A spokesperson for Elliott Management Corporation has answered questions in regards to the new stadium, saying Elliott does not intend to put the club up for sale in the immediate future.
Milan and Inter are making steps towards building a new stadium and have submitted their plans to the City of Milano, waiting for the authorizations.
The Rossoneri and the Nerazzurri are planning on building the arena right next to the current San Siro, and transform the entire district. At first it was thought that the clubs have a Plan B in case the San Siro district renovation doesn’t go through and that they’d turn to the Sesto San Giovanni area, but this – at the moment – does not seem to be considered.
An Elliott spokesperson spoke to Fabio Massa of affaritaliani.it about the situation with the stadium, and the entire interview is brought to you here:
Milan and Inter have assured that there is no Sesto San Giovanni option. Why? What would prevent the clubs from going to Milanosesto? It is undoubtedly strange that a few weeks ago, the owner of the huge project just outside of Milano said it was willing to host the new stadium, if the Meazza agreement had not been reached. Moreover: is it not relevant that the areas of Milanosesto and that of Trotto [the area near San Siro] are of the same fund, which is Hines.
“The only option on the table today is to be able to build a new San Siro at the San Siro area, and this was the basis of The Feasibility Study and the request made to the Municipality of Milano. The clubs do not have another project elsewhere.”
Taking for good the word of the clubs of the non-existence of a Plan B in respect to San Siro, what would they do if the City Council were to reject a new Meazza?
“If the City Council does not recognize the public interest in the proposal of the clubs, then the San Siro option will cease to exist from its first procedural step. If such a situation should occur, and only then, then the clubs will define subsequent steps, subject to the need to have a stadium in line with the top clubs with which they compete. The status quo and restructuring are not viable paths.”
If the City Council were to approve [the project] and the Superintendency limit it, what would be the choice of the clubs? Is there an option to coexist with the old Meazza, perhaps make it destined for something else? And if there was such coexistence, who would pay the restructuring costs necessary for the current stadium?
“The clubs have made a clear and precise proposal. If you want to say ‘no’, even if only partially, to this request then the clubs will evaluate what to do. There’s maximum willingness on the part of everyone to improve the project, but not to distort it in its fundamentals.”
Ownership issue. The Municipality owns the areas when the stadium is located and the stadium itself, which has been given for management to a joint company of Milan and Inter. Whose new stadium would it be? Or rather: in what budget would it end up? Among the assets of the Municipality or among the assets of the two clubs? Or would it be a 99-year leasehold estate which then is redeemed practically automatically and enters the clubs’ budgets?
“An initial clarification: today the Meazza stadium is not ‘given for management’ to the clubs, but instead it is given to them as a concession until 2030, with the possibility of cancellation with a two years’ notice. With regard to the request, the Feasibility Study for the redevelopment of the San Siro area has been presented to the City of Milano and it’s also based on the assumption of a concession. If the proposal of the clubs is approved definitely, after the various steps provided for by the procedure of the Stadium Law and the clubs winning the public tender to be called by the Municipality, the legal relationship would be that of a concession, for which a new agreement must be signed between the teams and the city of Milano. The Feasibility Study hypothesizes a concession, with the establishment of a leasehold estate for 90 [not 99] years, at the end of which both the stadium and the multifunctional district will be given back to the Municipality in full efficiency and functionality.”
Is there an option for a new stadium without any kind of construction around it? If not: what are the advantages of the city in building a whole area? Which public buildings – and therefore owned by the Municipality – will be built?
“The project presented to the city of Milano includes both the construction of the Stadium and a multifunctional district, as required by the Stadium Law, necessary to ensure economic sustainability and to achieve the goal of redeveloping the entire San Siro area. The realization of the mix of activities can only take place with public interest and it will take place in the procedural dialogue with the institutions.”
Does the Elliot Fund plan on putting the club up for sale after getting the OK for the new Stadium and construction site, or does it intend to monetize the investment made?
Communication issue: how many of those who responded to the polls of Milan and Inter are from Milano? The fans are not always citizens, and the San Siro is for the citizens before the fans. Can we have a geographical breakdown of the positive votes in the polls? What methodology has been adopted?
“Users are not registered on the site but interact with the survey as anonymous users. 31% of the users who interacted with the survey are from Milano.”