PUBLISHED 15:55 21st February 2014 Following an article in yesterday’s media, we would like to clarify our position with regards to sponsors for next season. Our Hull Tigers application is intended to capitalise on the club’s 100-year heritage of being the Tigers. Over the past six months our vice-chairman Ehab Allam and commercial manager Simon King have been speaking to several globally recognised brands. Although some of these brands have ‘Tigers’ in their names, the current front-runners for next year’s sponsorships do not, although they do hail from regions where tigers are both prominent and celebrated. Also highlighted in the same article was the notion of increasing season card prices for next year. The 1,600 strong ‘City Till We Die’ campaigners have objected to the club’s application in their 21-page report to the FA, suggesting an alternative commercial strategy, which may include an increase to season card prices. This sentiment is not echoed by all 18,000 season card holders. A significant rise to season card prices (not limited to the suggested 50%) would still be dwarfed by the potential revenues generated as a result of being Hull Tigers. As stated in our application to the FA, “the business plan which forms the basis of this application will help protect affordable ticketing for our supporters”. We thank you for your continued support ahead of a big game this weekend against Cardiff. Read more at http://www.hullcitytigers.com/news/a...SbwZFm65UCt.99 Second page. And it's CAPTAIN caveman thank you.
if it goes into administration then Allam will pass control of the club to the Administrator who will be responsible for the running of the club - Allam's going nowhere, he's totally ****ed this up big time - maybe he's going bust and it's all smoke and mirrors
That's not CTWD. That statement is from the club. Certainly nothing about what was quoted in the papers yesterday about 50% hike in ticket prices.
Nice to see you ignored the bit inbetween your bold points which says "campaigners have objected to the club’s application in their 21-page report to the FA," It's good when the argument works your way, isn't it?
men (old men) against businessmen ... like from day 1 ... keep your faith guys ... it keeps you getting through the day no doubts ...
Where did CTWD suggest an increase in season ticket prices? I suggest you read the presentation before you answer.
Are you saying CTWD's 21 page report to the FA didn't include increasing prices to raise revenue? Thank you for pointing that out. It emphasises the point that it WAS the campaigners who are suggesting a price hike. " The 1,600 strong ‘City Till We Die’ campaigners have objected to the club’s application in their 21-page report to the FA, which is suggesting an alternative commercial strategy, which may include an increase to season card prices"
The administrator will sell the club and charge over £2 million plus other expenses for the privilege. Allamhouse will get whats left after all the football creditors have been paid. Do you think Assem Allam is stupid enough to pay over £4 million for something he could do for himself for a few hundred thousand pounds at most?
Really? So "campaigners have objected to the club’s application in their 21-page report to the FA, which is suggesting an alternative commercial strategy, which may include an increase to season card prices" Is emphasising your point? You might want to read that again.
Look El Capitano club wielder.. in the English language, the use of the modal verb "may" is somewhat artbitrary and in this case conveys an unsubstantiated potential proposal by CTWD. The fact is, CTWD have not proferred this as a solution to cure all ills. Moreover, you may be forgiven for failing to recognize a recurrent trick of journalism in employing "may" or other options such as "might, "could" when in fact, there is no evidence to back up the initial claim. We live in a world of possibility and the HDM are exploitiing the chaos
