Joined: Feb 12 2005 Posts: 13126 Location: East Staffordshire
WormInHand wrote:Come off it, Mildy. Allam would not offer the SMC back if he thought for one second the Council would say yes. There will be huge debts attached, engineered by clever bookkeeping of the 'pass from the left pocket to the right' variety, in my opinion. All necessary to make the SMC appear unviable in it's present form, with 'tenants they have to subsidise', huge overheads to maintain and improve the stadium and the payment of unwanted mortgages secured against the stadium by the previous owners. This despite the fact that until the Allams' tenure the SMC was profitable and the community got to see the stadium on occasion as events were hosted there.
It's all gobbledegook designed to justify the Allams' appalling behaviour while they attempt to achieve their ultimate aim - which hasn't changed since the "sports village" (Pah) was mooted and they were thwarted. More ways to skin a cat and all that.
The last thing they want is to lose control of the stadium and the arena - they need that power and leverage. All of this is merely the offering of a pawn knowing it won't be taken because the opposition's queen would be squashed. And who will be the villains tomorrow when the council decline the saintly ones' offer?
Reading the Hull City boards tonight, it appears he Hull City paid Allamhouse £7M last year. A seventh of a Labour party donation and vastly more than it would cost to stick a roof over the outdoor artificial pitch already at the KC. Who does this tongue-in-cheek martyr think he's kidding? Not as many as he used to, that's for certain. But has the serpent been allowed to stretch and grow unchecked for so long it's now unstoppable? It really doesn't matter if true colours are finally seen in that case, never mind the emperor's clothes finally being revealed as non-existent to all.
Pretty well summed up. No point in making it seem any more complex than that.
"To play your best football you need players with enthusiasm and drive and energy." - Peter Sterling
Adam Pearson said not wrote:I know there are two franchises and two clubs (in Hull) and that will remain forever more
Its time we all turned the heat up under this, too many people in positions of power are sat on the fence holding very large tubes of Preparation H. I have sent an email to my three councillors asking them what they are doing to protect a vital council owned facility from being turned over free to a privately owned business.
The local MPs I know are on the case now, he has really upset the Labour movement with his £1 million offer.
Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth. Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness. Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself.;
WormInHand wrote:Come off it, Mildy. Allam would not offer the SMC back if he thought for one second the Council would say yes. There will be huge debts attached, engineered by clever bookkeeping of the 'pass from the left pocket to the right' variety, in my opinion. All necessary to make the SMC appear unviable in it's present form, with 'tenants they have to subsidise', huge overheads to maintain and improve the stadium and the payment of unwanted mortgages secured against the stadium by the previous owners. This despite the fact that until the Allams' tenure the SMC was profitable and the community got to see the stadium on occasion as events were hosted there.
It's all gobbledegook designed to justify the Allams' appalling behaviour while they attempt to achieve their ultimate aim - which hasn't changed since the "sports village" (Pah) was mooted and they were thwarted. More ways to skin a cat and all that.
The last thing they want is to lose control of the stadium and the arena - they need that power and leverage. All of this is merely the offering of a pawn knowing it won't be taken because the opposition's queen would be squashed. And who will be the villains tomorrow when the council decline the saintly ones' offer?
Reading the Hull City boards tonight, it appears he Hull City paid Allamhouse £7M last year. A seventh of a Labour party donation and vastly more than it would cost to stick a roof over the outdoor artificial pitch already at the KC. Who does this tongue-in-cheek martyr think he's kidding? Not as many as he used to, that's for certain. But has the serpent been allowed to stretch and grow unchecked for so long it's now unstoppable? It really doesn't matter if true colours are finally seen in that case, never mind the emperor's clothes finally being revealed as non-existent to all.
Respect here that's one of the best posts I have read on any subject
Joined: Jan 30 2003 Posts: 2476 Location: South Cave, East Yorkshire
The council would not be permitted to take on a debt ridden company. if he has broken the lease, the council may be able to take back the management of the complex free of the smc. This would leave the stadium in public ownership, the smc and its debts in the hands of the Allam family, with all parties having to renegotiate their rental with the council. All hypothetical and without any basis in fact.
One thing is for certain, if the smc went to the council, you can bet that City will have renegotiated a peppercorn rental with the smc, just ahead of the transfer.
Joined: Jun 01 2007 Posts: 12671 Location: Leicestershire.
WormInHand wrote:Come off it, Mildy. Allam would not offer the SMC back if he thought for one second the Council would say yes. There will be huge debts attached, engineered by clever bookkeeping of the 'pass from the left pocket to the right' variety, in my opinion. All necessary to make the SMC appear unviable in it's present form, with 'tenants they have to subsidise', huge overheads to maintain and improve the stadium and the payment of unwanted mortgages secured against the stadium by the previous owners. This despite the fact that until the Allams' tenure the SMC was profitable and the community got to see the stadium on occasion as events were hosted there.
It's all gobbledegook designed to justify the Allams' appalling behaviour while they attempt to achieve their ultimate aim - which hasn't changed since the "sports village" (Pah) was mooted and they were thwarted. More ways to skin a cat and all that.
The last thing they want is to lose control of the stadium and the arena - they need that power and leverage. All of this is merely the offering of a pawn knowing it won't be taken because the opposition's queen would be squashed. And who will be the villains tomorrow when the council decline the saintly ones' offer?
Reading the Hull City boards tonight, it appears he Hull City paid Allamhouse £7M last year. A seventh of a Labour party donation and vastly more than it would cost to stick a roof over the outdoor artificial pitch already at the KC. Who does this tongue-in-cheek martyr think he's kidding? Not as many as he used to, that's for certain. But has the serpent been allowed to stretch and grow unchecked for so long it's now unstoppable? It really doesn't matter if true colours are finally seen in that case, never mind the emperor's clothes finally being revealed as non-existent to all.
Plausible, and I agree that the offer was likely made in the expectation it will be rejected. But there are two (main) possible reasons why the council will likely turn it down. The 'debt-free?' question can help shed a lot more light than the accounts from either the profitable or loss making eras - just because we're dubious about how the latter were constructed, doesn't mean the former were transparent and free from political arithmetic. Plus costs may well have risen as the stadium has aged. If the answer to 'debt-free?' isn't 'yes', then it's back to square one, with the Allams sweating the asset and bitterness all round - but at least the offer will be seen clearly for what it is and there's hope that the SMC isn't necessarily some bloody great poisoned chalice. If the answer is 'yes', and the council still don't want it... Well it could be that they're very risk averse, and I know that some people would keenly advocate that position. But it'd seem more likely to me that it doesn't even really qualify as a risk and, as unpleasant as all this is, the prospect of chucking in many tens of thousands of pounds each year is even less appealing. Either way, at least we'd, if not quite 'know', then have a bit of a clearer idea - not about Allam, but about the SMC/stadium. I'm not convinced by it's portrayal either as loss-making burden or potential source of even modest profits. One must be true, but in one case there's a clear (though not very competent) attempt to encourage transfer of ownership, while the other often sounds like wishful thinking.
'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.
Joined: Jul 15 2005 Posts: 29811 Location: West Yorkshire
Under different tenures (AP and Duffen) the SMC broke even for 10 years. Since the Allams took over, it's now £6m in debt, due in large part to the exceptional write off of £5m.
Of course, as acknowledged in the half-arsed response to Whiteleygate, the SMC said "The SMC's principal responsibility is to remain neutral and to support all sporting, educational and community opportunities at the KC Stadium and the Sports Arena." Until today when AA openly contradicted this by saying City's academy was much more important as it would yield players for the national side, then.
Joined: Apr 17 2012 Posts: 5202 Location: Forever in debt to your priceless advice.
"I choose to take responsibility of the football club. You don't force me to look after the whole thing. There are elected councillors for that, rates and taxes."
^^^^ that's my favourite bit ^^^^^^^
Well you may throw your rock and hide your hand Workin' in the dark against your fellow man But as sure as God made black and white What's down in the dark will be brought to the light
"What about the people you voted for? Are they there for tea and coffee and lying and cheating, and knocking down buildings and closing down sports activities - is that what you voted them for?"
At 3.05:
"It's not my job. My job is to promote the football, I took this. Do i dilute the efforts and look after this and this 150 clubs, or do you want me to concentrate and make a success of the football and the academy? Academy is a very important item, very important issue for the community. Academy is important, far more important - equally important to every other activity."
At 4.40:
"...have discussed the matter with the East Riding, because the East Riding council have a different policy. They promote sports and they spend money on sports activities, unlike in the case of Hull City Council - they close them down."
At 6.00:
"Let the council do something. We need to start a bubble...what they call the covered pitch. That's their land, it is not my land. Build the covered pitch and then we'll leave the arena as is. The covered pitch will cost £1.5M. East Riding council spent £7M on Haltemprice. Come on, spend one and half million, it's your land, it's your freehold - spend one and a half million and then have the arena for the other sports."
"What about the people you voted for? Are they there for tea and coffee and lying and cheating, and knocking down buildings and closing down sports activities - is that what you voted them for?"
At 3.05:
"It's not my job. My job is to promote the football, I took this. Do i dilute the efforts and look after this and this 150 clubs, or do you want me to concentrate and make a success of the football and the academy? Academy is a very important item, very important issue for the community. Academy is important, far more important - equally important to every other activity."
At 4.40:
"...have discussed the matter with the East Riding, because the East Riding council have a different policy. They promote sports and they spend money on sports activities, unlike in the case of Hull City Council - they close them down."
At 6.00:
"Let the council do something. We need to start a bubble...what they call the covered pitch. That's their land, it is not my land. Build the covered pitch and then we'll leave the arena as is. The covered pitch will cost £1.5M. East Riding council spent £7M on Haltemprice. Come on, spend one and half million, it's your land, it's your freehold - spend one and a half million and then have the arena for the other sports."
Words fail me.
Philip Larkin wrote:
There ain’t no music East side of this city That’s mellow like mine is, That’s mellow like mine.
He's still knocking Hull City Council ,with his East Riding Council crap about spending. He's closing down sports facilities with out blaming Hull council. Its just the mans greed for money, only reason wants to take the academy up to next level.
I would like to the think that the premier league who are assessing the club in Apr for cat 2 status are also aware of our he has gone about this? Hull City have known about the fact they needed a covered arena for other a year yet a month before the assessment they panic and throw a whole host of clubs out of a community arena with zero regard to any of them. Surely morally that sits wrong with them also and they look at the lack of planning from the club.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
that's one of the best posts I have read on any subject
