It is now just over a year since West Ham left our spiritual home, the Boleyn Ground, to start a new, exciting and long-term future at London Stadium.

Our commitment to building that future, however, goes back to 2010, when my chairmen David Sullivan and David Gold stated their intention to take the momentous step of moving to Stratford.

We originally put forward a plan for outright purchase of the venue, a solution that would have seen West Ham take responsibility for the post-Olympic conversion, while still guaranteeing a legacy for the benefit of the local community.

But that route was blocked, so we entered into a fair and transparent tendering process — open to any organisation in the world, on virtually a ‘take-it-or-leave-it’ basis. We successfully bid for the right to be the primary user of the stadium and secured the best terms we could.

The 99-year concession agreement was signed with absolute good faith. As a professional football club, in the unique position of having our fortunes largely governed by the results and performances of 11 men on a pitch, the risk was ours.

The recent publication of the Moore Stephens report has led to the headlines focusing on West Ham. That’s understandable. But for those not familiar with the complex and convoluted structures in place in terms of the stadium’s ownership and operations, it is West Ham’s presence that generates interest.

The reality is when the deal was signed, LLDC’s (London Legacy Development Corporation) business plan showed that, with a Premier League club as anchor tenant paying an annual fee for 25 days’ usage, the stadium would make a profit. The way the contract was put to us, West Ham had to rely upon our landlord to secure a naming rights partner and to operate the stadium within budget.

A naming rights partner has not yet been signed up. It is a fantastic commercial opportunity and I am surprised the stadium is not already linked to a market-leading brand.

The global audience of three billion tuning into Premier League football — by far the most powerful attraction for naming rights — should have brought in an additional £4million a year.

E20, the management company, repeatedly refused our help to secure that revenue, so only they can explain why that has yet to materialise.

The stadium operator, LS185, record a £4.9m gross profit in their published accounts. Our landlord, on the other hand, is not yet turning a profit according to its accounts. The stadium is multi-purpose and has so much more to offer. We want our home ground to be a success and profitable for both our landlord and ourselves. It can be.

I want to be clear, though - no one is subsidising our use of the stadium.

Our long-term financial commitment to this stadium is there for all to see. The annual rent alone will see us pay hundreds of millions when you consider inflation over the course of the 99-year contract. That is before we take into account the hundreds of thousands we generate each year playing additional matches or hiring areas for club events.

It is also West Ham’s presence that has provided a clear benefit for the local community, with 2,000 full or part-time staff employed on the London Living Wage, £6m invested in community projects in Newham and surrounding boroughs by the end of the 2017-18 season and 1.5million people visiting the Olympic Park each year from our matchdays alone.

However, our primary focus always will be our supporters. In 2013, we signed a deal that was completely mindful of their requirement that the stadium at all times should look and feel like the home of West Ham.

We firmly believe the stadium move remains in the best interests of our supporters. It has helped us to increase attendances and, therefore, the revenue that we are able to invest in the global stars who may not have been attracted to the club previously.

It has allowed us to grow our fanbase and offer the most affordable Premier League tickets in London — with 10,000 under-16s paying £99 for a season ticket — meaning that thousands of supporters who might otherwise have not been able to attend every match with their families can now come.

There is one point I feel it is essential to clarify. First and foremost, West Ham never had any involvement in the choice of a retractable seating solution. Our only requirement has always been that the seats be brought as close as possible to the pitch.

In 2013, LLDC proposed a retractable seating model akin to that at the Stade de France and, indeed, produced a video showing this at that time. This solution would have cost in the region of £20m.

West Ham paid a capital contribution of £15m towards delivering this but had no say in the appointment of various contractors, managing those contractors or negotiating costs.

The opportunity to enter into the deal we made, with all of the risks of moving from one stadium to another, was open to every club in the area, but I suppose that has made West Ham an easy target. Very few former Olympic stadia boast a 99-year legacy and without us the stadium would have a very different future.

Football allegiance or political advantage has meant West Ham have faced unfair criticism, yet nobody has identified any step that we have made as being wrong. I feel for our supporters. We value their views and we understand their frustrations. We are focused on making progress at our new home and casting us as the villain of the piece is undeserving.

The Moore Stephens report acknowledged two very important matters. The first is that a Premier League club is the only sporting organisation that will provide the revenue required to make the stadium financially successful. The second is that there is scope for improvement. We are open to helping make those improvements, provided there is a clear benefit for our fans: greater rights and greater controls.

We will continue to devote time, effort and money, but what the stadium needs is strong leadership and I have every faith that the Mayor of London will now use the findings of the report as a catalyst to deliver it.

I am very much looking forward to meeting with him and his new chair when they are able to do so. I am certain that as soon as this happens, the Mayor will quickly see the way forward to a more seamless operation and be able to make quick changes that will reduce costs and increase the opportunity, appeal and, ultimately, the revenue of the stadium.

There is a clear opportunity to make this stunning, iconic stadium the jewel in London’s crown by adding a year-round programme of world-class events and vibrant content to the magnetic pull of the Premier League.

Now is the time for us to work in harmony, to ensure that London Stadium delivers the long-term legacy that the people of our great city deserve.