New Everton Stadium

[Achilles Heel]

Com

I'm not having a pop at the club, but because of all the false dawns it's hard not to be sceptical.

Completely understand that. None of this stadium uncertainty is helped by one of the worst seasons in our history. It is frustrating, but after all this despair, might as well keep hoping for a BMD Silver Lining.

 

[roydo]

When is the planning permission etc. likely to be given the go ahead mate?

No idea when it will be submitted/passed mate. But I would hazard a guess that it has been pretty much sorted behind the scenes. If I am even nearly right on my long held opinion on this whole saga, the funding model being used will remove some "obstacles" from a normal process.

 

[Market trader]

What I can't understand is that, if Usmanov is coming in, why are there problems with financing the stadium? I realise that he is a shareholder at Arsenal but why is that still the case?

 

[Achilles Heel]

That is a good question. I am still hoping there are others who will emerge from the shadows in due course. Maybe it's not Usmanov after all!?!?

 

[nsno-chris]

One of the most poorly written articles I’ve read in along time conjecture within almost every sentence.

The four questions are an embarrassment particulalry the first one.
Who even is the muppet

That’s Cllr Richard Kemp who hates, with all his heart, Joe Anderson. The questions and blog maybe irrelevant but the infighting in LCC is what people need to pay attention to

Not only do other party members despise the fat man, but members of his own party. If he’s leading the council come May I’d be surprised, people are plotting and every decision is going to be scrutinised

 

[roydo]

What I can't understand is that, if Usmanov is coming in, why are there problems with financing the stadium? I realise that he is a shareholder at Arsenal but why is that still the case?

Well thats full if, buts, and assumptions. They may well be all correct for all I know.

My understanding, based on little more than observations, is that the funding is in place, or, underwritten. (same thing really).

 

[Achilles Heel]

Think the better question is "Why would he?"

Answer that, and the path gets cleared of nettles and brambles. @Brisan123

That is a good question. You suspect other 'partners' I am guessing.

 

[RobSpurs]

Never, ever, trust an orange tory. Kemp's mob brought austerity and division to the UK unparalleled since Victorian times. Parasites.

Can you really argue against what he's saying? There's a report out there that's been commissioned about the finance deal, and it's being kept secret. Even if you support the deal as described by the Mayor, think it's win-win for everyone involved, you've got to admit that's not a great look. "Commercial confidentiality" is the reason given apparently, and I guess that's fair enough up to a point, but that kind of language reminds me so much of the obfuscation around the LS it's not funny:

Campaigners for transparency over West Ham United’s move to the Olympic Stadium have scored a major victory after the information commissioner ruled the terms of the deal should be made public, the Guardian can reveal. Both the London Legacy Development Corporation and West Ham had long argued that the deal for the largely-taxpayer-funded stadium should remain buried beneath a sea of black ink for reasons of commercial confidentiality. The decision could be embarrassing for the London mayor, Boris Johnson, who was desperate to conclude a deal with a football club to give the stadium a sustainable future, and West Ham, battling to convince the public the terms do not amount to a taxpayers’ subsidy for a rich football club.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/sep/15/west-ham-details-olympic-stadium-deal

Whatever you think of the Lib Dems, is it really surprising people (and particularly other councilors who have to vote on this) want to know what this report contains, that they're not willing to simply take the Mayor at his word that it's a great deal?

 

[roydo]

That is a good question. You suspect other 'partners' I am guessing.

Guessing is all I have done mate. the narrative is compelling though.

 

[Dr Baxter]

Neither have we yet mate.

Couldn't Moshiri have borrowed the money himself with the same low level of interest?

No. I don't think he could have. That's why he's borrowing off the council. Everybody wants the best deal for themselves. Even billionaires.

 

[James Patrick]

Have we started filling in the dock(s) yet?

I mean...we do own the land don't we?

Any lids prepping down there...???

No we don't own the land - yet - We've exchanged contracts by all accounts for a 200 year lease subject to planning. No planning = no land.

 

[MarcoM]

No we don't own the land - yet - We've exchanged contracts by all accounts for a 200 year lease subject to planning. No planning = no land.

If we've exchanged contracts then surely we've exchanged monies for something? Or have we exchanged roasted peanuts for a 200 year lease?

OR another idea...the planners what to keep BMD just as it is...

 

[James Patrick]

If we've exchanged contracts then surely we've exchanged monies for something? Or have we exchanged roasted peanuts for a 200 year lease?

OR another idea...the planners what to keep BMD just as it is...

They could've paid a deposit or an option fee but wouldn't make sense to have paid the actual agreed price.

 

[MarcoM]

They could've paid a deposit or an option fee but wouldn't make sense to have paid the actual agreed price.

So we've exchanged money for something that may or may not happen?

 

[paultheblue]

They could've paid a deposit or an option fee but wouldn't make sense to have paid the actual agreed price.

Sense? What has that got to do with it when you are talking about a club that is paying six million to a fat slob that would consider it an achievement to eat a pie dinner without getting gravy on his shirt.