I was watching the Man City game and I thought about how it looked when they had the Commonwealth Games in 2002. I mean, it looks like a football stadium not an athletics stadium.
I got thinking about it and decided to do some Googling because everyone seems to be pissed off with the deal West Ham have for moving in to the Olympic Park.
I know West Ham are getting a good deal but apparently Manchester City's ground is owned by the council and they paid for it to be converted from the Commonwealth Games stadium to a football stadium.
It cost £120m to build the stadium, £22m to convert the stadium for football, paid for by the council though the installation of bars, restaurants and corporate entertainment areas throughout the stadium was funded by the club costing £20 million.
From what I could find out Man City used to pay £1.5m a year rent but in 2011 they renewed their lease, increasing the rent to £3m a year but in exchange took over the naming rights. Man City pay the council £2m a year from their 10 year £350m deal with Etihad.
While I am not saying the West Ham deal isn't a con for tax payers, their owners only have a worth of about £80m from their soft porn and dildo empire.
The Manchester City deal is the scandal of the century especially when you think the capacity is going to be increased for the 3rd time since 2003 at the tax payer's expense knowing full well when the lease comes up for renewal in a few years time that there is only one person who is interested.
I got thinking about it and decided to do some Googling because everyone seems to be pissed off with the deal West Ham have for moving in to the Olympic Park.
I know West Ham are getting a good deal but apparently Manchester City's ground is owned by the council and they paid for it to be converted from the Commonwealth Games stadium to a football stadium.
It cost £120m to build the stadium, £22m to convert the stadium for football, paid for by the council though the installation of bars, restaurants and corporate entertainment areas throughout the stadium was funded by the club costing £20 million.
From what I could find out Man City used to pay £1.5m a year rent but in 2011 they renewed their lease, increasing the rent to £3m a year but in exchange took over the naming rights. Man City pay the council £2m a year from their 10 year £350m deal with Etihad.
While I am not saying the West Ham deal isn't a con for tax payers, their owners only have a worth of about £80m from their soft porn and dildo empire.
The Manchester City deal is the scandal of the century especially when you think the capacity is going to be increased for the 3rd time since 2003 at the tax payer's expense knowing full well when the lease comes up for renewal in a few years time that there is only one person who is interested.
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire