Mrs Barista wrote:The SMC accounts for 2010 (signed off by the Allams BTW) showed a gross profit of £0.4m on Hull FC activities -we paid £0.6m and cost of sales was reported as £0.2m. In 2014 we paid £0.5m to the SMC and direct costs were now £1.2m. A sixfold increase in direct costs. OK then. The implication on that basis is that for every spectator £4.10 is paid to the SMC but the DIRECT cost of each is £9.44. This is before overheads of £0.5m (a further £3.73 per spectator).

When you compare the two sets of accounts there are multiple income streams - sponsorship, catering, Premier Club, advertising, car parking, events, training ground declared in 2010. In 2014, there's less detail but assuming a similar pattern to 2010 it appears the vast majority of these income streams are shown as directly attributable to Hull City Tigers only. Right.

The accounts for City show stadium employee expenses as £2.2m. Which doesn't tie back directly to the P&L schedule in the SMC accounts for the same period.

There could be all sorts of explanations. Changes in accounting policies and intercompany charging mechanics between the multiple companies within Allamhouse for example, changed cost allocation methodology. The squash and polo things don't seem to be shown separately. But the question that is most pertinent I think is how the £1.7m the SMC reportedly incur to host 13 rugby games a year, given that we seem to run a fair bit of the ticketing operations ourselves, benchmarks against the likes of Wigan, Huddersfield etc. Might have a look at that one.

bonaire wrote:west ham 21000
Man City 22800
Southampton 22000
Swansea 21900
A Villa 21000

Take away the away supporters probably all less than 20000 home fans
Unless Hull city consolidate in the Premier League for four or five seasons pushing into the top half of the table there is little point in extending the KC capacity.

The most pathetic attendance for me was the FA cup 5th round against Brighton 10700 and sixth round ( 2 games from Wembley) against premier League Sunderland 21000

Liam666 wrote:Just bit of perspective, as I was at the game. Firstly that was actually a replay with the first game being only 7 days earlier, on a Monday night and was available to watch on ITV.

I would also look at our home attendances in the cup compared to when we play them in the league, Salford last year being one example

As for Hull City's attendance in general, after the first season the novelty of playing the likes of Stoke, Villa, Sunderland wears away. Add that to the fact tickets to Man City cost £50, the team not looking as comfortable as last year its hard to entice the casual fan

BEN_THE_BLACK&WHITE wrote:Always makes me chuckle when hull city fans compare their attendances to ours, they seem to forget one major factor and that's that there is two top flight rugby teams in this city and only one top flight football team, I wonder how city's attendences would fair if they were two top flight football teams. I Think attendences would be on par if there was only one rugby team.

looking in wrote:Name the City games with less than a 20,000 attendance.

Mrs Barista wrote:Huddersfield Giants pay Kirklees Stadium Development Limited a total of £300k pa for stadium use, annual rental, and an allocation of admin costs shared with Huddersfield Town and other users of the stadium.

WormInHand wrote:Not a spat between Hull City and us, the original debate was about the comparative number of rugby fans in the city (joint Hull and Rovers) and Hull City fans, as the soccer fans often appear to cite their attendances compared to ours when attempting to argue about our relative 'worthlessness'.

BEN_THE_BLACK&WHITE posted this valid observation:

...and was pooh-poohed. Unjustly, some thought, hence the ensuing debate.

This is quite a timely discussion, as the Fookwit Fewings letters page in the HDMail this week (now hosted by some young lad cowed by his superiors, after an anonymous Ivory-Tower-dweller bizarrely saw fit to promote Fookwit to Sports Editor) devoted itself to this very argument.

The young lad was trying to justify the discrepancy in coverage between the 3 clubs (2 pages per match for Hull and Rovers) compared to the 6 given to City on match day; plus the deluge of extraneous articles that appear on other days) as acceptable given City's Premier League status and the relative number of fans of each club.

He'd obviously decided to ignore the actual numbers of RL fans who buy his paper which, as discussed here today, do at least match and more probably outweigh their soccer counterparts. He has also decided to ignore the more compelling argument that his new boss is a raving Allamophile, terrified of losing his status as chief ankle-dangler from the Egyptian rectum and the corresponding complementary position in the KC tunnel.

Mrs Barista wrote:@MeehanMedia: #Hull City Council has written to @premierleague asking for £20m for 10,000-seat KC Stadium expansion, @hulldailymail reveals. #hcafc #UTT

ComeOnYouUll wrote:The Premier League rejected the request. Hull City Council have said that they agree with the Allams that the stadium capacity needs to increase.