Could be wrong but I’ve heard from people on the DSA and the Fans Forum that safe standing is well on the agenda. My hunch is that the pitch investment needed probably came as a priority however given the initial investment needed
Wonder how many we will have? Norwich will have the whole lower tier of the Barclay End which holds more than the whole North Stand and the corner filled in between that stand and the best stand done for the start of this season. No safe standing for away fans as far as I know. We will have the two thirds of the North Stand we have, which will be far less in total, and probably have safe standing for away fans. The problem is our stadium was badly designed and took too much accounts of the views of rugby fans. I think those involved had 5 or 6 meetings with FC fans and just 1 with City fans,
If we did introduce safe standing areas would we be able to increase the capacity in theory? Also any idea by how much. I appreciate that's a how long is a piece of string question but if we replace say 1000 seats how many standing spots could we have?
The rumour I heard was the north stand home side. It was expected to increase the capacity slightly but I didn’t hear a figure. if it was me I’d turn the south into a kop stand but I appreciate we’ve had so many changes in recent years it’s hard to justify another one
That was Adam Pearson’s intention to have the South Stand as the Kop End. It would have solved all the problems of having a fence and having to walk round the stadium after an game.Unfortunately the ex East Standers wanted to be down the side. Trouble was the Kempton only held 1,800 in its latter days so they were dispersed through the stand amongst a lot of sit down shut up types who wanted a side view without paying West Stand prices. That diluted the atmosphere for a long time. I would make the South Stand the Kop and encourage a raucous atmosphere helped by having safe standing and move the Family Area in to the South end of the East Stand at the same prices. And put the away fans in the section of North Stand next to West Stand. But I don’t own the club
Bit of a thread restore. Hull City Tigers Limited quietly released their accounts to Companies House on Christmas Eve. Two new directors have been added - Cem Avaroglu and Ebru Atasav Tahranci Latest accounts are attached as a download or you can download from Companies House. Sadly, I am not an accountant but there are some eyewatering numbers - £29.5m staff costs for 2024.
In the KPI section of the account - it shows 2023 wage bill was £23.65m, so an increase of over 20%. From the previous accounts, wage bill for 2022 was £12.696m.
No? The Philogene and Greaves sales will have helped FFP, although I dunno how much wriggle room that leaves in January.
I managed to find the staff wages from the 2021 accounts - £8.4m 2021 £8.4m 2022 £12.69m 2023 £23.65m 2024 £29.5m Are we in trouble? I don't know, you would need to speak to an accountant - I am sure Kieran Maguire from the Price of Football podcast could give you chaptor & verse on them.
I wrote into his show a few times and he consistently said he liked Acun as an owner a few years ago. I wonder if his tune has changed now. His rationale has always been as long as the owner keeps writing the cheques they're a good owner..
I guess none of it should come as a that much of a surprise, given the ongoing talk of putting in £20m-ish a year. But eye-watering still.
Quite right, the losses and debt levels were quite easy to estimate because as you say the 20m ish a season Acun is putting in doesn't come as a surprise and we had no big sales last season to offset it (as we had with KLP the year before and Jaden/Greaves subsequently).
Championship clubs vote on FFP rules for next season and what it means for Hull City's budget City and their Championship peers have been locked in talks over recent months about changes to profit and sustainability rules Championship clubs have voted to tweak rather than overhaul their profit and sustainability rules for next season, which Hull City will hope to be a part of, providing they can avoid relegation in the final 11 games. EFL rivals have been running working groups on how best to go forward with Financial Fair Play amid concerns over disparities between the Premier League and the rest as well as those in the Championship with and without parachute payments, including the Tigers. The Premier League has also been debating potential changes but, with high profile cases about breaches currently ongoing, they voted earlier this month to continue to operate in their current guise for at least one more year. In basic terms, top-flight clubs are allowed to lose up to £105 million over any three-year rolling period – but that, for a large part, does not include spending on infrastructure, women’s teams and youth development. The same rules apply in the Championship but with an allowable loss which was raised from £39m to £41.5m last year to take into account inflation from the cost of living. The top flight will run a squad cost ratio rule in the background for 2025/26 to see if that would be a feasible system. That would limit clubs to spending 85 per cent of revenue on players' wages, transfers and agent fees – but the Professional Footballers’ Association has expressed ‘significant concerns’ about the impact that could have on its members. The EFL was widely expected to follow suit and hold fire on major shifts for now, and that was passed at a meeting last week, although there will be three minor adjustments. There will be a change in how add-backs are audited for profit and sustainability calculations in terms of investment in youth development and women's teams. All clubs will now have to submit a profit and sustainability calculation at the end of a second year in a three-year cycle. That was previously limited just to clubs who were under close watch. Clubs also voted to keep the temporary raise they agreed on last season, so the loss limit will stay at £41.5m over a three-year cycle. Championship clubs will continue to discuss more significant potential changes for 2026/27. League One and League Two already operate using a squad cost ratio system – 60 per cent of turnover can be spent on wages and transfer fees in League One; 50 per cent in League Two – but with a crucial difference that owner investment is counted as revenue. That has been slightly changed too for next season. The first £500,000 from owners in League One can still count 100 per cent towards player-related expenditure but it will only be 60 per cent beyond that. The idea is designed to encourage investment in non-first team matters.
