Stadium sale Key questions
The Football Association sells Wembley for £600 million, pays off the debt on the stadium and spends the rest on grass-roots football? Sounds good, doesn’t it? But the governing body overseeing the sale hardly has an unblemished track record of avoiding catastrophe. That is the problem – the nagging feeling that the FA’S habit of shooting itself in the foot will resurface. What will be the unintended consequences of selling Wembley? Rebuilding it felt at times like investing in the proverbial money-pit but at least the FA had a stadium at the end of it. Can it really be trusted to deliver the grass-roots investment that the deal is supposed to yield?
The FA gets to use the stadium without paying the costs of the upkeep. What is the problem? Indeed, and Shahid Khan has already promised to invest in several annoyances, like new screens and the refurbishment of hospitality. But what about the lack of control the FA will ultimately have? It will never be able to buy the stadium back and it is impossible to tell what implications that could have for the future.
But Khan is one of America’s great success stories, the Pakistan immigrant who became a billionaire? His reputation as a businessman is impeccable. It has not all been plain sailing at Fulham, but the club is on a great run now, Khan is popular with fans and his redevelopment of the Riverside Stand has been welcomed. But what about when he is no longer around to make the right decisions for Wembley?
What about the public money? The Department for Culture, Media and Sport, which helped to fund the new Wembley,
sounds sceptical. If Wembley’s legacy was to fund generations of football participation at every level, then it would be an easy sell. But few trust the FA to do it.
Don’t fans hate Wembley? If you take your lead from social media, there is no end of people who say they hate the place. Yet if you go to games, then it is clear on any walk down Wembley Way on an international night that it is full of fans, especially families, who look delighted to be there. The stadium is safe, comfortable and for all the complaints about accessibility, the crowds have been good over the years.
What about Chelsea using the stadium while Stamford Bridge is rebuilt? It is the only option now that Twickenham is out the question. Chelsea would indirectly be tenants of Fulham.
Does the FA really need to own Wembley? Since Wembley was built in 1923, the FA has owned it only for the past 19 years. In no other big European football nations does the national association own its own stadium. Even so, there are many that would like to. Once English football sells it, it will never realistically be able to reacquire it, a piece of north-west London real estate that, as Khan knows, will only ever grow in value.