Geraghy statement This Allam / Geraghty thing desperately need Adam sorting it out! Geraghty has given quotes to the Fail stating the following today: 1. Freehold not going to be "given" to the Allams because they could not give any guarentees for the future of the Stadium. In other words the stadium would be used as collateral to raise project investment funds and if those funds went T1TS up the stadium would have to be sold. Is that correct? 2. The propsals for the Sports Village Development were vague and unclear, and the Allams were unwilling to show the Council what the plans were. SURELY no agreement can be made until any plans have been through the process of achieving planning permission and therefore how could the Allams not realise that? 3. Geraghty states that the Allams are more interested in shops, boutiques and supermarkets than he is about a Sports Village. So what! Both the Allams and Adam Pearson have stated that a comercial foundation needs to underpin the whole Sports Village Project, which makes complete sense to me, so long as it is just an underpinning and not the hidden REAL aims of the project. Again, surely that is something the Council can easily control through planning. I think this situation is we have a Council that really doesn't care about the money that the Allams can invest in Sport in this city and the Allams are are not politically aware of how Local Government works nor how to go about dealing with that. These are two groups who are wholly unsuited to sitting round a table and pushing through the BS that inevitably accompanies such projects in order to get the deal done. I can see fault on both sides, one in terms of style the other in terms of committment. AGAIN...............it needs a mediator to come forward and bridge the obvious gap. Someone who is trusted by both and who has the necessary negotiating skills that the two groups obviously lack. To my way of thinking there is only one person with that on his cv.
That's just the transcript from his interview with Burnsey last week. Allam and Adam Pearson have already shown most of it to be meaningless nonsense.
Must have missed that. I listened to Adam after Geraghty was on Blunderside and he dismissed the lease for Hull FC issue and went on to talk about what a huge opportunity it was for Hull. Has there been something else said about the other issues? How were they dismissed? Have detailed plans been submitted? Are there any guarentees for the future of the KC?
Its been suggested on ci that the council are going to issue a statment could be today.http://www.hullcityindependent.net/?page=forum&forum_id=4&thread_id=9278&selpage=0#21
They're hardly likely to be submitting detailed plans for a development they've been told they can't go ahead with. Geraghty knows in general terms what was planed for the site, there's been pictures and descriptions of the plans in the HDM ffs. I don't think there's much point in getting someone to mediate, Geraghty's an idiot, they'll probably just hang fire until he's gone.
When will Geraghty be gone? Gone from what? Is it a comittee that decides what gets approved or not approved for Leisure or is it the individual that holds the portfolio? Wouldn't a proposal of this magnitude have to go before the whole council to vote on? What are the rules? This is why I started this thread. There is so much rhetoric flying around it would be useful to know more about what has actually been said and done. I desperately want this to come about, but there have to be rules followed so that guarentees can be upheld. As City fans, with our sorry experience, surely that is in our own interest? I have no doubt in the trustworthiness or sincerity of Assem Allam, how could I after what he has done. But a project of this size and lifespan means it's not just about Assem Allam it's about what comes after. Here's a question. Without guarentees, as Geraghty rightly says, we are going from a position of no risk but with no development to a position of the prospect of a fantastic development that also risks the future of the stadium. Is that a risk the fans of Hull City are willing to take? The guarentees are to do with the financial security of the company that will eventiually own the KC and to do with what the KC and the surrounding land can be used for in the future even if any comapany that owns that land fails.
Everything you say is absolutely true and these things would need to be sorted ahead of any agreement being reached, but as the current situation is that the council won't give the Allam's the stadium on principal and won't give them Walton St car park due to the fair, so it all becomes a non-issue, as it's not going to get as far as detailed planning or funding. The site is not available, the contribution from the council is not available, so there is no development, we won't now find out what the detailed proposal is, unless the next bunch of duffers in charge say to the Allam's, 'okay, we're interested in what you're offering, everything is up for discussion, give us some detailed plans and costings on what you propose and if it all adds up, we'll try and do a deal'.
Hopefully the Allems will get on better with the East Riding council. Melton is too far out but if land can be made available, lets say Hessle, Cottingham or off the proposed Beverley SE by-pass then I think we could be moving. All the Allems need first is the land then they can finance a 35-40,000 seater stadium. The sports village can then follow on.
Thats all very well and as I have followed City and lived in the East Riding rather than in Hull for many years, so personally, that plan would be fine. But Hull City Football Club belongs in Hull and the sports village should be for the benefit of the kids in Hull. Yes, it is not impossible for kids to travel to the outskirts of Beverley in order to use these new sporting facilities, but that will have nowhere near the effect on the lives of the kids in the run-down areas of West Hull as it would if the village was built at Walton Street.
Would be great if they built it near Beverley, surely there would be plenty of subsidized transport layed on for those short of cash. Beverley would be a better location than Melton for most?
I know what my instincts tell me in this propaganda war. Geraghty is cherrypicking bits of half information and dissembling like a bitch on heat. We simply don't know. He isn't adult enough to negotiate and he shut the door like an angry dad protecting his daughter from Errol Flynn. It may take a bit of time but a balanced truth will out in the end; and will be interesting. In the meantime I trust the Allams on this and that they will come up with a worthwhile scheme.
Im sadly on the Councils side... i feel for the best interests of the club that the stadium stays with the council, atleast we know its in safe hands and cannot be taken away from us. However much i would love for the Allams to buy it and transform it, i would not like it to all crumble away in a few years and us lose yet another stadium. If some sort of deal could be done giving the council and the allams a 50/50 share of the stadium and the Allams were still willing to go ahead with plans i would be all for it.
