It’s entirely between the SMC and HCC and it would be highly unusual for the terms of a commercial lease to be made public.
To what end? We already know the terms are rubbish for the council, they get nothing out of it, but the demand from the Allams is just their usual petty bluster, it would achieve nothing.
Probably because i would like to have a deeper understanding of what would happen if the football club and/or the superstadium management company were placed in administaration or liquidated. The second sentence is just speculation and conjecture on your part. For whom would it achieve nothing? and why would there be need for achieving something?
You don’t see to see the lease terms to know what would happen if the SMC was liquidated, there would be no lease.
The terms of the lease will not be disclosed and as OLM posted it would be very rare for a commercial lease to be made public, in fact I cannot recall it happening. Of course Assem Allam wants it out in the public domain, it would not harm him at all. Why do you need a deeper understanding of what would happen? 15 point deduction is just about the worse possible event. There are no signs that any insolvency event would be triggered for a while yet.
That depends on the terms of the lease and whether it is transferable. I presume you've seen the full terms of the lease to make such a categorical statement.
Well it could harm the people who wrote the lease if is as poor a deal for the people of Hull as some make out.
12/12/2014 The lease provides that for the period up until the 16 December 2012 (the alienation date & tenth anniversary of the lease) SMC cannot assign or transfer the lease to a third party. Thereafter the lease can be assigned but the Council cannot unreasonably withhold consent subject to the proposed assignee being “a fit and proper person”. To date there has been no request to assign the lease from SMC.
What's the point of this lease kafuffle? Although I'm interested in those pre-sales discussions, the rights and wrongs change nothing about the current situation, they simply shine a different light on those involved. The important things are branding and concessions, best resolved by the Allams leaving; but that won't be anytime soon.
The lease would revert to the council? Would a new lease have to be drawn up? Does anybody such as the egg chasers maybe, have first option on the new lease? Would it have to be sold to the highest bidder? Who would be the safety officer in the interim period? Where would the egg chasers ply their trade until this was sorted out? etc.. etc...
15 points deduction would apply in the case of administration. But the worse possible event is liquidation surely. could a solvent company, in this case a football club be liquidated because this was the owners preferred option? or is there a legal obligation to place it in administration first? I would appreciate a definitive answer to this, I truly have no idea how this sort of thing works.
I think the rules include associated companies. As the SMC which owns the lease to the ground has common ownership and directors it would trigger the points deduction if it went into liquidation.
Righto, that makes sense. Can the football club by-pass administration and go straight to liquidation because it is the preferred option of the owners?
If it did they wouldn't get next year's parachute payments and we'd be out of the English Football League. Have a look at the history of Newport County to see what a struggle they had to get back into the Football League and their name back after the original club went into liquidation.
What is really being discussed here is the possibility of the club suffering an “insolvency event” under EFL Governance Guidelines. How likely is this at the end of a. this season (relegated / not relegated) or b. at the end of next season when the Allams are most likely to have relinquished ownership? MoH
Don't think it would. Allamhouse going into administration would be a different matter. But none of this is going to happen anyway.
