The bigger plan

  • 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!
I suppose they owned the smc which runs the stadium?!? but as I say very dodgy
But they don’t own the stadium. Something seems a bit bent here. Maybe that’s how football finances work. A mortgage is generally secured against something you will own outright at the end of it.
 
It’s not possible to have a mortgage on it. It’s owned by the council.


3. Assignment, Transfer of Shares and Mortgages 3.1 Charge/Mortgage: The lease provides that the tenant may at anytime charge the property to a “respectable and responsible financial institution”. There is no stipulation that the Council’s consent is required, save where such charge is made other than to a “respectable and responsible financial institution”. Where the charge is not to a “respectable and responsible financial institution” Council’s consent is required, however, it is “not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed”. The mortgage of the stadium to RBS in 2007 by the then owner R3 Investments to facilitate the transfer of the club between Adam Pearson and Russell Bartlett accordingly did not require the consent of the Council.
 
But they don’t own the stadium. Something seems a bit bent here. Maybe that’s how football finances work. A mortgage is generally secured against something you will own outright at the end of it.

It's effectively just a loan and though these are normally taken out against an asset, they can also be taken out against future income and the SMC has guaranteed rental income from City and FC, but it is rather surprising that the lease terms allowed it.
 
Yep
Conservative group leader Councillor John Fareham spoke out after criticism of the council over its role in a mortgage deal arranged on the lease by former Hull City owner Russell Bartlett.

The latest annual accounts published by the Stadium Management Company (SMC) have detailed how Mr Bartlett set up a holding company to own the SMC, which then provided guarantees on the stadium lease to secure two loans from the Royal Bank of Scotland used to help fund his takeover of the Tigers in 2007.

Current City owner Assem Allam and his son Ehab, who are also the only directors of the SMC, claim the mortgage deal should not have been sanctioned by the city council, which owns the KC Stadium.

They face having to spend £4.5m to clear outstanding loan repayments from the deal inherited after taking over Hull City and the SMC in late 2010.

In the accounts, the Allams also claim that by failing to intervene, the council "lost control" over any future transfer of the SMC's ownership as any buyer could purchase the holding company.

Now Cllr Fareham has called for a review intothe issue.

He said: "I have been advised by our officersthere was no obligation within the lease for us to sign off anything because the loans were being secured through a responsible financial institution, namely RBS.

"While some might argue that subsequent events elsewhere showed RBS were anything but responsible, at the time it was seen to be a responsible institution as defined in the lease.

"However, I do think it is time we had afull and frank review into the SMC and the terms of the deal when it was originally set up to operate the stadium lease.

"In the past, this has been pushed into the long grass but with national newspapers now taking an interest it can no longer be viewed as a little local difficulty."

He said he would be urging a panel ofcouncillors currently examining the council's relationship with the private sector to pay special attention to the SMC deal. The 50-year lease agreement with the SMC was struck shortly before the council-funded stadium opened in 2002.

It is possible the council quotes I have copied here are the minutes or findings of that review carried out on the 12th December 2014
 
It's effectively just a loan and though these are normally taken out against an asset, they can also be taken out against future income and the SMC has guaranteed rental income from City and FC, though it is a surprise that the lease terms allowed it.

I honestly can’t believe it. If payments had fallen into arrears. Does that mean RBS could have gained possession of the Stadium? Inexperience on the Councils behalf when drawing up the terms of the lease?
 
I honestly can’t believe it. If payments had fallen into arrears. Does that mean RBS could have gained possession of the Stadium? Inexperience on the Councils behalf when drawing up the terms of the lease?

Probably taken control of the SMC rather than gain possession of the stadium
 
Not sure what you mean by that? Are you implying that he 'just' bought a football Club for a quid and didn't realise there was significant debt attached?Or are you saying he knew there was debt but didn't care how much it was?
The company was purchase for a nominal sum on the basis that the winding petition was settled. I think at the time the stated liabilities of the company were 16m. Bartlett a few months later popped up with a demand for 7m, there were mortgages in the SMC, staged transfer and agents fee to be settled and the club had over 100 leases on company cars.
Assam Allam bought the club because he understood that there was nothing in the way of being able to develop Walton Street and because out of the consortium who he was in with, he was the last man standing.
Bartlett was a property developer and it was probably his team that suggested that buying the freehold was just a formality.
Assam Allam had no interest in the football side of the business and it only entered his plans once he could see that even with the freehold he could not get his money back.
At 16m there was a chance for supporters to do a deal. It needed 8m on the table by the October after he bought the club.
 
I honestly can’t believe it. If payments had fallen into arrears. Does that mean RBS could have gained possession of the Stadium? Inexperience on the Councils behalf when drawing up the terms of the lease?


As Chazz has mentioned, John Fareham was somewhat scathing about the terms of the lease. I asked him once about something relating to the stadium ownership and lease terms but he would not go into finer details.
 
As Chazz has mentioned, John Fareham was somewhat scathing about the terms of the lease. I asked him once about something relating to the stadium ownership and lease terms but he would not go into finer details.

Seems incredibly dodgy to me.
 
If we argue all day between ourselves will it matter one dot ?
They bought/gambled/what ever the club, the gamble paid off and they managed to **** it up big time. My take on it is that the council don't come out of it clean faced either, but that doesn't matter now because we are where we are.
Back in the old Third Division, aka League 1. I've already been asked this morning by a 'I'm HKR me, and Liverpool' fan what all the fuss is about because 'aren't you back to where you've always been' ?
I thought Geoff Bielby spoke some sense last night on RH. We need to show a united front as supporters. but sadly I think the club is fractured beyond repair right now.

This.
Does it really matter the price the club was bought / sold for?
Whether the Failures are asset stripping or not?
And so on, supporters point scoring over each other?
Divide and conquer.
Whatever.
The club, our club, is up **** creek without a paddle right now and heading towards the waterfall.
 
This.
Does it really matter the price the club was bought / sold for?
Whether the Failures are asset stripping or not?
And so on, supporters point scoring over each other?
Divide and conquer.
Whatever.
The club, our club, is up **** creek without a paddle right now and heading towards the waterfall.
Yep, like arguing whether they **** in our left or right shoes...
 
Bartlett also took out a loan against future seasons Corporate pass sales, as back then corporate memberships were for five years and it was significant guaranteed income.
The Sheffield Mafia pulled a similar stunt at Boothferry Park to get their hands on some readies just before they were kicked ( locked) out of the stadium by David Lloyd. They sold a number of lifetime passes for £1k each which caused considerable headaches for Adam Pearson later on. I think Pearson honoured them for five seasons and then cancelled them which of course led to some supporters thinking they had been robbed.
 
It cost you £6k, though
Well, it depends
Do you account for inflation, build in opportunity cost, deduct vat reclaimed, add interest if it was bought with a loan, any tax offsets, .......
Not much is that straightforward. Just saying like :emoticon-0112-wonde.
 
Well, it depends
Do you account for inflation, build in opportunity cost, deduct vat reclaimed, add interest if it was bought with a loan, any tax offsets, .......
Not much is that straightforward. Just saying like :emoticon-0112-wonde.
account for inflation, - no, you think about that when it is relevant
build in opportunity cost, - no, money does that
deduct vat reclaimed, - if you are VAT registered you should always think net of VAT
add interest if it was bought with a loan, - no because you could have bought something else with the loan and paid cash for the car
any tax offsets - you could offset them for something else
 
account for inflation, - no, you think about that when it is relevant
build in opportunity cost, - no, money does that
deduct vat reclaimed, - if you are VAT registered you should always think net of VAT
add interest if it was bought with a loan, - no because you could have bought something else with the loan and paid cash for the car
any tax offsets - you could offset them for something else
Oh. Rite.