The mere idea of the much criticised London Stadium in the Championship is enough to send shivers down the spine of West Ham supporters.
Ten years on from the controversial decision to move there, West Ham have been relegated to the Championship.
Nuno stays! Tell us how YOU are feeling about the big news!
Vote below 👇
An unpopular stadium in the Premier League threatens to be an absolute disaster in the Championship. There is little shying away from that fact.
Taxpayers across London will be hit with a £2.5million bill due to West Ham’s relegation, so Hammers News spoke to football finance expert Adam Williams about exactly what that means.
West Ham set to lose money despite £2.5m taxpayer bill
It’s a poor deal for all involved. As Williams explains, the club themselves will be out of pocket too due to lost revenue.
What’s your early prediction for West Ham’s 2026/27 Championship campaign? 👀
“The London Stadium lease is so often framed as a win-lose-lose-lose deal, i.e., it’s a win for West Ham’s owners and a loss for the fans, taxpayer and the landlords. But the reality is that there are no winners in the deal,” said Williams.
“Just because it’s a bad deal for the taxpayer, that doesn’t make it a good deal for the club. Yes, West Ham’s owners get the stadium for next to nothing annually, but they have completely limited their upside.
“Growth in commercial and matchday income has been so, so slow since the move the stadium. Contrast that to Everton, who – after you subtract debt repayments on the construction costs – are probably going to get an annual uplift of maybe £30m pretty much overnight from their new stadium.”
Obviously, West Ham losing out on revenue is unlikely to elicit much in the way of sympathy when people across London will see an increase in their taxes.
Yet, it just underlines what a millstone the London Stadium is for almost everyone involved.
“Clearly, no one needs me to explain why the London Stadium is an albatross for the taxpayer, the landlord and the fans,” adds Williams.
“Some finance experts have called it the ‘deal of the century’ but that is so, so short-sighted.
“As far as the reduction in rent goes, yes, West Ham will save about £2.5m in rent in the Championship and the taxpayer will carry that burden. But again, it’s lose-lose, because West Ham aren’t going to be able to charge the same prices at the London Stadium, so the £2.5m they save will be more than negated in lost revenue.”
Attendances will almost certainly go down in the Championship. Money generated through hospitality will decrease because the second tier is frankly a less glamorous stage. The intangible matter of the atmosphere in what is often described as a soulless bowl is likely to be diminished even further.
None of this is to suggest West Ham fans won’t support their team. It is just the sad reality of relegation.
The most frustrating thing is that none of this had to happen.
West Ham would have earned billions in TV revenue during their 14-year stay in the Premier League, yet they have watched other teams with far fewer resources get their acts together and compete.
Bournemouth, Brentford and Brighton are examples of what can be done. There is little reason why West Ham cannot be on that level at least.
The club have not moved with the times and, for that, they have paid a heavy price – just like taxpayers across London.
Receive a digest of our best West Ham content each week direct to your mailbox
