carl_spackler wrote:I'm going to have one more go at this and then I'm going to give up, because you're either incapable of grasping the point or deliberately choosing not to to suit your point. It's fundamentally flawed to state that Hull City would/should pay less rent at a market rate by quoting examples WHO HAVE BEEN PUBLICLY CRITICISED FOR NOT PAYING THE MARKET RATE (West Ham and Swansea). Man City pay roughly the same, it seems (in rent), but they also paid for the corporate areas, bars and restaurants, are helping fund the expansion and campus, and the stadium also makes a lot of money from other activities.
The market rate Hull City AFC will pay for renting the KC per match will be the same as what the Council will charge Hull FC. That is likely to be less than the £4.3 million paid in 2013-14.
If the SMC is making losses now, and that is unlikely to change anytime soon, you can see why Assem Allam might want rid of the lease.
Obadiah wrote:The market rate Hull City AFC will pay for renting the KC per match will be the same as what the Council will charge Hull FC. That is likely to be less than the £4.3 million paid in 2013-14.
If the SMC is making losses now, and that is unlikely to change anytime soon, you can see why Assem Allam might want rid of the lease.
Do you seriously think a[ Hull FC do not have a legal agreement with the Hull City Council. b[ pay less because they where asked to join Hull City AFC.
If so when they sold the Boulevard they must of had the thickest Solicitors in the World as it was sold at less than face value.
oud3pstander wrote:Do you seriously think a[ Hull FC do not have a legal agreement with the Hull City Council. b[ pay less because they where asked to join Hull City AFC.
If so when they sold the Boulevard they must of had the thickest Solicitors in the World as it was sold at less than face value.
Hull FC have a legally binding agreement with the SMC. The SMC has a legally binding lease with Hull City Council. Hull FC have user rights at the KC but no tenancy agreement, hence no legal rights as tenant. That is according to Hull City Council in one of their papers to the Scrutiny Committee.
As far as I know Hull FC's agreement with the SMC is similar to Hull City's. Its based on a percentage of gate receipts which is why Hull City pay more.
If the lease is revoked by Hull City Council they become landlords and the agreements with the SMC for both City and FC become worthless. New agreements with both clubs have to be agreed and put in place. The market rate for the stadium hire per game will be more or less the same for both clubs unless the Allams agree to pay substantially more.
I doubt many solicitors would have predicted the behaviour of Assem Allam.
I doubt whether many Councillors are looking forward to becoming landlords of the KC. They may be hoping that the Allams will back down and put the Airco back into its previous condition.
Joined: Apr 29 2010 Posts: 585 Location: In two minds
Obadiah wrote:As far as I know Hull FC's agreement with the SMC is similar to Hull City's. Its based on a percentage of gate receipts which is why Hull City pay more.
As far as I know it costs more to stage a football game than a RL game.
Large Paws wrote:As far as I know it costs more to stage a football game than a RL game.
Depends on what is included in the rent.
I wouldn't expect Hull City Council to include the cost of stewards and the police in the rent. If they provide the stewards then it should be charged separately. Renting the KC for the day should be the same whether its Rugby League or Association Football.
Joined: Jul 15 2005 Posts: 29811 Location: West Yorkshire
Obadiah wrote:Hull FC have a legally binding agreement with the SMC. The SMC has a legally binding lease with Hull City Council. Hull FC have user rights at the KC but no tenancy agreement, hence no legal rights as tenant. That is according to Hull City Council in one of their papers to the Scrutiny Committee.
As far as I know Hull FC's agreement with the SMC is similar to Hull City's. Its based on a percentage of gate receipts which is why Hull City pay more.
If the lease is revoked by Hull City Council they become landlords and the agreements with the SMC for both City and FC become worthless. New agreements with both clubs have to be agreed and put in place. The market rate for the stadium hire per game will be more or less the same for both clubs unless the Allams agree to pay substantially more.
I doubt many solicitors would have predicted the behaviour of Assem Allam.
I doubt whether many Councillors are looking forward to becoming landlords of the KC. They may be hoping that the Allams will back down and put the Airco back into its previous condition.
I agree the council have little appetite to run the stadium, they set up the SMC in the first place to have a cost-neutral third party custodian, foregoing a share of the income generated for the avoidance of cost and hassle of running it themselves. They found a reasonable partner in AP, but didn't future-proof the arrangement. The deal looks like it's similar to the one they struck with Hull KR when they repurchased the freehold of New Craven Park to allow Rovers to avoid folding, then set up a peppercorn lease with Gaingroup who sublet to Rovers. I'm not sure of the split of cost ownership between Gaingroup (now KCD) and Hull KR, but KR get all the stadium revenue and pay for maintenance, stewarding etc. Essentially it looks like all the clubs are rent free, courtesy of the council? It would seem that costs at the KC are broadly allocated on gate receipts - you have, what, double our gates, twice as many fixtures and charge 50% more, roughly an uplift of x6
Mrs Barista wrote:I agree the council have little appetite to run the stadium, they set up the SMC in the first place to have a cost-neutral third party custodian, foregoing a share of the income generated for the avoidance of cost and hassle of running it themselves. They found a reasonable partner in AP, but didn't future-proof the arrangement. The deal looks like it's similar to the one they struck with Hull KR when they repurchased the freehold of New Craven Park to allow Rovers to avoid folding, then set up a peppercorn lease with Gaingroup who sublet to Rovers. I'm not sure of the split of cost ownership between Gaingroup (now KCD) and Hull KR, but KR get all the stadium revenue and pay for maintenance, stewarding etc. Essentially it looks like all the clubs are rent free, courtesy of the council? It would seem that costs at the KC are broadly allocated on gate receipts - you have, what, double our gates, twice as many fixtures and charge 50% more, roughly an uplift of x6
the deal is also similar to Swansea City's which has been criticised by the EU. If the lease was terminated by the Council any future lease would have to be profitable. However its probable the Allams would want to pay the same rent as Hull FC for use of the stadium. If you rent office space you'd expect to pay the same price per square foot as the other tenants unless you got extras in the tenancy. The rent wouldn't be dependant on how much profit you made.
Obadiah wrote:the deal is also similar to Swansea City's which has been criticised by the EU. If the lease was terminated by the Council any future lease would have to be profitable. However its probable the Allams would want to pay the same rent as Hull FC for use of the stadium. If you rent office space you'd expect to pay the same price per square foot as the other tenants unless you got extras in the tenancy. The rent wouldn't be dependant on how much profit you made.
Not sure of all the financials involved but wouldn't city be financially better off if the lease was terminated, a lease per foot agreed and put them in a more saleable position? So if Allam has given up on getting the KC he would be better off forcing the councils hands to Cancel the lease and almost set the rent at what he's willing to pay as who else will go in there.
The councils only other option would be to leave it empty and let it rot.
Obadiah wrote:the deal is also similar to Swansea City's which has been criticised by the EU. If the lease was terminated by the Council any future lease would have to be profitable. However its probable the Allams would want to pay the same rent as Hull FC for use of the stadium. If you rent office space you'd expect to pay the same price per square foot as the other tenants unless you got extras in the tenancy. The rent wouldn't be dependant on how much profit you made.
It is only fair if it is done per match and only for the hire of the stadium, staffing and security would need to be an additional fee, as we already know the soccer fans find it hard to control themselves
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
