The bigger plan

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Large Elephant said:
Maybe not illegal as such but certainly going against the rules. They got rid of concessions for children of all ages and for seniors. This was contrary to Premier League rules and (eventually) the Premier League recognised this and insisted they must be reinstated. Unfortunately by the time this had been formally recognised City had been relegated to the Championship where concessions were only advised rather than compulsory. I think the FA would also regard the request to change the name of the club (without consulting the fans) as dodgy. The decision to evict sports clubs including disabled athletes from the Arena and the way it was handled was widely regarded as dodgy. The closure of the gate to the East (thus making the walkway redundant) was dodgy. To suggest it was done to prevent a terrorist threat (rather than to annoy their friends at Hull City Council) is dodgy.

How do they compare with other owners? Harold Needler was 'generally' well respected and very popular and the rest obviously less so but to varying degrees. Some were no doubt more honest than others. Illegal activities are alleged to have occurred beyond those that were reported. Bartlett & Duffen were not so unpopular at the time but became so when the financial situation became apparent. Duffen was certainly more PR aware than most. Most of the unpopular owners owned the club at a time when Hull City was in the bottom division and / or had not enjoyed any recent success. As a consequence less fans were affected, the club appeared to be relatively small and insignificant and to an outsider it probably seemed there was little there to actually damage.
To me (and many others) the Allams' unpopularity is at a different level. The club had enjoyed success and had further success whilst they were still in charge. Rather than build on that success and at least leave a legacy their attention seemed to focus on falling out with everyone from the Hull City Council, The FA, various managers and head coaches, Hull Daily Mail, Radio Humberside and even through to their very own fans. That is unforgivable!
Click to expand...
.... and continue to use the rejected name change wherever they could get away with it for as long as they could
 
  • Like
Reactions: balkan tiger and Large Elephant
Large Elephant said:
Maybe not illegal as such but certainly going against the rules. They got rid of concessions for children of all ages and for seniors. This was contrary to Premier League rules and (eventually) the Premier League recognised this and insisted they must be reinstated. Unfortunately by the time this had been formally recognised City had been relegated to the Championship where concessions were only advised rather than compulsory. I think the FA would also regard the request to change the name of the club (without consulting the fans) as dodgy. The decision to evict sports clubs including disabled athletes from the Arena and the way it was handled was widely regarded as dodgy. The closure of the gate to the East (thus making the walkway redundant) was dodgy. To suggest it was done to prevent a terrorist threat (rather than to annoy their friends at Hull City Council) is dodgy.

How do they compare with other owners? Harold Needler was 'generally' well respected and very popular and the rest obviously less so but to varying degrees. Some were no doubt more honest than others. Illegal activities are alleged to have occurred beyond those that were reported. Bartlett & Duffen were not so unpopular at the time but became so when the financial situation became apparent. Duffen was certainly more PR aware than most. Most of the unpopular owners owned the club at a time when Hull City was in the bottom division and / or had not enjoyed any recent success. As a consequence less fans were affected, the club appeared to be relatively small and insignificant and to an outsider it probably seemed there was little there to actually damage.
To me (and many others) the Allams' unpopularity is at a different level. The club had enjoyed success and had further success whilst they were still in charge. Rather than build on that success and at least leave a legacy their attention seemed to focus on falling out with everyone from the Hull City Council, The FA, various managers and head coaches, Hull Daily Mail, Radio Humberside and even through to their very own fans. That is unforgivable!
Click to expand...

That is some legacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dennisboothstash
originallambrettaman said:
You're playing semantics again, the club have paid Allamhouse £22m in interest alone up to the end of last season, they then took £3.8m personally in dividends from Allamhouse last year. They obviously couldn't fit that much money in their trousers, but as a slang term for taking out money personally, it's perfectly reasonable.
Click to expand...
So is that 22 million over ten years? Seems fair enough if so.
3.8 million is that every season? A one off? Seems strange if a one off, why?
 
Chazz Rheinhold said:
So is that 22 million over ten years? Seems fair enough if so.
3.8 million is that every season? A one off? Seems strange if a one off, why?
Click to expand...

Nine years, the accounts for the past year aren’t out until September. I’m pretty sure they haven’t taken a dividend every year, but I only remembered the most recent one, I can’t remember what they did in previous seasons.
 
originallambrettaman said:
Nine years, the accounts for the past year aren’t out until September. I’m pretty sure they haven’t taken a dividend every year, but I only remembered the most recent one, I can’t remember what they did in previous seasons.
Click to expand...
It’s certainly a pity our crusading journalist fatty burns didn’t ask him stuff like this isn’t it
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howdentiger2
Chazz Rheinhold said:
It’s certainly a pity our crusading journalist fatty burns didn’t ask him stuff like this isn’t it
Click to expand...

Burns needs access to the club/family way more then the club/family need him, so unfortunately burns will never really push or ask the questions we/he wants to ask
 
Burnsey tried in the pm interview. Grant was on replay message mode. Said nothing different. Still thinks he's in the job next seaon. Goodness gracious me !

You must log in or register to see media
 
Chazz Rheinhold said:
It’s certainly a pity our crusading journalist fatty burns didn’t ask him stuff like this isn’t it
Click to expand...

I like Burnsy, but he’s no David Conn, you can always tell he’s out of his depth on the financial stuff and it’s easy for Ehab to bat him away.

It’s easy for someone like me, who’s run multiple companies for over thirty years, with holding companies etc, but it’s not stuff you’d expect most to be knowledgeable about, not unless they happen to be an accountant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edelman, brownbagtiger and The Omega Man
So reading between the lines, 'the plan' was to go down in order to reset for league one and in doing so slash the budget.
either Terry is a willing contributor and a brown nosing 'yes man', or a bit thick, probably a bit of each.
I guess Blunderside, and the Fail are now fully up to speed with 'the plan'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edelman
Duffens_Briefs said:
So reading between the lines, 'the plan' was to go down in order to reset for league one and in doing so slash the budget.
either Terry is a willing contributor and a brown nosing 'yes man', or a bit thick, probably a bit of each.
I guess Blunderside, and the Fail are now fully up to speed with 'the plan'.
Click to expand...

Been done to death on here ... but still to say the plan was never to go down! They've ****ed up big style (Ehab and McCann).
They did though mention a few weeks back that they working on 2 plans for next season - one if they stayed up and one if they got relegated (and to be fair, that's what any club would do when facing the possibility of relegation).
Maybe it's just that 'the plan' long term remains the same - something like what Enob rambled on about when McCann first came in - cut cloth accordingly, bring in young exciting talent (read cheap), fast paced pressing front foot exciting football (guffaw). Maybe the plan is now being refined to incorporate basics like leaders, bite, experience, goals, defensive coaching, and stuff?
 
Duffens_Briefs said:
So reading between the lines, 'the plan' was to go down in order to reset for league one and in doing so slash the budget.
either Terry is a willing contributor and a brown nosing 'yes man', or a bit thick, probably a bit of each.
I guess Blunderside, and the Fail are now fully up to speed with 'the plan'.
Click to expand...
Oh ffs give it a ****ing rest
 
Duffens_Briefs said:
So reading between the lines, the 'plan' was to go down in order to reset for league one and in doing so slash the budget.
either Terry is a willing contributor and a brown nosing 'yes man', or a bit thick, probably a bit of each.
I guess Blunderside, and the Fail are now fully up to speed with 'the plan'.
Click to expand...

In the interview with Burnsy a few weeks ago, Ehab made much of a Bolton equaliser? winner? keeping them in the Championship. Said they celebrated, but it was to be their financial downfall. Bolton were sustainable in League 1, but not in the Championship. He then told us the City players have a 50% pay reduction in their contract. Putting those two statements together at the time, I thought, no, surely not, no.
Sadly, with hindsight, there is no reading between the lines needed. That really was the plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Noggin The Nog and juleskaren
originallambrettaman said:
I like Burnsy, but he’s no David Conn, you can always tell he’s out of his depth on the financial stuff and it’s easy for Ehab to bat him away.

It’s easy for someone like me, who’s run multiple companies for over thirty years, with holding companies etc, but it’s not stuff you’d expect most to be knowledgeable about, not unless they happen to be an accountant.
Click to expand...
He works for the BBC mate
Lot of researchers on hand to provide info.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back