes me that their attendance numbers are inflated. Do they have 15-20k on a season's ticket waiting list? I don't know the answer to that. I doubt it though. 35k in a 60k stadium is not a good atmosphere, irrespective of sightlines, concessions and product. Their bed. They will have to sleep in it. Let's get our stadium done so we can push onward and upward. Why look down? COYS
06/12/2012 16:41:00
As an aside, the main structure of the 1976 Montreal Olympics, the big O (or OWE) wound up costing 1.6B (way over any budgets or predictions), took 30 years to pay off (2006) and does not have a regular tenant. Look at the the last couple of decades of Olympic Games. There are very few summer Olympic main venues that are still in profitable use. They are all white elephants. If West Ham was to get the stadium afterwards, they should have been part of the development beforehand. They are inheriting a building that was never designed to be a footbakll stadium. Good luck. COYS
06/12/2012 16:51:00
Who pays for the upkeep of the stadium? A 99 year lease at 9m is a better deal for the taxpayer the the spammers and just shows what inept businessmen the spammers owners are. The only way this will work for the porn barons is if the sell upton park and then sell the club and pocket the profits leaving the club with a 99 year lease at 9m a year. But who would be stupid enough to buy the club??
06/12/2012 17:37:00
Trouble is the politicians that decided the stadium wouldn't be built for Football after the games are the same people who sqandered Billions of pounds and sunk the country into a deep black hole...where are they now? no longer in power and living off nice pension provided guessed it the tax payer!...but then again someone voted those morons into power...
07/12/2012 09:33:00
peterballb - All the government get is part of any profit from the current owners selling the club on. Everything else, capital receipts from the old ground, naming rights etc belongs to West Ham. If they bank the capital from the redevelopment of the old ground they could probably pay the rent with the interest.
07/12/2012 09:41:00
good facts...
07/12/2012 11:25:00
It'll all go wrong - It's West Ham for god sake - they'll probably be in league 1 in a a season or 3.
07/12/2012 12:40:00
Perhaps if our plans for the stadium had not been as controversial, and if our chairman was a more ameanable individual in negotiations, we might have become the preffered bidder to take avantage of all the perks. It will be interesting to see who gets into, and playing in their new ground first, us or WHU, my money is on the "porn kings". Its no good taking jealous glances across at them, when we had the chance to scupper them.
07/12/2012 14:10:00
Will it take WHU 12 years to sort out their tenancy of the OS, I doubt it, and the stadium will be finished and ready for occupation, albeit with retractable seating over the athletics track. Just remind me how many bricks we have laid after 12 years of ENIC ownership, after greater match day revenue was announced on their acquisition of the club, as a priority, answer none. I wouln't be surprised if after WHU have their feet cosyly under the table at the OS, we are still playing in front of 36,000 at WHL, trolling out excuses, and surveying a cleared, but still undeveloped, new ground site.
07/12/2012 14:21:00
Frank i remember the VHS Scotch tape adverts with the Skeleton man kept saying rewind and tape again re you can record over and over again...its reminds me of you with your constant repitition of your Enic posts...Stop it my man
07/12/2012 15:28:00
Frank - You really have a starry eyed view of politicians if you believe we were ever going to get the stadium. It was a political stitch up from the start, we were only included in the bidding process to give an appearance of a fair process, once the questions started being asked they just changed the rules and cancelled the original bids.
07/12/2012 15:31:00
As usual Frank hatred for ENIC clouds his judgement. Such a moron. Lets not worry about West Ham. There stadium will be crap and ours will be state-of-the-art. The can't fill a stadium that size every game, we can. So they will have a library every week.
07/12/2012 19:47:00
Ironically, it is the same for the world's wealthiest club. After all, a similar arrangement is still in place for the Etihad, is it not, and for the same pathetic 'legacy' policy, this time after the Commonwealth Games rather than the 'lympics. Lord bleedin' Coe's smug face wants me to put my boot through the TV screen at the best of times, but his crapola before during and after the Olypmpics about legacy was obvious ****e. They effed up, him, Dame Tessa Jowell, Livingstone and all the other assorted useful idiots who p*ssed our tax money up the wall, ignoring the wrong-headedness of not designing a proper stadium that could be converted to football, and was never going to work financially as an athletic stadium (as per City Of Manchester-do they never learn?) Now they accept any old offer, as long as it retains a redundant athletic track. As for our brilliant owners, asherthesmasher, before you berate Frank who talks nothing but common sense, perhaps you'll retract that 'moron' slur, and look at the facts, as it may, in fact, highlight your comments as moronic when trying to defend ENIC. After all, it wasn't Frank who announced in 2001 that increasing capacity was a priority, and 11 years later we have an extra seventy (70) seats, and lock out 20,000 on the waiting list every home game. To paraphrase that ol' Connie Francis song...."Who's moronic now...?"
07/12/2012 20:09:00
Thank you Lordjohnny, you and I have shared similar views re, our esteemed owners ENIC for a very long time, and with each season that passes are being proven more right than ever. People can call me what they like, can villify and slur, it might keep them happy, and insulate them from thinking seriously themselves about the situation, and what is actually going on, that is of course if they are indeed capable of rational thought in the first place, or are they in fact the morons.
07/12/2012 20:56:00
Many of us have selective amnesia when it comes to past statements, future plans and promises, and edicts, from messrs Lewis and Levy, some will never learn.
07/12/2012 20:59:00
Spot on frank.
Little spur
07/12/2012 21:12:00
Frank-I think it's called Flat Cap Syndrome, whereby sufferers adopt an a**e-lickingly deferential attitude for any perceived authority figure, no matter what crap they are fed.
07/12/2012 22:31:00
Frank doesn't have an ounce of common sense. If building a stadium is good for the club, it's good for ENIC. They are a business and extremely successful at it. So whatever reasons for not have a stadium yet, i am sure they are good ones. What i do know is that our club is a much better stature now than where we were when ENIC took over. We are much more successful on the pitch, we are a bigger brand and worth a lot more as a club. Frank's issue with ENIC is that he would rather have a sugar daddy. He wants to see the club spend beyond there means. Another words, he wants ENIC to spend out of there own pockets. Yes i think he is an idiot and if you shares his views then i am pretty sure you are an idiot too. Frank is pretty old, so he says. He must have been a right muppet when he was younger.
07/12/2012 22:40:00
07/12/2012 22:42:00
jod, you write "As if it wasn't bad enough having to compete with billionaires we now have to compete with the government." Which billionaires do you speak of? The billionaires of other rich clubs, or the 2 billionaires who are shareholders of THFC, one being a triple billionaire named Joe Lewis. Aren't we therefore competing against ourselves if the finance needed to take us up to being serious title challengers and to build that new stadium is all ready there, already exists? Think of the hundreds of millions being lost on stadium revenue, because Lewis didn't have the bottle to build that new stadium a decade back when land was much cheaper. ENIC could now have their very own Emirates style revenue making machine. But Lewis bottled it and Levy blew the OS bid! The rest is sour grapes...
08/12/2012 10:55:00
asherthesmasher, Have your own views on this site, post them all you like, get into debate with your fellow Spurs fans, but please refrain from your extremely rude attacks on individual posters on the site. And please show a little more respect for one of the older posters on this site named Frank who has been watching our club play for much longer than most on here. (lucky guy) Frank has seen the glory, the ups and the downs, and only wants what all true THFC fans desire, that the glory days return to our great club. He wants the richest owners in our clubs history to contribute more financially so we can seriously compete, on and off the pitch! Many thousands of REAL Tottenham fans agree 100% with Frank, so please show a little more respect...
08/12/2012 11:17:00
Every wet spam fan I know (a lot, I'm from Hornchurch) is against it and think it will ruin the club.
Tottenham Hotcore
08/12/2012 13:11:00
How can you ruin a club that is already *****ed?
08/12/2012 15:57:00
Spuds-U-Like - So how would they pay off their debts without the sale of Upton Park ? A gift of hundreds of millions is a gift of hundreds of millions. West Ham happen to be in debt, how does that change anything ?
08/12/2012 16:52:00
Asherthesmasher, the only reason that we have not had a new stadium for at least as long as Arsenal have had the Emirates, or Utd have had an extended OT, or City have had the Etihad, is lack of the bottle, ambition, committment, or the desire to own a successful football club and invest realistically in order to succeed, rather than a piece of Nth London real estate that happens to house a football club. If the buildding of a new stadium adds value to their holding in excess of the cost of building it, then they may build it, one day. If it doesn't then don't hold your breath. It maybe advantageous to them to sell with all the consents, promises of assistance from govt and others in place, then we may have to wait several more years or until a new owner comes along. If you believe a word that Messrs Lewis and Levy tell you, then all I would say is, make sure you get your chimney swept before Christmas Eve.
08/12/2012 20:20:00
Page 1/1
  1. 1

Login to post a comment

Recent Spurs Articles

Can / Will Chelsea Slip Up Against Southampton?

The FA Cup Final was decided over the weekend and I for one still feel emotionally stressed. Having said that, my feeling of desperation might lighten somewhat if..

ITK: Some WHL Staff Axed - Wembley Here We Come

A current White Hart Lane employee has confirmed that the current crop of match day vending staff have been given a month's notice ahead of the clubs move to Wembley.

The Comedy Show Soon Commeth

It won't be long until the hilarious media script of the comic-opera season starts to play out.

Chelsea Showed Us How to Win

Tottenham had 63.1% ball possession - we had 11 corners to their 1 - we had 13 goal attempts to their 8 but what really matters is that they had 5 shots on target and scored 4 of them.

Archived Vital Spurs Articles

Vital Spurs articles from

Site Journalists

Editor email
no email

Current Poll (see more polls)

Dele Alli won 'Young Player of the Year' 2016/17, but how do you rate him?
Suggested By: Tino
Five star81%
Four star13%
Three star0%
Two star0%
One star6%
ScoopDragon Premier League Network Sites

League Table

# Team P W D L Pts. GD
1 Chelsea 32 24 3 5 75 38
2 Spurs 32 21 8 3 71 46
3 Liverpool 34 19 9 6 66 28
4 Man City 32 19 7 6 64 28
5 Man Utd 32 17 12 3 63 26
6 Everton 34 16 10 8 58 23
7 Arsenal 31 17 6 8 57 23
8 WBA 33 12 8 13 44 -3
9 Southampton 31 11 7 13 40 -3
10 Watford 33 11 7 15 40 -17
11 Stoke 34 10 9 15 39 -13
12 Crystal Palace 33 11 5 17 38 -7
13 AFC Bournemouth 34 10 8 16 38 -14
14 West Ham 34 10 8 16 38 -15
15 Leicester City 32 10 7 15 37 -12
16 Burnley 34 10 6 18 36 -16
17 Hull City 34 9 6 19 33 -31
18 Swansea 34 9 4 21 31 -29
19 Middlesbrough 33 4 12 17 24 -20
20 Sunderland 32 5 6 21 21 -32
Write for Vital Football
Latest F1 News
Latest Vital Boxing News
The Vital Football Members League

Recent Spurs Results (view all)

Spurs Fixtures (view all)

Apr 26 2017 8:00PM : Crystal Palace (a)
Barclays Premier League
Apr 30 2017 4:30PM : Arsenal (H)
Barclays Premier League
May 5 2017 8:00PM : West Ham United (a)
Barclays Premier League
May 13 2017 3:00PM : Manchester United (H)
Barclays Premier League
May 21 2017 3:00PM : Hull City (a)
Barclays Premier League

Vital Members League Table

1.Nick Real Deal292
9.Big Chiv77
Vital Football Comment