New Stadium

Playboy

Fair enough m8 .. you are entitled to your opinion. We will just have to agree to disagree. I'm a pragmatic person by nature so maybe I undervalue certain things just as much as I think others over romanticise them.

Dublin Spur

I understand both arguments
Haven't made up my mind yet
Emotion v Sums

I'll wait to see all the facts first I think.

It's years off happening anyway

RichMc70

Dublin Spur wrote: »

It's years off happening anyway

I wouldnt be so sure about that Shane. AEG are involved so they'll want quick return on their investment. Could be in by 2014 if we're unlucky enough to get the nod from the LOPLC.

mushykeogh

therecklessone wrote: »

If we go I will walk away from this club, it pains me to think I share a common space with people who are so ready to sell our soul.

So for all of your love of the spurs and its history that you keep reminding us about, you will just pack it in and stop supporting them if the club moves?

5 miles and your just going to stop?, not even a sneaky peak at teletxt if were 1 nil at old Trafford with 1 minute to go?! I dont buy it.

therecklessone

mushykeogh wrote: »

I dont buy it.

I never put anything up for sale.

mushykeogh

therecklessone wrote: »

I never put anything up for sale.

Boom Boom.

So your going to stop supporting spurs if they move to Stratford?

therecklessone

mushykeogh wrote: »

Boom Boom.

So your going to stop supporting spurs if they move to Stratford?

I thought that was clear from my post.

I will not be attending Stratford if we go by choice, I will give up my season ticket and I will cease to consider myself a Spurs fan.

I won't hate Spurs, and I'll be happy to see the team do well, but I won't be along for the ride.

Hatch99

therecklessone wrote: »

I thought that was clear from my post.

I will not be attending Stratford if we go by choice, I will give up my season ticket and I will cease to consider myself a Spurs fan.

I won't hate Spurs, and I'll be happy to see the team do well, but I won't be along for the ride.

Strong stuff Ronan. I agree with the large majority of your posts above, but tbh, I dont think I'll stop supporting , following and going to see Spurs if we do move.

RichMc70

therecklessone wrote: »

I will not be attending Stratford if we go by choice, I will give up my season ticket and I will cease to consider myself a Spurs fan.

I won't hate Spurs, and I'll be happy to see the team do well, but I won't be along for the ride.

+1

although in my case it will be, not renewing the bronze membership.

BERBA

therecklessone wrote: »

I thought that was clear from my post.

I will not be attending Stratford if we go by choice, I will give up my season ticket and I will cease to consider myself a Spurs fan.

I won't hate Spurs, and I'll be happy to see the team do well, but I won't be along for the ride.

i could understand your logic if you were living in the area , but your from ireland and supporting the club most of your life ( sorry just assuming) so what do you care about the club moving 5 miles down the road? The area is a bit of a dump anyhow , Why would you give up on the club?

therecklessone

BERBA wrote: »

i could understand your logic if you were living in the area , but your from ireland and supporting the club most of your life ( sorry just assuming) so what do you care about the club moving 5 miles down the road? The area is a bit of a dump anyhow , Why would you give up on the club?

Because I understand the connection between the club and it's environs, I appreciate it's history, and I believe that once we sell on this we will sell on anything.

Would we wear red shirts? By the logic advanced here I can't see how those who are pro-Stratford would have any argument against it, but it would be anathema to me.

My disconnect with N17 does not invalidate my opposition, i do not need to live in the area to understand the magnitude of such a move.

Hatch99

BERBA wrote: »

i could understand your logic if you were living in the area , but your from ireland and supporting the club most of your life ( sorry just assuming) so what do you care about the club moving 5 miles down the road? The area is a bit of a dump anyhow , Why would you give up on the club?

I disagree mate. I think it's a bit ignorant to say you dont live there, so why do you care...

jrt123

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rdm9sm43H8
19.30-22.30

Funny but true!!

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

jrt123 wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rdm9sm43H8
19.30-22.30

Funny but true!!

haha very good. Embed by pressing the Youtube icon diagonally above the smilies and put in everthing after "v=" (if confused quote this reply).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rdm9sm43H8

RichMc70

jrt123 wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rdm9sm43H8
19.30-22.30

Funny but true!!

excellent:D

tippspur

jrt123 wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rdm9sm43H8
19.30-22.30

Funny but true!!

Very good,:)

everdead.ie

I know someone mentioned something about pissing off west ham but the way I see it is if they keep that running track it will affect there performances at home and could see them drop even further down the table maybe even a division ?

RichMc70

"The Association of British Athletics Clubs (ABAC) say keeping a running track at the stadium - as West Ham would do - would be a waste of time.
They have thrown their weight behind Tottenham's rival bid to rebuild the venue as a football-only ground and redevelop Crystal Palace athletics stadium".

Source: news.sky.com


Chairman of the ABAC must have been easily persuaded for lobbying support for Spurs bid, as his comments are the complete opposite view than that of all the other Athletcis bodies and in particular the national governing body, UK Athletics.

UKA Press Release:-

England Athletics Chairman John Graves went on to reject the position of the Association of British Athletics Clubs who yesterday expressed support for Tottenham Hotspur’s bid for the stadium that would see the athletics track removed.

"ABAC have no legitimacy – they are a self appointed lobby group whose views cannot be claimed to represent athletics clubs. Across Britain there are some 1500 athletics clubs, only a few percent of whom have any association whatsoever with ABAC."

http://www.uka.org.uk/media/news/february-2011/01-02-11-ea-olympic-legacy/

Hmmm, I wonder if the last stationery order for offices at THFC included an extra batch of brown envelopes.:rolleyes:

Hatch99

The plot thickens...

RichMc70

Alan (Youre Fired) Sugar
(Mr Viagra) Pele himself
and now Association of British (against legacy) Athletics Clubs

Wonder who will be next

I heard Frank Dunlop was seen heading to the White House

therecklessone

Account of meeting held between Levy and weareN17 today, 3rd hand off FTL from guy who wasn't at meeting but is organiser of weareN17:

Levy said NDP has been unviable for months - he knew it was unviable even before we got planning permission so why we continued down that path is anyones guess - sounds like Levy bull**** to me as why would he continue to spend millions on a project he knows we cannot afford.

Relationship with Lammy is dead whatever happens.

Claims building in Tottenham is unviable and they have no other sites in mind bar Stratford.

He "might" sell if we don't get Stratford.

Promised a full and independent consultation on Stratford with the fans before we pay the £20 million bond.

On the last point this is really what We Are N17 was after and looks like we have got as if most fans say that they want to go then fair enough and if they don't and Levy still wants to take us then we continue to campaign.

I expect the consultation to be worded something like move to Stratford or die.

There is more but I don't know what it is yet. Opened the meeting with an absolute cracker of a line though - "Do you realise you are killing the club".

My emphasis.

So we have no option but Stratford, but he'll ask us anyway if we win the bid. That's nice :mad:

The last line is a direct quote from him, addressed to weareN17 reps.

Meanwhile he is threatening to sue the OPLC if we don't win the bid.

RichMc70

Levy defends stadium plan - No moral obligation to keep running track claims Spurs chairma



Switch: Levy is keen for Spurs to move to the Olympic Stadium

There is no moral argument to retain the running track. Any bid process sees commitments made and then things change.

Daniel Levy



Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy insists there is no moral obligation to retain a running track in the Olympic Stadium after the 2012 Games and claims a takeover of the venue by Spurs would see money pouring into the public purse.
Spurs are bidding against West Ham - who would keep the track - to take over the stadium and have faced criticism from those who say London should honour the promises made to the International Olympic Committee when they were awarded the Games.
Levy, who added Tottenham fans must put emotions to one side and embrace the proposed move if the club are to find a permanent place among football's elite, said London's original plans for the Olympic Stadium had already been proved unworkable.
"There is no moral argument to retain the running track," he said. "Any bid process sees commitments made and then things change.
"The original plan was to reduce the stadium to a 25,000-seat stadium just for athletics and nobody wanted it. The minute they went away from that commitment then it all changed.
"The commitment to have no white elephants is also relevant. London 2012 also planned to hold certain events in a venue next to the O2 arena and now they are being held in Wembley Arena - circumstances change.
"From the viewpoint of the taxpayer and therefore the Government a lot of money has been spent on the Olympics and it is important the taxpayer is not asked to put more money into it in the future.
"We will actually be providing significant returns to the taxpayer through lease payments."
Myth

Spurs' plan would see the Crystal Palace athletics stadium redeveloped for that sport instead, and Levy insisted the plan to demolish the Olympic Stadium and construct a purpose-built football ground in its place was not a waste of the £500 million public money already spent on it.
"That's a myth," said Levy. "The £500 million is the total investment for the total site and it was always intended for much of the structure to come down after the Games - at a cost of £80 million.
"Under our proposal the vast majority of the stadium will be reutilised in the new stadium or at Crystal Palace.
"The notion that the whole thing is being knocked down and wasted is incorrect."
Levy said he understood fans' concerns at the club uprooting for north London and moving to east London but insisted that was a step that had to be taken.
He said: "I understand that because I have been a Spurs fan all my life. But our fans travel on average 40 miles to each game from all around London and the south east.
"If we have to move five miles down the road for the greater good of the club, then that's what we have to do.
"I believe the vast majority of fans support us if it means progressing and sometimes you have to make bold decisions. If you look across Europe we are the only major club to play in such a small stadium.
"Our capacity is 36,000 and we have a waiting list of 36,000. We know we will
sell the Olympic Stadium out every week, we have substantial financial backers, we have a fantastic partnership with AEG and we know therefore there will be no white elephants and that is so important in what will be the entrance to the Olympic Park."

Incompatible

Levy said that athletics and football in the same stadium did not work for either sport.
He added: "In my opinion we would bring a much bigger contribution to athletics at Crystal Palace, the original home of athletics. The only thing we would not do is have it in the Olympic Park.
"The Olympic Park Legacy Company have to take the emotion out of this and look at the long-term viability of the Olympic Park. If they get this wrong it could impact on the public purse for years to come.''
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11675_6721195,00.html


lies, lies and more lies. (He really is a slimy cnut)

a) "I understand that because I have been a Spurs fan all my life. But our fans travel on average 40 miles to each game from all around London and the south east.
Bullsh1t, the majority of fans travel less than 10 miles

b) "Our capacity is 36,000 and we have a waiting list of 36,000
Bullsh1t again.
We have 36,000 One Hotspur 'Bronze' Members which automatically put you on the waiting list. It doesnt mean you will take up the option of comitting to a season ticket.

c) who added Tottenham fans must put emotions to one side and embrace the proposed move
so therefore feck what Tottenham fans want as we're gonna do it anyway whether you like it ot not

Say NO to Stratford

http://www.petitiononline.co.uk/petition/say-no-to-stratford-hotspur/434

WHL

RichMc70 wrote: »

b) "Our capacity is 36,000 and we have a waiting list of 36,000
Bullsh1t again.
We have 36,000 One Hotspur 'Bronze' Members which automatically put you on the waiting list. It doesnt mean you will take up the option of comitting to a season ticket.

Absolutely agree. My buddy and I have 4 bronze memberships (2 are Juniors) - we would have no intention of taking up season tickets

Hatch99

therecklessone wrote: »

Account of meeting held between Levy and weareN17 today, 3rd hand off FTL from guy who wasn't at meeting but is organiser of weareN17:



My emphasis.

So we have no option but Stratford, but he'll ask us anyway if we win the bid. That's nice :mad:

The last line is a direct quote from him, addressed to weareN17 reps.

Meanwhile he is threatening to sue the OPLC if we don't win the bid.

Are you serious about the line that he opened the meeting with, surely not...

therecklessone

Hatch99 wrote: »

Are you serious about the line that he opened the meeting with, surely not...

Yes, my mate was one of the two weareN17 reps who was at the meeting.

RichMc70

Welcome to We Are N17

04/02/2011 -Statement & Details of meeting with Daniel Levy (Chairman) and Donna Cullen (Director of Communications)
Full Statement: http://www.docshare.com/doc/436644/We-Are-N17-Statement-02-11
Key Excerpts:

DL indicated that he believed the views of We Are N17 and our overall goal of ensuring the club will not move to Stratford was detrimental to future of the football club.

We Are N17 believe that a move to Stratford would be detrimental in a different way. Whilst the financial considerations relating to building a new stadium may favour a move, we suggested that this should not be ‘at any cost’. DL and DC agreed and said that they’d stay in Tottenham if it were possible but at this time it is not viable to do so. We suggested that staying in Tottenham would not ‘kill’ the club and that other clubs accept the circumstances of their locality. DC mentioned that THFC would remain a London club and we asked at what point within London do you draw the line and where is too far to move; it was said that we are Tottenham Hotspur, not London Hotspur.

It was agreed that neither party expects the club to have to change its name, regardless of a move.

DL said that he is not interested in selling the club following a move and that he does not believe AEG are interested in buying the club. He also said that he’d be more inclined to sell if the club does not move.

DL promised a full consultation would be conducted with the fans.

DL said that the Northumberland Development Project (NDP) is no longer viable.

It was raised that we believed the club’s communications with fans to be misleading.

The club did not really argue this point and DC said ‘it suited their purpose’ when asked about the content of the statements released thus far.
DL said (despite his recent interview) that there is no other site in mind nor available to move to other that Stratford.
The idea of We Are N17’s involvement in any future ‘breakaway’ club was also mentioned and dismissed.

http://saynotostratford.wordpress.com/



DL is slippery to say the least, more so than some of the outgoing Politicians/Taoiseach. He's looking to sell the club, imo theres no doubt about it, just a matter of time. In 3-4 years time we could be known as Pepsi Spurs.

You only have to look at this season in that we are the only English club to have two different sponsors on our shirts. One for PL and another for Cup games. That's the direction our current board are taking us. Think about it.

Anyway I recommend you read the full article here http://www.docshare.com/doc/436644/We-Are-N17-Statement-02-11

Hatch99

:mad:

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/futureplans/news/club-releases-image-of-proposed-60000-capacity-stadium-in-olympic-park-070211.html

RichMc70

Hatch99 wrote: »

:mad:

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/futureplans/news/club-releases-image-of-proposed-60000-capacity-stadium-in-olympic-park-070211.html

Heres my my take on the article which accompanied those picture releases


Daniel Levy, Chairman, Tottenham Hotspur FC said:
“We are proposing one of the most advanced, state-of-the-art stadiums in Europe that will deliver an exceptional spectator experience. Fans will be closer to the pitch than at any other comparable size stadium in the UK, while its acoustic design will ensure that the noise from spectators remains within the stadium".

He said exactly the same about the NDP.

“Our partner AEG would attract and manage a wide range of events for the stadium and surrounding public realm including world class sport, music, festivals, and exhibitions".

So after all the concerts and festivals we'll have a pitch like the DW Stadium, which it looks like cattle have been grazing on it.

"Tottenham Hotspur would also commit tens of millions of pounds for local sports and community projects and our Foundation would work with relevant partners to bring these to life. Ensuring the stadium and the surrounding space is sustainable, exciting and viable 365 days a year is crucial to our proposal and to the whole future of the Olympic Park".

So fcuk all TH Foundation work in our current locality of Tottenham because if we get the Stratford site we'll forget about them and switch the projects to a community that has more interest in West Ham, Leyton Orient and the Pakistani National Cricket Team.

“Accusations that we would ‘demolish’ £500m of stadium are hugely inaccurate and highly irresponsible and I want to be very clear on this issue. Our proposal will retain around £420m worth of the Olympic Stadium, and we will re-use or recycle the £80m that will be dismantled with zero landfill. It is also important to remember that two thirds of the Olympic Stadium, under the original legacy plan, was to be dismantled – it was not designed to be a permanent structure. Recent scaremongering conveniently forgets this fact.”

We're going to demolish the stadium and completely rebuild, but keep a lot of the other existing Olympic infrastructure because when we change our name to Olympic Hotspur the other buildings will fit in nicely for our new image.

As part of its bid to the OPLC, Tottenham Hotspur FC is also proposing the significant redevelopment of Crystal Palace Athletics Stadium that would see its capacity increase to 25,000, with the ability for it to be increased up to 40,000 for major championships.
Daniel Levy added:
“We would increase the current capacity of Crystal Palace by 9,500 to 25,000 and a new 4 lane warm up track and all weather hockey pitch would also be built. With these proposals, Crystal Palace would become a re-invigorated dedicated facility, bringing more activity to the area and be available to the athletics community every single day of the year.”

UK Athletics Authority want to keep the Olympic Stadium as it is but fcuk them, we are a PLC and have AEG as our partners and therefore we have more financial clout than them. Anyway who the fcuk are they, we are a money making machine and financial legacy is far more important that any amateur sport. Oh and yes I have heard that Crystal Palace have intentions of taking over the Crystal Palace Athletics Stadium in their desire to move back to their original home. Who the fcuk are the cheeky cnuts that think they have a right to move back to their South London original home when we the Mighty North London Giants should be dictating anything that happens within the Greater London Area.

Anyway if we don't get Stratford I'll move us to the MK Dons Stadium in Milton Keynes. Sure it's only 55 miles from White Hart Lane and as I've already said our fans are used to travelling over 40 miles to watch Spurs games at WHL, so whats the difference.

Well Mr. Levy I personally believe that your direction is completely driven by financial reasons. Not for the greater good of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club but for THFC PLC. My crystal ball tells me that somewhere in the near future, Mr. Levy and Enic stand to make a savage return on your investments in THFC. Stratford is your best bet. Gecko once said 'GREED IS GOOD', but he was a greedy cnut who just thought about himself and not the thousands of people he fcuked.

Unless you want to be fcuked, I'd Say No to Stratford

http://www.petitiononline.co.uk/petition/say-no-to-stratford-hotspur/434

Hatch99

Daniel Levy - Evening Standard article
08 February 2011

ShareThe Olympic Park Legacy Company have a tough decision to make that will affect the future viability and success of the Olympic Park for decades to come.

They are looking to ensure the venues in the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park have long-term tenants that are financially viable, sustainable, able to maximise the use of that venue to support the wider vibrancy of the Olympic Park and do not burden the taxpayer.

I believe that Tottenham Hotspur's plans for the Olympic Stadium site meet every one of these criteria - whilst also delivering a coherent and comprehensive legacy for athletics.

The original 2012 legacy was to demolish the stadium and leave a 25,000 capacity athletics stadium.

This was taken to the market and no tenant could be found, so the OPLC started to look at other options and indicated they would be prepared to consider a bid from Tottenham Hotspur for a rebuilt or reconfigured stadium without a running track - as long as we also planned for an athletics legacy.

The easiest, most cost-effective option we could have chosen was to have submitted a bid which retained the athletics track but there is a fundamental reason we have not proposed this - it would not have delivered or guaranteed a viable, sustainable legacy. Quite simply, athletics and football cannot successfully co-exist.

The experience of clubs in Europe clearly demonstrates that forcing co-existence in stadia that were not primarily designed for football is a short-term fix.

Data shows that staging football matches in a large stadium with an athletics track results in a poor spectator experience, leading to reduced attendances, excess supply of seats, the undermining of pricing structures and higher operating costs. The combination of these factors causes football clubs to move because their business models become unviable.

Three European cities which have hosted a summer Olympic Games also provide compelling evidence for London. In Munich and Barcelona the experiment has left an empty Olympic stadium, after bad experiences for fans and clubs concerned. In Athens, there are unhappy football tenants with very low attendance figures, working desperately to relocate.

Our proposal uses as much of the existing stadium infrastructure as possible, to maximise the benefit of the public investment to date. We are not "demolishing £500million" of stadium infrastructure - we are removing and recycling around £80m with zero to landfill, leaving around £420m of investment in place. Indeed, it is worth remembering that two thirds of the Olympic Stadium, under the original legacy plan, was to be dismantled.

Our bid proposals will deliver a 365- days-a-year venue. In addition to selling-out for football, together with AEG, the company which saved the Dome from being a white elephant, the stadium would host world-class concerts, sports, entertainment and community events ensuring year-round use.

We also propose a major tourist attraction based around extreme sports and incorporating a specialist sports retailing centre, restaurants, cafes and bars along with a full programme of community activities across the public realm managed by the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation.

This combination of activities will deliver over three million visitors a year to this part of the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park - visitors from the UK and around the world - creating a showcase destination for London. There has also rightly been much debate recently about ensuring a proper legacy for athletics. We have looked long and hard at this issue and believe that what we are proposing offers a robust, viable and appropriate legacy for athletics.

In terms of infrastructure, we would pay for the significant redevelopment of the Crystal Palace Athletics Stadium as a dedicated home for the sport, which would see the venue's capacity increased to 25,000, with the ability to convert to 40,000 for a World Championships.

Importantly, it would be available to athletes every single day of the year. This is something that is not possible at the Olympic Stadium under West Ham's proposal, given the demands of the football season, summer pitch relaying and the hosting of other events during the summer - access for athletics has been set at a mere 20 days per year.

In addition, we have put together a substantial package to provide long-term funding for grass-roots athletics and community programmes across London and we would work with relevant athletics and other groups to help deliver this.

Our community programmes are multi-sport with guaranteed multi-million pound funding, an array of activities delivered in the stadium, across the public realm and with outreach work in all five Olympic boroughs.

We believe this is a fantastic opportunity to create a true Olympic legacy - we have put together a bid that is financially robust and fully underwritten, delivers a substantial return to the public purse, would provide a dedicated athletics legacy, includes funding and provision for comprehensive sporting and community activities and engagement and is backed by a team experienced in delivering.

There is no danger of a white elephant, no need for public subsidy now or in the future and no need for a future alteration to the stadium under our plans. But our bid goes further than just the Olympic site. Our move to Stratford would kick-start nearly half a billion pounds worth of investment in London in no less than three boroughs - three capital projects would be delivered - a new stadium built in Stratford, capital project works in Crystal Palace and a mixed-use scheme development in Tottenham.

These new projects would drive substantial regeneration benefits for Londoners, delivering employment, commercial opportunities and community engagement.

Our bid provides for real investment in east, south and north London and will return money to the Government and ensure no further call on council taxpayers. Furthermore, alongside these developments we would extend and continue our work in these communities through the Tottenham Hotspur Foundation.

We hope that the OPLC make a decision based on what is right for London, Londoners and for the public purse, with the solution that will stand the test of time for both athletics and football, that helps create a vibrant Olympic Park and delivers the promised legacy of regeneration.

Tottenham Hotspur can guarantee to deliver on all these fronts.

Hatch99

Even the kids can see it

http://www.tottenhamjournal.co.uk/news/school_kids_march_plea_for_spurs_to_stay_in_tottenham_1_796429