Bid for Long accepted

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Sir Cheshire Ben said:
"Goals written all over it", what book have you been reading?

Last season & a half = 97 games & 18 goals.

£15m of debt don't buy you much nowadays.

Looks like we're due 3-4 goals between them by the end of the season.

Wonderful.
Click to expand...

Of the 97 games quoted, how many are full games compared to sub appearances, just interested to see what the goals are compared to minutes played?
 
Devil's Advocate said:
People moaning about the money spent by Allam. They hate him but want him to save some pennies ><
Click to expand...

I think it's just obvious to a lot of people that he's showering us with 'gifts' in an attempt to buy the approval of as many undecideds as possible.

£14.5m for those two, plus reported wages of £50k a week is ****ing staggering and ****ing mental. I can't get my head around it. I didn't think we'd do this again. We've been bitten before.

I hope the numbers are wrong and it's more sensible that reported. I think they are good players, but there's much to be wary about here.

That's all.

Of course, those in the Cult Of Allam have disconnected from rationality long ago, and even contemplating this in a balanced way is off bounds.
 
Sir Cheshire Ben said:
You don't do debate as you have no answers that are sensible. You'll accept whatever AA throws at you because we're in the PL even though you accept he doesn't give a toss about you. What does that make you?

How about another go at answering this?

What evidence is there to suggest that the additional generated income spoken about would not also be attracted as Hull City?
Click to expand...

I have no great fondness for AA, but that does not mean he is wrong. Like a few of the anti name change people on here your real argument is with AA who you hate for reasons best known to yourself.. The club needs to become self sustaining, the name change is his idea of how to do it. Do you have one? He may be wrong, but unless it is tried we won't know. The name of various clubs has been changed over the years including ours, and yet they still survive.

In this case I would suggest to you that he is the legal owner of the club, and therefore almost certainly has not only a right, but also a duty, to run it as he sees fit. I suspect he has the legal right to change the name, whether you or the F.A. agree or not. He may not have the right to then compete in their competitions. That is their dilemma. You simply don't count.

As for the evidence about additional income, well, Allamhouse has provided plenty of additional investment (ie for these two strikers), on the basis that it is AA who is in charge. If he cannot run the club his way, then they would not put in the investment. If he can find some further investment or income from an external source, so much the better.

So, what is your evidence that the name Hull City would attract income? It does, after all, have a 100+ year history of failing to do so. Evidence enough I would have thought to suggest it's time for a change.
 
Mr. Hat said:
Principle and moral values were a good trait in past human beings, who's lives were governed largely by honour, many people died for it.

These days people bend over and beg to be f**ked in the arse for a quick buck or an easy way out.

What I'm trying to say is your post should say "But please don't go. Come back with your usual witty response - it allows the rest of the people on here to see how far the Human Race has deevolved from you." for it to hold credibility.
Click to expand...

If you say so.

I think you mean "whose"
 
Party Hull! said:
I think it's just obvious to a lot of people that he's showering us with 'gifts' in an attempt to buy the approval of as many undecideds as possible.

£14.5m for those two, plus reported wages of £50k a week is ****ing staggering and ****ing mental. I can't get my head around it. I didn't think we'd do this again. We've been bitten before.

I hope the numbers are wrong and it's more sensible that reported. I think they are good players, but there's much to be wary about here.

That's all.

Of course, those in the Cult Of Allam have disconnected from rationality long ago, and even contemplating this in a balanced way is off bounds.
Click to expand...

As Ricardo pointed out we may have been budgeted for 17th place. Every spot above where we were budgeted for is 1.3 million in additional income. We may have had Longs bid in the budget for the summer and it wasnt used. We dont know how much this will increase the debt. It is possible that Long will be covered by the summer budget and that Jelavic will be covered by being midtable. It could be that these bids add no additional debt to the club.

Salaries will be covered by relegation clauses this time around.
 
TygerTyger said:
I have no great fondness for AA, but that does not mean he is wrong. Like a few of the anti name change people on here your real argument is with AA who you hate for reasons best known to yourself.. The club needs to become self sustaining, the name change is his idea of how to do it. Do you have one? He may be wrong, but unless it is tried we won't know. The name of various clubs has been changed over the years including ours, and yet they still survive.

In this case I would suggest to you that he is the legal owner of the club, and therefore almost certainly has not only a right, but also a duty, to run it as he sees fit. I suspect he has the legal right to change the name, whether you or the F.A. agree or not. He may not have the right to then compete in their competitions. That is their dilemma. You simply don't count.

As for the evidence about additional income, well, Allamhouse has provided plenty of additional investment (ie for these two strikers), on the basis that it is AA who is in charge. If he cannot run the club his way, then they would not put in the investment. If he can find some further investment or income from an external source, so much the better.

So, what is your evidence that the name Hull City would attract income? It does, after all, have a 100+ year history of failing to do so. Evidence enough I would have thought to suggest it's time for a change.
Click to expand...

Any chance you could answer the question?
 
TygerTyger said:
I have no great fondness for AA, but that does not mean he is wrong. Like a few of the anti name change people on here your real argument is with AA who you hate for reasons best known to yourself.. The club needs to become self sustaining, the name change is his idea of how to do it. Do you have one? He may be wrong, but unless it is tried we won't know. The name of various clubs has been changed over the years including ours, and yet they still survive.

In this case I would suggest to you that he is the legal owner of the club, and therefore almost certainly has not only a right, but also a duty, to run it as he sees fit. I suspect he has the legal right to change the name, whether you or the F.A. agree or not. He may not have the right to then compete in their competitions. That is their dilemma. You simply don't count.

As for the evidence about additional income, well, Allamhouse has provided plenty of additional investment (ie for these two strikers), on the basis that it is AA who is in charge. If he cannot run the club his way, then they would not put in the investment. If he can find some further investment or income from an external source, so much the better.

So, what is your evidence that the name Hull City would attract income? It does, after all, have a 100+ year history of failing to do so. Evidence enough I would have thought to suggest it's time for a change.
Click to expand...
Fully agree good post.

Like the bit about our 100 year history failing to do so-spot on!
 
Devil's Advocate said:
People moaning about the money spent by Allam. They hate him but want him to save some pennies ><
Click to expand...

Anyone who says they hate Allam is Not a Hull City supporter.

ellewoods said:
As we may have been budgeted for 17th place. Every spot above where we were budgeted for is 1.3 million in additional income. We may have had Longs bid in the budget for the summer and it wasnt used. We dont know how much this will increase the debt. It is possible that Long will be covered by the summer budget and that Jelavic will be covered by being midtable. It could be that these bids add no additional debt to the club.

Salaries will be covered by relegation clauses this time around.
Click to expand...


If we finish 10th it is worth over £28m in PL prize money which more than covers what we have spent on transfer fees so far plus we have moved out some squad players so savings there as well.

The squad is far stronger now that when we started back in August.
 
ellewoods said:
As Ricardo pointed out we may have been budgeted for 17th place. Every spot above where we were budgeted for is 1.3 million in additional income. We may have had Longs bid in the budget for the summer and it wasnt used. We dont know how much this will increase the debt. It is possible that Long will be covered by the summer budget and that Jelavic will be covered by being midtable. It could be that these bids add no additional debt to the club.

Salaries will be covered by relegation clauses this time around.
Click to expand...

Budgets and salaries yada yada yada.

Fact is, the fees are too much, and the wages are too high.

I hope the figures are wrong, because they are ****ing mental.

Good players, yes, but c'mon.
 
TygerTyger said:
I have no great fondness for AA, but that does not mean he is wrong. Like a few of the anti name change people on here your real argument is with AA who you hate for reasons best known to yourself.. The club needs to become self sustaining, the name change is his idea of how to do it. Do you have one? He may be wrong, but unless it is tried we won't know. The name of various clubs has been changed over the years including ours, and yet they still survive.

In this case I would suggest to you that he is the legal owner of the club, and therefore almost certainly has not only a right, but also a duty, to run it as he sees fit. I suspect he has the legal right to change the name, whether you or the F.A. agree or not. He may not have the right to then compete in their competitions. That is their dilemma. You simply don't count.

As for the evidence about additional income, well, Allamhouse has provided plenty of additional investment (ie for these two strikers), on the basis that it is AA who is in charge. If he cannot run the club his way, then they would not put in the investment. If he can find some further investment or income from an external source, so much the better.

So, what is your evidence that the name Hull City would attract income? It does, after all, have a 100+ year history of failing to do so. Evidence enough I would have thought to suggest it's time for a change.
Click to expand...

Move this **** to the name change thread. It's been done to death.
 
It's also worth noting that most of the clubs below us would have liked to have signed Jelavi&#263; and Long. I doubt there will be many more PL strikers available to other PL clubs, certainly those clubs below us.

So, there options are abroad, or the league below, which is a bigger gamble and likely to be just as expensive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back