Interview with Ehab

  • 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!
Crash Gate 9 said:
David Burn's reputation as a journalist has taken a sever blow. For Allam (at the press conference) to start talking about his bloody jacket...which he pandered along to...was cringeworthy.
Click to expand...

I don't think he pandered to it at all. He sounded utterly bemused by it to me.
 
CMPUNK said:
I seriously believe that had they got their way with the stadium, then the Hull Tigers situation may have never happened.

My impression. Although it could be entirely wrong is.

- The Allams wanted the stadium for free or a at a highly reduced rate.

- The council rejected this situation because the offer was derisory and smacked of the Allams arrogance.

- The council didn't want to sell the 'family silver' because it was an asset the council had and felt uncomfortable about that the public building would forever more be in private hands.

- The Allams felt that they could offer a reduced amount because they would take away the financial liabilities of the council. Not to mention that the Allams felt they could expand the stadium and bring in much more revenue from hotels, casinos, shopping and restaurants that the council couldn't.

Allams also thought that the club would be much more likely to stay in the Premier League should the own the stadium, expand it and increase revenue. This in turn would then be more beneficial to the council as it would free them up in other ventures, more visitors to the city and an increased profile of the city worldwide.

- Allams became offended that the council wouldn't sell because they at heart were dong everything they where doing for the benefit of the City and the councils rejection came across to them as if they where faceless, corporate mercenaries.

- Allams also pissed off at the incredibly high council rates as well.

- Allams then get to a point of hatred with the council and turn their attentions to Hull Tigers.

- Allams boast about how they never go back on deals and you only get one opportunity.

- Hull City Council become willing to negotiate on the freehold and the Allams say '**** you, you had your chance'
Click to expand...

The stadium is a community asset & can only be sold under government legislation at a price which reflects it's value as such. It would also need public consent to sell as the paying fans at Hull City only account for a small percentage of the taxpayers in the city

The biggest flaw with most of that is that the Allams only do things for the Allams, not to benefit the people of Hull or the stadium, there is always some payback expected

The Business rates are nothing to do with HCC, the rateable value is set independently & the whole amount goes direct to central government & a share is returned in the national rate support grant allocation

Hull City Council were and are willing to deal with the Allams, it is Assem who has said he will never deal with the council
 
NorthFerribyTiger said:
The stadium is a community asset & can only be sold under government legislation at a price which reflects it's value as such. It would also need public consent to sell as the paying fans at Hull City only account for a small percentage of the taxpayers in the city

The biggest flaw with most of that is that the Allams only do things for the Allams, not to benefit the people of Hull or the stadium, there is always some payback expected

The Business rates are nothing to do with HCC, the rateable value is set independently & the whole amount goes direct to central government & a share is returned in the national rate support grant allocation

Hull City Council were and are willing to deal with the Allams, it is Assem who has said he will never deal with the council
Click to expand...

Not so sure about that. There's been a few things bought and sold over the years without that, such as the assets given in exchange for the Boulevard.
 
The problem is that they want to implement change, and the only change is to the name. That said what they have failed miserably to do is to validate the commercial benefits to the club and its fans of the proposed name change and whilst that situation exists they will always face some opposition. I'm bemused that they totally failed to validate the merits of doing so, it seems that they believe that the statement 'that we feel its the right thing to do' will suffice when clearly it won't. We hear that they have researched the position, in which case share the merits with the fans so they can consider changing their position.

Problem now is they have pushed themselves into a corner and the only outcome I can see is that at some point they will be gone.
 
Bum_Chinned_Crab said:
But you've hit the nail on the head there - there is no reasoning for it other than pure, bloody pig-headedness. In Allam's snr's mind Hull City advertises the council (weird logic, but this is Allam....) so he wants to change the name cos the council wouldnt let him have his own way. An easier way round all of this wouldve been for him to offer, say £30m for the stadium complex rather than the zero pounds and pence he did offer, and the council might have actually accepted it. That way we'd all have what we want.
Click to expand...

He never offered anything did he ? I understood also that he was after a joint venture which would have included his ownership of the stadium & complex development along with grants from the council & other sources to assist with the costs

Not bad, give me the stadium & with your money I'll build other assets around it which I will also own, paid for with a chunk of public money
 
cheshireles said:
The problem is that they want to implement change, and the only change is to the name. That said what they have failed miserably to do is to validate the commercial benefits to the club and its fans of the proposed name change and whilst that situation exists they will always face some opposition. I'm bemused that they totally failed to validate the merits of doing so, it seems that they believe that the statement 'that we feel its the right thing to do' will suffice when clearly it won't. We hear that they have researched the position, in which case share the merits with the fans so they can consider changing their position.

Problem now is they have pushed themselves into a corner and the only outcome I can see is that at some point they will be gone.
Click to expand...

Ehab's position seemed very much to be "we need to do something to generate income" "Changing the name is something" ergo, they try to change the name.
 
NorthFerribyTiger said:
He never offered anything did he ? I understood also that he was after a joint venture which would have included his ownership of the stadium & complex development along with grants from the council & other sources to assist with the costs

Not bad, give me the stadium & with your money I'll build other assets around it which I will also own, paid for with a chunk of public money
Click to expand...

There were no grants from the council involved, the site would have been the council's contribution, Allam was funding the rest(with some grants from Sport England/Lottery etc).
 
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
Not so sure about that. There's been a few things bought and sold over the years without that, such as the assets given in exchange for the Boulevard.
Click to expand...

Not in light of cuts to local authority budgets under the current regime of austerity & budget cuts ....central government would expect HCC to maximise the income from any sale, otherwise they could face the penalty of further budget restrictions
 
NorthFerribyTiger said:
Not in light of cuts to local authority budgets under the current regime of austerity & budget cuts ....central government would expect HCC to maximise the income from any sale, otherwise they could face the penalty of further budget restrictions
Click to expand...

They'd have been in trouble for offering him Costello then, which they did amongst other sites. Also, who says they wouldn't have been able to show that any sale was in the best interest of the City? It certainly goes beyond the imediate finance for such considerations.
 
Maurice Moss said:
What I took from it was the embarrassment of him holding a "Tigers" programme as if to say we have always been Tigers, what the big deal.

On the interview, very poor. No one has ever really probed with questions. Although I do remember a female interviewer asking questions which Allam Snr did not like, clearly just because she was a split arse.......I mean woman!
Click to expand...

That was the interview with Amanda White - she had the Doc squirming and wriggling in her first and, unfortunately, last interview with him ........... it's a pity that Levy, Burns and Gollum didn't have the cahones to follow her lead, ****ing set of arse-licking eunuchs !
 
spesupersydera said:
That was the interview with Amanda White - she had the Doc squirming and wriggling in her first and, unfortunately, last interview with him ........... it's a pity that Levy, Burns and Gollum didn't have the cahones to follow her lead, ****ing set of arse-licking eunuchs !
Click to expand...

OT but I think I read somewhere that this is the most misused popular translation in the world. The article said cajones doesnt mean balls in that sense whatsoever.
 
originallambrettaman said:
I though Ehab was terrible in that interview, he didn't sound like he'd convinced himself, never mind anyone else.

He's in awkward position, as he's trying to defend the indefensible and that's never easy.

The obvious answer to all the questions posed was 'cos dad wants to'.
Click to expand...

Which is the whole point. Dad saved the club and can do what he wants. If the customers dont like it then the answer is simple. Dont go...........


John Ex Aberdeen now E.R. said:
You won't get one, because there are no significant benefits from changing the name.
Click to expand...

Agreed John. But he should be given the right to do what he wants so that he can prove what he thinks to be true is true. The name can soon be changed back if / when it is not. Alan McInally on soccer saturday came out with the best comments so far over the name change issue. Spot on he was.
 
I didn't hear today but Burns is rapidly plummeting in my estimation he just doesn't ask the most obvious of questions and keep at it untill he gets the answers we all want. It's to the point he's not worth listening to, He either agrees with the name change or is frightened he'll get banned from speaking to Bruce etc.

The most obvious question:
As tigers is our nickname and not our name, why do you think it's wrong for arsenal to add their nickname to their name but it's perfectly ok for you to do it with ours?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back