Good read tbh and good to see that we may be back on a even keel come August one the last Covid payment has been paid,I think some fans haven’t realised how much of a impact this has had on the club.People bang on about Pearson,yes he has made mistakes but by god,we are far better having him and his goods far outweigh the bad.I await the numptys coming on saying we are skint blah blah and need Pearson to go.Looks as though he is looking for investment and if it helps him and club then good.

The SMCs deal was 50 years, whether there are any review points before that I dont know. No idea what City's lease term is either but of course they and the SMC are essentially the same thing.

Quite right when the lease was agreed it was for 50 years, (something that was part of the governments agreement to the Council being allowed to spend some of the capital receipts they had received from the sale of Hull Telephones shares to build the stadium) however to safeguard the two clubs should they fall on hard times or should circumstances change on either side (the clubs or the council) it was decided by the council and the clubs that it would be a good idea to review the terms after 25 years, it was hoped that would benefit the clubs but as things stand now it could be quite the opposite. At least the climate has changed somewhat now the Allam's have gone, because I believe Adam felt that they would try and get us out at that point.

Gas, water, electricity, insurance and wages have all gone through the roof since AP put your lease in place, surely he can't be that confident of renegotiating better terms.

Better terms doesn't just mean cost though. We could end up paying more, but being given more freedom with the stadium, which in turn could offset the higher rent. An example would be been able to have a home friendly every year, or the way food/drink takings are shared out.
While AP will no doubt want to keep rent costs as low as possible, there will be a lot more to discuss than just rent costs.

I can't help but feel that as a club we fail to organise our support base to it's fullest financial potential. I know our pass, ticket and merchandise sales are up there but there must be at least 1000 more ardent / affluent supporters who would be prepared to pay into a share scheme (not necessarily for dividend but for love of the club)? Have we ever investigated this type of revenue stream?

Yes but equally the SMC wont find the approx 15 days of revenue we bring in if we left. The stadium is now old, theyve tried and failed with concerts and it isnt 1st choice for proms, weddings etc like it was when it opened. It would sit empty most weeks if only City played there.

Agree, also with the current situation of paying off the Covid loan they could have looked at selling 2 or 3 year passes to get revenue in early.

I think a lot of the issues with the lack of use of the Stadium by other & non sporting possibilities such as concerts, weddings, events etc can be laid at the foot of the SMC under the reign of the Allams.

The personal feelings seemed to me to take precident on what was/wasn’t done rather than what was beneficial for actual Stadium. It certainly changed when they fell out with just about everyone involved such as the city council, AP etc as shown by kicking out the community groups from the Arena and all the other tricks that then came along etc.

It was as if the Allam’s ran the SMC at that time was doing everything it could to hamper/hinder the Stadium rather than anything positive due to pettiness for not being handed the Stadium or the surrounding land for nothing.

The stadium can not exist sufficiently unless the SMC maximise its use and its something that needs addressing.

The SMC having to share profits with the council doesnt help matters. I can what the council were thinking a nice stream of revenue from events...but corporate business think creatively and the SMC have maybe thought 'who bother gambling on booking a concert if we have to split the profits?'