Oops, sorry for the double post!
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Hidden away in the supporting documents was this...
This suggests we could be away from the Lane for two seasons...the existing stadium being demolished January-June 2017 but the new stadium not being finished for another year...
I took that to mean that demolition starts in Jan but that doesn't mean they are closing the stadium that early. No doubt they can carry out a fair amount of work whilst still hosting matches, then 6 weeks after the end of the season of final demolition.
How much demolition work can they do on an active stadium, all I can think of is the old offices.
Take all the seats out of 33-35 for starters
Blow up the away end when Chelsea come to play.
Here's the minutes from the recent THST & THFC board meeting, a lot of which is about the new stadium, ground sharing etc.
THST THFC Board to Board Meeting Minutes - 29 September 2015
THST Board:
Katrina Law, Co-chair
Martin Cloake, Co-chair
Adam Bailey, Treasurer
Kevin Fitzgerald
Keith Sharp
Adam Nathan
THFC Board:
Daniel Levy, Chairman
Donna-Maria Cullen, Executive Director
Sue Tilling, Safety Officer
Ian Murphy, Head of Ticketing and Membership
Jonathan Waite, Head of Supporter Services
1. Stadium/ Northumberland Development Project
2. Ground share
Update on London Ground for a London Club campaign
3. Ticketing
Results of THFC research project from July
4. Summer Transfer Window
5. AOB
Shadowing the match day safety team
The meeting concluded at 8.10pm.
ACTION POINTS
The next meeting of the Boards of THST and THFC to be scheduled for January 2016
THST THFC Board to Board Meeting Minutes - 29 September 2015
THST Board:
Katrina Law, Co-chair
Martin Cloake, Co-chair
Adam Bailey, Treasurer
Kevin Fitzgerald
Keith Sharp
Adam Nathan
THFC Board:
Daniel Levy, Chairman
Donna-Maria Cullen, Executive Director
Sue Tilling, Safety Officer
Ian Murphy, Head of Ticketing and Membership
Jonathan Waite, Head of Supporter Services
1. Stadium/ Northumberland Development Project
- DL opened up the meeting with a presentation on the stadium project
- DL explained the 3 phases of development: Phase 1 was the build of Lilywhite House, now completed. Phase 2 is the stadium and Phase 3 the southern development including the residential towers, hotel, extreme sports centre, the museum and also the Health Centre in the northern part of the development
- DL reiterated the stadium would be a new landmark for London
- The largest club stadium in London, the second largest club stadium in the UK
- The 17,000 seater ‘kop end‘ was highlighted as a unique feature
- The new next generation General Admission area in the South Stand was positively received
- DL referenced the significance of the 10 year partnership with the NFL – THFC intend to engender closer links moving forward
- The stadium development represents true sports led regeneration that would now see the redevelopment of this area across a 130 acre site, including 10,000 new homes
- The Club’s scheme would result in an increase of £173m extra local spend per year bringing this to £290m and would create 3,700 jobs
- As the pre consultation phase has now concluded, MC asked whether any changes have been made to the stadium design as a result of feedback
- DMC confirmed that the West Stand elevation was being looked at again as a result of THST member input ahead of the meeting with Populous in July, feedback from the Council design panel and the Club’s wish to see an improved main entrance
- The Club consultation period has been very positive
- DMC circulated a hard copy of a summary of the consultation feedback, which would be made public along with the planning apps
- The designs were now in a consultation period with Haringey Council, which concludes on 16 October
- DMC made the point that although there was overwhelming support and backing for the project from Spurs fans, a key focus was local residents and it was important to convey that the scheme delivered real community benefits
- KF referenced the consultation meeting he had attended at Northumberland Park School and the resistance from a few local residents at that session. DMC agreed that particular session had seen the local community raise their concerns; the following two consultation meetings had gone well and the Club had ensured that the community issues were covered
- MC asked whether Historic England had objected to the demolition of the heritage buildings, as was reported in the media last week
- DMC explained that the quotes were made some months ago and prior to the current application being made. Historic England are now involved in workshops with Haringey and THFC and discussions are ongoing
- DMC explained that THFC had worked hard to preserve the buildings at the North end (Northern Terrace) of the development and had made a significant investment in protecting heritage assets locally
- However, the individual buildings to the South presented a safety issue which both the Club and the architects considered untenable
- The CCTV footage of numerous near misses with fans walking in the bus lane where the section of pavement in front of the houses is significantly narrower meant there was a very real issue here
- DMC confirmed that the three buildings in question were locally listed and the decision therefore lay with Haringey Council
- The fourth building, the higher listed Grade II Warmington House, has been worked into the fabric of the development, forming the entrance to the museum
- There are also plans for the Foundation to move into Percy House
- MC raised point 6.3 of the latest planning application which stated the possibility of Spurs remaining at White Hart Lane during the construction period – an idea which had been mothballed last year by THFC. Was this an oversight?
- DL asked for this section to be shared and KL read the relevant section to the group
- The Club explained that the application required that a range of options be considered and this had been undertaken but the submission makes the need to move away clear
- MC then asked whether Neale Coleman moving from the GLA to Jeremy Corbyn’s office would have an impact on the wider Haringey planning proposals. DMC didn’t think this would be the case as the Club would now be working closely with other senior officials at the GLA, who have all been heavily involved in the process for several years
- DL suggested letters of support for the planning permission would again be welcomed. THST agreed to discuss outside of the meeting
- MC asked for an update on the current basement level work. Was this all on track and going to plan? DL confirmed the basement build programme was on schedule and progressing well
- MC asked whether there were any issues with access following the closure of Paxton Road this season. ST and IM confirmed there had been no problems and access to the stadium was smoother than when the road had been open
- MC then asked whether the new ticket collection points were working well. IM confirmed they were working better than when the windows had been located in Paxton Road
- AB asked for an update on funding for the stadium build. Was the money in place? How would the project be financed? What was it going to cost? DL broke down the general sources of funding into debt, naming rights and advance sale of tickets – both corporate and season tickets
- Rothschild are currently working with THFC to secure the optimum financing packages with the banks
- KL asked whether the tender process had now been completed. DL explained that this was ongoing
- KL asked what the sequence of events was. DL explained that planning permission needed to come first, followed by main contractor appointment, then bank finance plus equity with naming rights coming later
- KL asked for clarification of the timeline. DL responded that a contractor should be in place in Q1/Q2 2016, planning permission would hopefully be granted in February 2016 and the financing should also be in place during Q2 of 2016
- KL asked whether the date of Summer 2018 was still achievable considering that timeline. DL confirmed it was still the aim to have the stadium opened in August 2018 but all should recognise this is an enormous project with many complexities and difficulties
- THST stressed communication with supporters was vitally important during this process. The microsite and the webcam were acknowledged to be helping thus far but it was imperative fans were kept in the loop as much as possible. The Club confirmed that a full comms programme would continue
- MC asked whether the current issues with London Overground’s match day service could impact on the planning applications. This was not thought to be the case and THFC advised the problems are being rectified
- The problems encountered since LOROL took over the Abelio line were acknowledged by all present
- JW thought a normal service would be in place for the Chelsea match and agreed to confirm with LOROL after the meeting
2. Ground share
Update on London Ground for a London Club campaign
- KL updated the Club Board on progress with Trust work on the London Ground for a London Club campaign, specifically pushing for Wembley and publicising the support of key figures such as Boris Johnson and the FA’s Glenn Moore for Spurs playing at Wembley
- KL asked for clarification of the position regarding negotiations over Wembley
- DL said that the FA’s stance for some time had been that it was a national stadium and they were not interested in any Premier League club playing at Wembley. So, despite offers from THFC, there had been no willingness from the FA to progress discussions
- Chelsea FC’s offer of a four-year deal, which would deliver a substantial sum of money, had changed this position and the FA would now consider a PL team
- A four-year deal was thought to be far more attractive to Wembley than a one-year deal, although DL stressed the ‘per season’ income to Wembley was unlikely to be materially different from either Club. DL also felt that the FA acknowledged the need to treat clubs equally
- The FA has now said it will go away and consider the practicalities of a ground share. Until that is decided, no further discussions can take place
- KL asked for clarification of the decision makers here. DL confirmed that the Wembley Board will give a recommendation to the FA Board, who will make the ultimate decision
- KL asked what the deadline was for Spurs to have a decision about where they would be playing in 2017/18 if the current stadium build timetable was adhered to. DMC and DL said that March 2017 would be the deadline
- The best outcome for Spurs would be that Chelsea do not require the stadium for 2017/18 and/or that the FA grant Spurs the season of 2017/18 with Chelsea having the following four seasons
- The Club also underlined that Wembley was the only neutral option
- KL also updated on the work of the 14 Trust-strong fan coalition seeking to get the details of the deal between the London Legacy Development Corporation and West Ham United over the Olympic Stadium made public. It was stressed that the coalition’s approach here was twofold, to seek to address the issue of unfair competitive advantage being given to one club, and to ease the burden on the taxpayer that helped provide that competitive advantage
- KL asked if the possibility of the Olympic Stadium being a potential ground share venue was being considered
- KL and MC said that information already received as a result of Freedom of Information requests indicated that, whilst West Ham United may have a priority usage clause, they did not have a veto over who used the stadium: the club was merely a tenant
- DL said that, should the Olympic Stadium become a possibility, THFC had a responsibility to consider it, but Wembley was the preferred venue as it was a neutral venue
- KL put the view that the financial damage done to the THFC brand by not staying in London while West Ham United were aggressively being marketed as ‘West Ham United London’ would be considerable
- KL sought clarification of THFC’s current position
- DL reiterated his view that the Club’s Board had a responsibility to secure a venue for the ground share season wherever it could, accepting that we might not be able to find an option to suit all
- THST reiterated its Pro London position over this matter and the Club acknowledged this
3. Ticketing
Results of THFC research project from July
- AN asked for an update on the results of the online survey THFC had sent out in the summer. He said feedback the Trust had received indicated fans wanted more options to renew season tickets on an annual basis and that the range of choices was bewildering. He also said the Founder Member scheme was not well received
- DL responded that ISG were still processing the data – 13,000 responses from 59,000 surveys sent out - but that early indications were that there was a fair amount of support for multi-year deals and the Founder Members scheme
- Some discussion followed about how people responded to set options in a survey
- IM said that surveys were tailored, with different options
- KL pointed out that the Club had been at pains to assure the Trust, before the survey went out, that the figures used were purely illustrative and should not be taken as any indication of pricing policy
- IM emphasised that this was the first round of research and that different groups received different questionnaires. It was also the case that the research company had started with the higher end product range designed to test price points
- The point was made that within the new pricing structure there needed to be accessibly-priced tickets. The Club stated that there would be a wide range of different priced seats and it was in everyone’s interests that the stadium sold out
- MC and KL made the point that the Trust had repeatedly stated the importance of a stretch pricing policy that included provision for as wide a range of fans as possible to be able to access the stadium in order to fill 61,000 seats regularly
- DL responded that, if the new stadium was to be built, it would have to be paid for - advance and multi year ticket sales being part of this (alongside bank finance and naming rights)
- MC responded that the Trust and the wider fan base recognised the new stadium had to be paid for, but there was also a need to provide accessible pricing points
- KL requested a dedicated ticketing meeting with IM as soon as the results from the ISG survey were completed. It was thought that the meeting could be held in December
- MC reiterated the Trust’s opposition to the Club’s proposed ticket price increase next season, and to any attempt to bring renewal forward. In the current climate, with awareness of the new TV deal high and the debate about ticket pricing in full flow, it was not possible for the Trust to back a price increase
- KL said that the 2% rise was said to be linked with inflation, but the rate of inflation was now far below that
- DMC said no decision on renewal date had yet been made, while DL said that the 2% price rise was to ensure that this income stream did not show a reversal – this was important in respect of the financial modelling required for bank finance. It was also the case that we were the only PL Club bearing the costs of currently constructing a stadium
- MC and KL said this was understood but restated the Trust position and asked if the Club was prepared to negotiate over parts of the overall ticketing package, such as further reduced cup pricing
- THST acknowledged satisfaction with the pricing for the recent Woolwich match
- The Club said that it would look to be flexible on pricing where possible, such as with cup pricing
- MC updated the meeting on THST’s participation in national pricing campaigns including the planned Twenty’s Plenty protest around away tickets at Swansea on 4 October
- The issue of subsidising away tickets was again discussed and the point made that subsidising other clubs did not encourage price reductions per se
- MC said the THST Board had some sympathy with the argument that an across the board reduction was a better option, but said the Football Supporters’ Federation was wary of switching the focus of a successful campaign
- MC explained that THST had attempted to get other Trusts to write to their own boards asking them to back a fixed percentage of the new TV deal money being used to reduce ticket prices across the board – both home and away. This had not been successful because other Trusts were not confident the proposal would get backing
- MC said there was a frustration among Trusts across the country at being told that everyone agreed that ticket prices should be reduced but that no one could take the decision to do so
- This was noted by the THFC Board
- KL thanked JW and IM for addressing the latest issue with Ticketmaster overcharging customers, and all were agreed that this issue was now resolved
4. Summer Transfer Window
- KS asked for a breakdown of staff responsibilities. DL said that Paul Mitchell heads up scouting and technical, with Rebecca Caplehorn dealing with contracts
- DL confirmed that Franco Baldini’s role in the summer window had been player disposal with Paul Mitchell in charge of recruitment
- The Club’s aim was to develop a better recruitment policy across all levels of the club. MP had wanted players in a number of positions and players who could play in a number of positions and most of these had been secured
- KS and MC both emphasised the positive effects of the more detailed ‘transfer window wrap’ . Fans want to be informed, and the reaction to the statement had been largely positive, even from those who retained doubts about the success of the transfer window. Doubts still remained in some quarters, but providing plausible and detailed explanations was seen as a positive development
- KS asked if the stadium build was expected to impact on transfer funds. DL said that transfer funds were still ring-fenced and there would remain a focus on strong performances on the pitch. We would, however, need to be pragmatic and realistic. That said, on pitch performance underpinned everything and would be a priority
- KS asked if the Director of Football job still existed. DL said that it was the people rather than the titles that mattered
- KS stressed that a success of the recent window had been keeping our key players at the Club. DL commented that the new stadium was a critical factor, as this showed the intent and ambition; and is the sign of a big Club. That’s what ambitious players look for when joining a new club
5. AOB
Shadowing the match day safety team
- KF thanked ST for enabling various members of the Trust Board to shadow the THFC safety team at Premier League matches this season. Feedback from the first of these sessions v Manchester City had been extremely positive with acknowledgement that ST and her deputy, Dean Smith, run a very tight ship
- MC touched on formal fan representation on Haringey Safety Advisory Group and ST agreed to progress the conversation with Bob McIver and to revert
- ST also agreed to set a date for the next Police Safety Forum meeting
- AB asked what had happened to the Fan Forum with DL and MP scheduled for the Spring. DMC confirmed that the first 2 Forums (Junior members and the Official Supporters Club Google Hangout) had taken place and been hugely popular, followed by DL and MP Q&A session in Australia via Facebook
- A date for the Fan Forum with MP and DL at WHL would be around December 2015
- AN raised the issue of putting new kits on sale in May and changing the squad number of a key player such as Kane in August without offering shirt swaps or refunds to fans who had bought the kits early and had previous squad numbers printed
- DMC noted this wasn’t satisfactory and confirmed conversations were ongoing with Victoria Howarth, Head of Merchandising, and with Rebecca Caplehorn with a view to setting a policy for future seasons, be that refusing to print numbers on new shirts until those numbers were finalised or another option. This season had been impacted by the early on sale dates for the new kits
- THST provided members of the THFC Board with a leave behind comprising all questions submitted by THFC members. DMC thanked THST as the questions were used to gain an insight into the priorities and concerns of the fan base as well as acting as a sense check/ideas forum for THFC departments
The meeting concluded at 8.10pm.
ACTION POINTS
- THST to discuss the mechanics of sending letters of support to Haringey Council over the planning application for the new stadium with THFC
- THFC to check 6.3 of the new planning application and confirm whether remaining at WHL during the build process is a viable option once again (Completed)
- THFC to issue the Consultation feedback along with the planning application as opposed to a stand alone document (Completed)
- THFC to arrange a ticketing meeting with THST as soon as the results of the ISG survey are finalised
- THFC to arrange the next Police Safety Forum meeting
- THFC to pick up on fan representation on Haringey Safety Advisory Group discussions
The next meeting of the Boards of THST and THFC to be scheduled for January 2016
Last edited:
Feels like we are going to get shafted on this..........which will be ridiculous when we've already been fucked over on the Olympic Stadium
Yeah, Chelsea gazumping us again...fuck 'em.
Get Blatter in as an advisor. I'm sure an odd "disloyal payment" here & there will do the trick. Unless the Chavs have already got him on retainer
Or they've simply come back to finish it?
Probably not. The very idea of clubs playing at the national stadium was an absolute no-no until the Chavs flashed their wallet, and suddenly there was a change of heart. What are the odds that part of the Chelsea proposal is to use Wembley in the year we want it, and if they don't get it that year they'll take their money elsewhere for the 4 years?
I would think Blatter is an amateur in bribery and corruption compared to Abramovich.
Funny that, didn't the same thing happen with Woolwich when they wanted Wembley for the Champs League games before moving from the Library?
The notes say the FA didn't want any clubs until Chelsea's four year offer. They say they have to treat clubs equally so Chelsea could actually be helping us get Wembley.
As long as we match their price...
Just like all bidders were supposed to be treated equally on the Olympic Stadium.....
and that was from a vendor that is supposed to be accountable, the FA make their own rules.
Chelsea won't want to do us any favours though, and being the mistrusting soul I am, I feel it is quite likely they will be happy to inconvenience us by offering a more lucrative deal to the FA for the same Stadium at the same time.
I'm not a fan of the FA, I believe they are not too dissimilar to FIFA with a load of mini Blatters in their offices all out to do the best for themselves, the fact they were so quick to change their tune about clubs using Wembley as soon as Chelsea started talking money just goes to reinforce my belief.