It is now official. The deal for West Ham to own the 2012 London Olympic stadium has been completed (subject to an ambitious legal challenge from disgruntled Leyton Orient chairman Barry Hearn). On first looks, there seems to be divided opinion on two levels: firstly, the questionable economic benefits that have been bandied about and secondly, what this does to the past, present and future of West Ham as a football club.
What are the economic benefits? At capacity, the Olympic stadium can hold 18,984 more people than Upton Park can. This means 18,984 more of a lot of things every home game – pints, pies, train tickets, car parking fees, match programmes and, of course, match tickets which all bring in money to the club and surrounding businesses. The big ‘if’ surrounding this model, however, is whether West Ham, a team who were playing Championship football last season, can attract that many more punters. West Ham’s average attendance this season stands at 34,681, that’s a very impressive 99% of seats filled on a weekly basis. Add to this the inevitable impetus that will be created by moving to a new, high profile, stadium as well as the likely investment in better quality playing staff, the model looks financially secure.
There is a catch, though. Up until now the cost of building the stadium totals at a colossal £600 million. To convert the stadium to be football worthy (yes, it needs that – extending the roof and adding retractable seats) another £190 million will need to be spent on it. Of the £790 million gross spend; 775 million will come from the taxpayer. Major of London Boris Johnson, someone heavily involved in the deal, is quick to say that a 99-year lease with West Ham will help the Olympic Park and stadium generate revenues of £10m a year. Over the course of that lease, he says, the loans and public subsidies will be repaid. This, however, is too long term and will not satisfy the public.
But for West Ham this is not the point, for they can be delighted that they have got a world-class facility at a hugely discounted price. The fault lies with the the mis-management and short-termism of the Olympic Committee who have been without an economically robust strategy for the Olympic Park and stadium for quite some time. West Ham are the mere beneficiaries.
So the question for West Ham, then, is not at all on a financial level it is on a ‘footballing’ level. Upton Park is one of the most recognisable grounds in the Premier League, drenched in rich football history. Opened in 1904, it has gone on to house names like Sir Trevor Brooking, Bobby Moore, Paulo Di Canio, Frank Lampard, and Carlos Tevez – three of the 1966 World Cup winning squad (Bobby Moore, Martin Peters and Geoff Hurst) were West Ham players at the time. With fans tight to the pitch, no noise made by revved up cockney’s escaping, high rise flats spiralling above the stands, this ground is a fixture of Premier League antiquity.
But times do change and clubs do have to move forward. It is important not to get too entrenched in the history of your club, because a glamorous past can be the scapegoat of an ordinary present – just look at Liverpool. And who knows, this bravery may even usher in a new era in the history of West Ham Football Club – the data suggests they could certainly fill the 54,000 seats. I like to think that steps forward off the pitch are rewarded by steps forward on the pitch. Anyway, you never see a big club in a 35,000 seater stadium.
About the Author
Good, even -handed article.