Were lead to believe Allam doesn't talk to the council, so I don't see why they should consult him.Does anyone know if they informed Adam Pearson ?I can imagine it gave Scudamore a chuckle, not least because its likely that at some point before the proposed loan was paid off City wouldn't be in the Premier league
Never understood how or why the SMC is owned by the user of the stadium. Like if you rent out your house you either manage it yourself or get an independant letting agency to look after it. No way would you let the tenant manage the property, sorry no rent for you this month i spent it all on maintainance. If the council or even a new third party were to take over the SMC would the income cover the maintinance and upkeep. A few weeks ago it was said that the council had recieved less than 50k in more than 10 years. Can't see the cost getting less as the stadium gets older.
Oh dear. Who built the stadium when we really needed it? There would have been no team without a stadium and I very much doubt you would have seen hide nor hair of Pearson without the KC Stadium, so Allam came quite a way down the plaudits trail, IMO.
If they don't want to consult him, then that's fine. But that doesn't give them the right to then unilaterally approach the Premier league. What on earth has any of this to do with Adam Pearson??
Firstly, the council can approach whoever they like,and for whatever reason.With respect to your last point, Adam Pearson is a joint tenant of the stadium,so has every bit as much right to be informed as Allam, should the council wish to do so
I totally agree with you, it does seem crazy, so what could the reason be? What about (and this is pure daydreaming) the new proposed owner made it an unwritten condition of progressing the purchase of Hull City AFC and the ground share with Hull FC? The unwritten condition was presented as a sensible and mutually beneficial arrangement.
Plaudits trail? If £90m doesn't get you "Down the plaudits trail" how much money would? You seem to forget that money was a windfall, a piece of blind luck. The Council did nothing to "earn" that money and if you don't believe me go and have a look at the KC share price now compared to what it was before the bubble burst. In addition, that money belonged to the people of Hull, the Council didn't own it. You make it sound like they gave it to us.
Adam Pearson has nothing to do with the Premier League. Assem Allam is the ONLY connection the Council has with the Premier League and for that reason should be consulted about any request for funding.
Is there definitely more to this then meets the eye. I have feeling something will happen in the next 6-12 months regarding the stadium.
Who said he does not deserve plaudits for the loans and interest he has given and received? I am simply saying that your argument about saving the club was quite reasonably pre-empted by HCC in building the KC Stadium - try following the well known timeline, it isn't a chicken and egg thing, after all. You second paragraph is simply daft, nothing else; fluke, blind luck, look at the share price - so you would not have maintained Hull's independence in the national telephone system and you would not have cashed in the shares and made all of that money? Really? The council of the day were the decision makers and yes, as the elected council and decision makers of the City of Hull. at that time, they most certainly did give it to the people of Hull. You do realise we (Hull City) are not the owners, don't you?
Dear Premier League We are sorry to hear that you have refused our request for funding to expand the football stadium in our jurisdiction. The club has since agreed to pay for the expansion itself. Could you please gift us £10m that we may pass to the club in due course to pay wages in lieu of the money they are now spending on expanding the stadium? Kind regards Hull Tigers Council.
I see what your saying ( and i wouldn't put it past him ) but the previous owners of City/FC also owned the SMC i think. Seems to me like the mistake was made at the very begining.
Agreed regarding Pearson, but the rest is nonsense; HCC had no obligation to inform Allam about their enquiry - why should they? If your landlord was considering applying for a loan or a grant to improve your rented property (hypothetically) why on earth do you consider he should inform you of the fact at that stage?
Yes, exactly, I am talking about the very beginning, the negotiations when we were still in BP; after that it passed from one owner to another in a pre-determined way.
The club doesn't own the stadium though does it? I thought the council owned the stadium and it was them asking. Anyway I don't really see them handing over any cash but someone asked and they could only get one of two answers.
I can't see the current owner of the SMC handing over any profit to HCC. IF there was a profit at the end of the year i am sure the SMC would find another wall to repaint or another carpet that needed replacing.
Aye, I agree; but I'm a tad confused as I don't see what that has to do with what we were discussing - have I missed something?
There are two rental agreements that are relevant. The one between the Council and the SMC and the one between the SMC and Hull City. Depending on the terms of the agreement the SMC could increase the rent Hull City pays to cover the costs of keeping the stadium up to scratch. A third party would be in a strong position because every time the Premier League said you need to instal new technology, press facilities etc etc the SMC could demand a rent increase. The Council would be a different landlord as they may put the needs of the City before the profits of the business, Having a Premier League team being more important than an extra £50,000 a year rent.
Kingston Communications was overvalued by probably a factor of around 30x at it's height, as were many other Tech Bubble companies at that time. The council received advice to float half their share of KC at the time and profited by some £250m at a price of 225p per share, the bubble continued to bulge to a point when the share price reached £15.90. The share price today is around 87p. All that was due to a speculative bubble and nothing to do with any organic growth of the company within the market. There is nothing daft about that, it is simply the truth. The Council and the people of Hull got lucky. The independent telephone network was never intended to be an investment that would one day be sold off, that is simply the way things turned out because of the tech bubble. If the truth be known the Council actually sold off the majority of the shares in 1999 too early and could have profited even more from the wild hi-tech speculation at the time. As for whose money it is, the facts are that the Council, like all Councils, own nothing, They collect taxes from the electorate to run services and acquire capital to be managed on the behalf of the electorate for the benefit of the electorate and are not permitted to make profit from their activities.
