please log in to view this image NEW figures have revealed that Hull City Council has received just under £50,000 from the company set up to run the KC Stadium since it opened in 2002 under a profit-sharing deal. The agreement struck before the venue opened was hailed at the time as a "win-win" situation for the council, which funded the building of the stadium and redevelopment of West Park. Under the deal, the Super Stadium Management Company (SMC) is required to pay a percentage of its net annual profit before tax to the council. Payments are based on a sliding scale, which requires the SMC to pay five per cent of any profit up to £1m, 7.5 per cent of any profit between £1m and £1.5m and 10 per cent of any profit over £10m. However, a new report due to be discussed by scrutiny councillors later this week, shows just £49,672 has flowed into the council's coffers since the stadium opened. That compares to the £72,500 annual charge paid by the council to the SMC when it rented offices at the stadium for several years for the authority's sports development section. As the Mail revealed yesterday, the new report by city council property manager Nick Howbridge focuses mainly on whether the authority should have intervened when previous Hull City owner Russell Bartlett secured two mortgage loans on the SMC's stadium lease when he took over the club in 2007. Mr Howbridge said the terms of the lease meant there was no requirement for the council to give its consent. In a separate section on the council's profit-sharing agreement with the SMC, he confirms that the company only pays a peppercorn rent on the stadium and the nearby Airco Arena. Under the terms of the 50-year lease, this sum â believed to be a nominal figure of about £1 â is not subject to any review. Mr Howbridge said: "The terms of the lease relating to income favour the SMC and it is unlikely that the lease will yield significant amounts during the term." Mr Howbridge gives a year-by-year breakdown of the amounts received by the council under the deal. In its first operating year under former owner Adam Pearson, the SMC made a net loss. However, the next eight years all saw modest profits. The report also highlights what appears to be a current difference of views over who is responsible for a number of unidentified "defects" at the stadium. A 12-year period when the construction contractor can be notified of any essential repairs ends next month. In the report, Mr Howbridge says: "The SMC has provided information to suggest there are, in its view, a number of defects that need addressing. "Following independent assessment and legal advice, steps are being taken to bring these to the attention of the main contractor but the council is taking up with the SMC those alleged defects it considers should be addressed as part of the SMC's repair obligations." Profit-share deal was part of wider aim THE profit-sharing deal struck between Hull City Council and the SMC was part of a wider partnership aimed at making the stadium project work. The central element was the 50-year lease with the SMC. Under the lease, the council retained outright ownership of the whole of the stadium and nearby indoor arena throughout the 50-year period. However, the day-to-day responsibility for the development, including all operating and maintenance costs, fell to the management company. Speaking at the time of the stadium's opening, the company's then owner, Adam Pearson, said: "I see the SMC as the guardian of the stadium for the city. "Underlying the whole of the agreement was the council's demand that the stadium should be run for the benefit of Hull, but that the responsibility for the financial success of the development should not fall on the local council taxpayer." http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/KC-S...tory-25446734-detail/story.html#ixzz3LPANUjHI
Does Allam only have one shirt? I'm sure he's wearing the same one in every photo that I've seen of him.
There's absolutely no reason they would see it as essential. Which is why only an Allam fanboy would believe they do.
No, I'd rather they let someone who knows what they're doing own, develop and expand the site, to the benefit of all locals. So you would rather see the stadium rust and rot away until its worthless?
The people who have owned the lease to the SMC are the owners of Hull City, have been from day one. The stadium shouldn't rot away as the leaseholders have a legal duty to look after it. I'm sure Assem Allam has complained about the state of the KC and spent significant amounts improving it. Hull City Council have "subsidised" Hull City (and to a lesser extent Hull FC) to the tune of around £10 million, maybe more. That subsidy helped us get into the Premier League and no doubt benefited Hull the City by many millions more. Hull City Council are prepared to sit down with Assem Allam to discuss the future of the stadium and the surrounding area but it takes two to tango. If we get new owners one of the first things they'll do is talk to the Council. If he doesn't sell we'll stay like this until the lease runs out or there's a break. The reason is simple, Assem Allam currently sits in a council house for which he pays no rent. All he has to do is keep it spick and span and even doing that is making a loss.
Why do you say 'to a lesser extent, Hull FC' ? Did they not get their already 'peppercorn' rent agreement cut, not once but twice, in a secret deal with the council ? Also can someone shed some light and give us the reasons why Hull City should be subsidising every Hull FC home game ?
