Some of the comparisons being raised are interesting. Terry Brown was probably more disliked than Sullivan at his peak. When Sullivan first came in a lot of fans said they would have preferred Tony Fernandes, but QPR under Fernandes became a real boom and bust story and plenty of their fans do not l...

You're a board plant mate, you have only posted 35 times and all of them on this particular subject, nothing to say elsewhere then? There's very little "apathy" amongst the support just go to an away game to see how strong the feeling is. I did say I only really signed up to have this con...

Doesn't matter how much you try to spin or wriggle out of it, all fault lines lead directly back to Sullivan (the de facto board / Director of Football).  Honestly there is no spinning or wriggling from my side. I cannot get to Saturday games but I made the Brighton and Forest matches midweek and t...

If we get relegated this season it will be because we were too bad to stay up and nothing at all to do with the stadium. I say that because the previous two occasions we have been relegated this century our home ground was our much vaunted Boleyn Ground. We go down because our ownership has not don...

In a nutshell we had the wrong people in charge when it came to redeveloping the old ground to a very high standard to ensure it was future proof enabling the club to reach the next level. We ended up at the future proof toilet bowl as a direct consequence of that fact and now we have different peo...

Stadium model, ownership debates and seat distances aside, it will be interesting to see if the need for points and the slight upturn in form lifts the mood a bit tomorrow against Man Utd. I was chatting to a pal the other day about that last night at Upton Park against them. I think it is fair to s...

interesting chat.  Do we consider that the reason most clubs own their ground is because they’ve historically had no other choice? I don’t think it’s a business model of choice, rather it’s been the only model available.  Right now clubs have realised they can repurpose some parts of the asset they...

“Sullivan has kept West Ham afloat, sure. But he's never truly elevated the club. He won’t be missed when he goes”

I agree with this 

I’ve been clear I’d prefer a change and as a fan I’d happily spin the wheel on someone more ambitious, but that still does not make him the great enemy some paint. He is a conservative and stubborn businessman who has overseen a largely stable fifteen years in a volatile industry. That is not exciti...

My wider point is I can see the logic behind a lot of Sullivan’s decisions. Keeping a long term stadium lease at around three million is good value when you compare it to ownership, maintenance and borrowing costs. He’s clearly conservative and risk averse. That isn’t exciting for fans, but from a b...

southbank I think we’re just using flexible to mean different things. You mean commercial freedom to push revenues in the stadium. I mean financial breathing room. If your fixed costs are lower than others you can plan easier, start each season from a steadier base and it’s simply a lower stress clu...

I don’t disagree that stadium investment can work if the revenue uplift really covers the cost, my only point is that the cash still leaves the club each year and football is unpredictable so flexibility has value. At our level sustainability depends on football income being spent on football becaus...

Not Irish and not Sean. I’ll keep my club anonymous on here as it doesn’t really add to the discussion. I’m just a non league owner who takes an interest in football finance and how clubs try to balance the books.As a West Ham fan, with everything going on at the club, I was just interested in havin...

No, I’m not Sean. I own a non league football club so I see some of this first hand, just at a much smaller scale and many millions and a considerable amount of steps below Premier League level. We deal with the same themes though, balancing cash, contracts, risk and performance, just with fewer zer...

I should probably say that football finance is an area I work in so I naturally find this side of things interesting. I’ve genuinely enjoyed the back and forth on here about West Ham and I’m not trying to push an agenda, and if this level of discussion isn’t what people want then I’m happy to dip ou...

PSR is your credit limit, cash flow is your bank balance. The limit doesn’t matter if the cash isn’t there. If basic cash flow discussion is seen as an agenda, then we’re probably debating emotion, not finance.

PSR rules do not pay the bills, cash flow does. Stadium finance is still real money out of the club. I am genuinely struggling to understand the counter to that point. If tens of millions leave annually in interest and maintenance, how does that not affect what is comfortably spendable?

People are mixing up turnover PSR and actual spendability. PSR is about allowable losses and stadium capex training grounds and academies are largely excluded from that calculation so owning a stadium does not hit PSR the same way player spending does, but the cash cost is still real because finance...

Guys, the closest comparison to us in the Sullivan debate is Spurs, because a big part of this discussion is stadium ownership versus renting. In a similar timeframe both clubs moved into stadiums worth hundreds of millions just miles apart in London. The structural difference is simple: Spurs fund ...

John

Full stadium control only wins if it adds 35 million a year in real net revenue. Naming rights, concerts and hospitality sound big, but once you total it up and strip costs out, very few clubs actually reach that level.

Southbank The question is not whether ownership is better than renting, it is whether we could realistically earn more per year from owning than the 30 to 40 million annual saving we effectively have compared to the ownership costs clubs like Spurs or Everton carry. I am not convinced Sullivan and c...

Capital spending on stadiums, training grounds and academies is excluded from FFP loss calculations. That’s true.What it doesn’t mean is that the cash magically exists to spend on players.If you build or own a stadium, the money still has to be paid in real life through loans, interest, maintenance ...

I’m really not a board lackey and I’m happy to be clear about my view. Personally I think it may be time for Sullivan to move on if that helps reset and unite the club. He is clearly in a position where he can wait for the right purchase price while the club remains a stable Premier League side. The...

I’m not ignoring ownership revenues at all. I’m pointing out the size of the gap those revenues have to bridge compared to our rent.

People talk about stadium ownership vs renting as if one is automatically better, but they’re just different financial models.  Spurs are often estimated to be paying £35–50m a year when you combine stadium financing and running/maintenance costs. Over 30 years that can easily run past £1bn in total...