I know it could seem I'm anti-trust, but I'm not. I do have a number of reservations though. In the unlikely event that the Allams drop the name change today, we're left with a trust that the club will not work with. If the club sold today, how would the new owner know the trust was representative and spoke for fans, when the only apparent support is primarily to oppose the name change? There seems to nothing to indicate that the trust has listened to and speaks on behalf of a representative number fans on other issues. It may well be the case that they do, but I think a new owner, or anyone else for that matter, should be able to see evidence beyond a single issue.
I don't, I didn't say 3,000 people weren't coming because of him, but obviously he's one of the reasons, he's pissed off loads of people.
Count me as number 1 who didn't renew. I have two mates who will not renew next season if the name thing isn't dropped. Fans are just fed up of Allam + the name change s**t. It is tiresome to say the least, can you not see that
Did you look at the HCST website and look at the other work the Trust is doing? I would recommend it.
I had considered returning next season had he decided to drop the bullshit, but it looks like another season with a bit more cash in my pocket.
You just said people were coming despite of him and then that 3,000 had not renewed. I'm asking you how you know what the motivation is beind why people do or don't go or why they do or don't renew passes.
I have, it's why I asked the questions and raised the points I did. I'd also argue it's not for fans to find out what the trust committee want, but for the trust to hear and respond to fans needs. Here's an opportunity to sell the trust.
If the trust is seen as a single issue organisation, it's because our owner won't drop this nonsense and we've been dragged back into another name change campaign, it's an issue of the club's making, not ours and nobody would like to see it ended more than us. While that continues to be the case, it's impossible for us not to be in conflict with the owners, unfortunately it's unavoidable, though obviously the club are still working with us to a point, via our representation on the FWG. There are other issues, such as use of the ASI money, the campaign to get all Premier League clubs to pay the living wage, the revision of ticket prices(particularly the disabled ticket pricing) and other issues that we're addressing with the club. It's not true to say were a single issue group, it's just that there's one issue that currently dwarfs all the others. Many will have joined the trust because they oppose the name change, some will have joined because they agree with the principal of fan involvement at the club, neither of us have any idea how many fall into each camp.
The point you raised is that the Trust is a one issue organisation. You've now been guided towards the website, which clearly states otherwise, yet you persist in your original belief. That's fair enough, you must come to your own view. If I keep saying the same thing, I don't anticipate a different outcome. What the Trust is and stands for is clearly set out on the website. That's good for some, not for others. We accept that and do what we can to please our shareholders.
There are several reasons why people didn't renew, some because of the name change nonsense, some because of the season pass price hikes and some because they were pissed off at being moved out of E1-3. Obviously I don't know the breakdown of each, but as the owners were ultimately responsible for all three, they've played a significant part in us losing long term season ticket holders(though I suspect a fair few of them are still attending on matchday tickets).
well i'm another one who after 32 years of being a pass holder, gave up and didn't renew this season because of allam and his lies. i've only done 2 home games this season, both the european qualifiers, and instead just gone to away games. thats the way it will continue whilst he carries on with his disrespect of all things hull city afc, or sticks to his word for once and leaves.
The Trust isn't a Trust it's just the CTWD organisation that's changed its name in order to make it appear that it speaks for all fans. It's built on a lie, it represents a mere 800 people and is not fit for purpose.
Hull City 'Tigers' name-change application: What happens now? HULL City reporter Philip Buckingham describes the application process and says the FA Council would have to have a significant change of heart before accepting a name change. Hull City have begun a second bid to change the club's name to Hull Tigers after formally reviving their controversial plans with the Football Association yesterday. City have written to the FA declaring their intentions to again apply for a name change ahead of the 2015-16 season, two weeks after an arbitration verdict ruled last year's decision could no longer stand. Neither City nor the FA were making official comment yesterday other than to confirm correspondence had been sent and received ahead of the deadline, but the ambitions of owner Assem Allam are clear. For now, the complex matter remains in the hands of legal teams. City continue to argue their original application still stands and is awaiting reassessment, while the governing body believe that application was annulled by the tribunal verdict. Whether it is viewed as a resubmitted or fresh application, the process would then follow events of last year that ultimately led to the FA's rejection. After being considered by the Membership Committee over the coming weeks, those recommendations would then be passed on to the Council ahead of a vote. The most likely date for that would be May 19, the FA's AGM and final Council meeting before the summer break. Although City's will for change is as strong as ever, it would require a significant change of heart from the FA Council before they are given the green light to become Hull Tigers. A majority of 47 votes to 27 rejected the last application 12 months ago and it is unlikely any of those members opposed to change will have been enamoured by City's legal challenge. One difference from events of last April will be the presence of City secretary Matt Wild on the FA Council. The Mail has learned Wild was elected as a divisional representative earlier this year, joining a group of figures from the professional game. Wild would not be eligible to vote on City's proposed name change due to a conflict of interests, but could feasibly lobby fellow members ahead of the decisive meeting. On the flipside of that, the findings of the recent arbitration tribunal do not bode well for City. Stinging criticism in the report saw City's owners accused of considering the views of its supporters as "irrelevant or barely relevant until a very late stage" in the process. The lack of a business plan also undermined the club's view a change to Hull Tigers would generate a greater income. In the meantime, City's resurrected bid threatens to further stretch an already strained relationship between Allam and a section of supporters opposed to change. Those fans had hoped the issue was over when the FA stood firm last April but the long-running saga will test their appetite for another season of unrest. Season tickets for 2015-16 are likely to go on sale before the FA Council vote on the name change and there is an expectation some supporters will delay renewals until the club's playing name is confirmed. http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull...tory-26269919-detail/story.html#ixzz3W8tFDD3E
It's rather ironic, that having had the original ruling overturned because an FA Council member came to one of our meetings, the club now actually have a staff member on the FA Council.
No, that's what you WANT it to be. In reality, what you WANT and what is TRUE is completely DIFFERENT.
