THERE BORED OF US WINNING AT IT

So long as the FA give ALL of the money back to HMRC, I agree, it was paid for by the people of the UK, It wont be available in August as Jacksonville will want to play pre-season games there. The FA, like the RFL, have lost control. No need for a new stadium IF it's sold, plenty of capacity at other grounds around the country.

So, you don't think land and peoperty values increase?

Always thought we should build Rl stadium for the national team and cup finals , Odsal is a perfect place a natural ampitheatre . The CC , GF and all England games, there would cost a lot of money but rather spend it in the north than have to go south where they have no interest in RL whatsoever.

Problem was the new stadium went way way over budget and cost far more than its probable (or real) value. ATEOTD it will only be worth what someone is willing to pay in terms of a structure plus the value of the land it sits on.

The land will no doubt have gone up in value due to development in and around the area and will continue to do so but the value of the stadium will probably remain fairly static or indeed decrease due to limited use of facility and the running & upkeep costs associated with such.

The simple reason the FA will be looking to offload is that they simply can not afford to pay for it.

Wembley for me lost all its tradition and feel when they demolished the twin towers, that for me was a sign the FA didn't give a knack about history and tradition when they sold out the sole of the place. So no wonder they are willing to sell it now.

From what I have read, they can't realistically sell it. Would have to be signed off by the government. Can you imagine if a UK businessman tried to buy Soldier Field in Chicago... there would be riots!

It wasn't paid for solely out of the UK tax system. Its not a government asset.

Do you really think Jascksonville will play all of their games at Wembley? The prospective buyer is a business man. Why cancel an event (CC Final) for this? To maximise income from US football, they would stage the games to coincide with TV viewing in the US = Sunday afternoon in US = evening UK.

The big difference is the Americans care about their history and traditions and although the totally rebuild it they preserved and kept the original exterior something the FA chose not to do. The difference with Soldier Field is it has always been owned by the Chicago Parks District and is all connected to the Lake Front area. Where as Wembley is just a soulless stadium with no other remains of history or the past or parkland and is owned by the FA not the local council or government.

They still wont be able to sell it without government approval, I know what you mean about the NFL schedule, but it takes 6 days to get Wembley into NFL "mode", if the FA sell it, fair enough. Selling your soul to the devil seems to be at the core of Football.

Oh I agree, but Brent Council own Wembley Way, and 2nd, 4th and 5th way. All the major approaches.

I guess as you picked Chicago as an example then the United Centre would be more accurate as it owned by the Blackhawks & Bulls organisations jointly. Fans of both clubs were devastated the old Chicago Stadium was to be demolished but knew the way forward was the United Centre. However they still designed & built the United Centre with the old Chicago Stadium in mind, as a way to try and keep some of the tradition and past. Its a fantastic Stadium/Arena too (best I've been too) which also helped the transition.

So if they sold the United Centre I guess the fans (myself as an ardent Hawks fan) initially would be pee'd off as long another stadium was available then it would soon be forgotten about.

Soldier Field is more akin to the KCOM in terms of ownership, Wembley just an asset (or mill stone) of the FA.

Problem is they claim Wembley is the national Stadium but in reality it isn't as its not government owned.

There is no reason why this will affect the Challenge Cup, as the RL only uses it one day a year.

Presumably, if sold, then Wembley will be leased as a venue by the new owner using a couple of potential commercial models to the RFL:

1. A contract for x years, to hold the Challenge Cup Final at Wembley at a cost of c£1m pa. The RFL then market the final and profit on all revenue less this lease cost, ticket contributions to clubs etc. This will be similar to the deal what the RFL have currently with the FA.

or

2. Wembley bid, along with other stadiums, to host the Challenge Cup Final each year. The RFL receive a fee upfront and then the venue markets the event keeping all revenue. This model is similar to Test Cricket, with each Test ground bidding against each other to host the Ashes Test matches. The ECB get a guaranteed revenue up front and then its up to the venues to worry about ticket sales, weather, how long the game lasts.

With the second option, the RFL could use the opportunity to allow other venues e.g. Millennium Stadium, Old Trafford, Murrayfield, a new Odsal, and New Craven Park to bid for the final, therefore driving the fee up. Presumably, the RFL would then pay the competing clubs a share of the spoils.

Depends on covenants, which I am struggling to find any detail of. IF (when?) the FA sell it then people should refuse to visit it. I am a big NFL fan, but selling for NFL is a step too farr.

There'll no doubt be something in to say any monies paid from government & lottery type funding would have to be paid back if sold within a time period or sold at all. That said its still owned by the FA and as such will be their decision the government may not even have a say apart from along the lines of 'in the national interest blah blah blah'

I don't imagine that Shahid Khan is buying it for just purely for an NFL fanchise more likely for the status of owning Wembley and he see's an opportunity to capitalise on owning it.