In my informed opinion. If that £11mill is dependent on the rebrand, someone's ****ed up big style and we certainly wouldn't be seeing the players that just signed today in black and amber.
That's why we aren't in debt and are about to kick off a season in the premier league ..... ****ing **** owners!
Simple question. If as the Allams said the club would be run as a business where has the £11m deficit come from? If there is such a deficit was does it say about his business acumen?
You can run a business with a deficit if you believe that doing so one year will see you generate greater profits in future. Buying a new factory or equipment is likely to see a deficit during the construction/installation phases in order to make more money once they're operational for example.
Initial capital investment is usually a part of any business proposal. Our country's gross business debt puts the public deficit left by Labour at the last election into insignificance. By that measure, Allam's business acumen is much greater than the majority in the U.K. as has been proved with his continuing success in the generator business - (I bet he couldn't tell you in detail the finer points of how one of those worked either.....) He's talking long-term sustainability, which we aren't at the moment - and he's the one who has to come up with a businessplan to achieve that. If improving the marketability of the club globally is part of that effort then all power to him as far as I'm concerned. We are still Hull City, Still the tigers, still play in black and amber and still have a 109 year history.
So you have a deficit but increase it by £5m plus to sign Huddleston plus his and Livemores wages, so how goes this make more money?
The 5 mill for Huddleston isnt 5 mill spent its 5 mill invested. You can recoup some of that money by selling him so it is more of an investment with depreciation (if his value drops).
Establishing the club in the top flight means massive long-term income. Once you are operating at that level then you can hopefully sustain yourself. Moving from a Championship budget to a premiership one is a costly endeavour in the short- term. If we can develop players and sell them for profit then that is one way of clawing back the deficit, another is increased commercial activity brought about by global exposure, yet another might be to make the club attractive to offshore investors. With no guarantee of staying up then there is a risk.... seemingly of around £11m in this case.
Most of the clubs who have come up have spent serious money getting established in the Premier League. Some of these clubs, and a few others, have realised they can't sustain this level of expenditure. They have now decided to cut costs and risk relegation. The Allam's spent a lot saving Hull City and I can't see them ever getting that back. I think they will only have the opportunity to minimise the losses. The club's greatest asset is Steve Bruce because he seems to be able to bring players in who think they will improve their career with him as manager. There's a lot of things to be grateful for. The problem with the name change is that it's not a balancing out thing. A manager can make mistakes and if he buys some good players and some bad you have to judge him overall. You can't say that some decisions are bad and reverse them - at least not without taking a financial hit. With the name change it can be reversed and the damage done can be minimised. That means that even if we achieve a top half finish I will still be critical of the name change. It's just not a football name and I can't see any commercial advantage. If having a silly name brings in substantial extra funds I would agree with it and would be happy to be proved wrong. I just don't think it will happen. I will be emailing the Premier League explaining why it's a bad idea and setting out what the club has done - including Nick Thompson's role. I feel that is the best way to ensure the name change doesn't go ahead - at least with the fixtures, football scores and league table.
The interview seemed very much like 'this is my club, I can do what I want. How dare people question what I'm doing'.
I'm not an accountant, but if Allam pumped in £50m plus last year, does he mean he's taken it all back, then the new investment has raised what the club owe him back to £11 m? That sound more likely
