Hull FC Anti-Allam tweets, why?!

  • 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!
I tried signing up for that RL fans site yesterday, never got an activation email, only tonight have I realised my email host automatically sent the email to the junk folder! No word of a lie...

At least I know it works properly, it called that one bang on! <laugh>
 
Have to admit i am now just posting on their just to wind them up, i really shouldn't.

However i think my latest post is correct even if i didn't explain it well. Why would the Allams add unneccessary costs to the club with the FPP rules coming into play?
 
originallambrettaman said:
The FFP rules will only apply to the club, the SMC won't have any bearing.
Click to expand...

Agreed but Hull City have to pay for the pictures and that money has to come into the club from somewhere, so surely that means we have to increase the clubs income? Or have i missed something?

Even if its twenty quid, sure we can have a whip round.
 
City1904 said:
Agreed but Hull City have to pay for the pictures and that money has to come into the club from somewhere, so surely that means we have to increase the clubs income? Or have i missed something?

Even if its twenty quid, sure we can have a whip round.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the £20 per picture, per game, it would be about £600 a season, that's more than we charge for advertising on the concourse for a season.
 
I'd love it if the seats changed to just Hull city colours.. and a tiger:> Crap sport and crap team
 
originallambrettaman said:
As far as I'm aware, the SMC has a fixed agreement with the council with regard to the percentage of it's income they have to hand over, I don't see that the Allam's could increase the income and simply pocket the cash.
Click to expand...

I thought the original agreement was 10% of net profit would be handed to the council ?

As anyone in business knows, turnover is more difficult to manipulate but one or two invoices for management charges/consultancy can reduce net profit to whatever you wish.
 
I would imagine these charges for photos, etc are not a charge for displaying them but the cost of putting them up, taking them down and storing
them after each game. If the suites are named differently as well for each game (eg Carter/Whiteley) then no doubt the signs on the doors have to be changed.

Someone at the SMC will be employed for x hours to do this . It wouldn't surprise me if this cost to the SMC is why they charge the clubs.

So, it's not a charge, per se, for having the photos/memorabilia shown but the associated cost of swapping them over when necessary.

That's what I think this fuss is all about.
 
It'll be interesting to see the reaction in some quarters if there's anything at all to support the claim some are making that this was initially Adam Pearson's initiative.
 
I really don't understand the FC lot. They just make up conspiracy theorys. They honestly think they are being treated unfairly. It is disrespectful to Jonny Whiteley just to take down his stuff, but not one of their fans has asked "Why has Pearson let it get to this point?".

Proper tunnel vision, just like Hull City Council.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back