Bet they don't come cheap! Manchester based legal firm Brabners, experts in sports industry. Just read an article, reference the name change. ( looked like some recycled cack from HDM, but) This is who is representing Mr Allam v FA in his appeal. Wondering if it's Allamhouse or the club picking the tab up?
AN have been asking this for a while. Not got an answer as far as I'm aware. We're just the fans though, it's rude of us to even ask.
The story more than likely came from this in the HDM http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull...-Tigers-8217/story-26034348-detail/story.html It says the descision should be announced by the end of the month.
Why do you need to know? The petulance over the right to know stuff is funny. Its a shame the same gusto isn't put into challenging HCC on what they spend their (your) money on rather than something like this, which despite the inference, will not in the slightest bit be dodgy or illegal. If its required to be public knowledge, it'll be in the end of year accounts. The club is the Allams btw. Without them and their money, there'd be no club. If its the clubs money they're spending, its still their money. Without you, there'd still be a club btw.
I think James Mooney said the Allam's we're paying for the legal fees, rather than using club funds, but it's rather a side issue. You won't able to tell from the club's summary accounts, they don't go into that much detail. If they started on this last week, you'd expect an announcement this week, it shouldn't take long.
Diverting attention to the irrelevant matter of HCC's budget, erm ok, surprised you didn't mention the FA this time. So yeah, we're just the fans, we should just be quiet and keep paying our money.
What does it matter who is representing either side in this, it makes no difference. does it? As for who is paying, well that does have a bearing, but I cannot see there is anything to be concerned about. Happy you are stretching this a tad, bringing HCC into it.
Not really. It's no worse than demanding to know who is paying what to whom. This culture of entitlement without any personal risk irratates me. The whole need to know everything in real time is annoying too especially when it's linked to the entitlement thing.
The question of who is paying is relevant, in that the point of the Allams exercise is to improve the club's finances when most observers think it won't make any money, thereby making the appeal and subsequent expenses a waste of money. If they had put as much "gusto" into improving and nurturing the relationship with their paying customers they could quite possibly have made a damn sight more money than they have thrown away in pointless ballots and fickle appeals.
