the problem with that argument is there is no room for growth and there would be times when the club would miss out on 2/3000 people willing to pay at the gate for some matches.
The key to all this is produce a winning entertaining team and the club sustaining and building on the success.We will then in my opinion have average gates of 15/18000.
The MKM is still one of the best in S/L but its ageing so being a tenant has its advantages.
The problem is the SMC and whilst its owned by the football club we will always be seen as a the lttle partner.

Pearson isn't paying for it, thicko, go back and read the article again, if indeed you actually read it in the first place.

But maybe the club could make more money as the costs would be lower, as having 80 to 100% capacity v's 40 to 50% would be better, build a good club house (like a modern day Willows club) and we earn the money from food and drink.

Add in atmosphere, if it was better, I'm sure we would win more games, pressure on away teams and referees etc.

I'd prefer a 15k stadium no doubt, but if its the choice of our own 12k stadium or sharing the MKM with a 25k or greater capacity I'd take 12k anyday.

Think BDC is starting to panic already

Wondered which one would be on here first trying to play down the whole thing?

They clearly haven’t read any of the article and just spout what they hope and pray is true

A good point Dave re overheads/cost but still think anything less than 15K is a waste purely on the fact that the club could very realistically achieve an average gate of not far off 12K within the next couple of years if the performances and brand of rugby are much improved as hoped. As I put in a previous post the fact the club are now over the 7500 mark after what has been affectively a real poop show is evidence the fans will come back and grow with a better product. I'd say its also quite conceivable that the clubs average attendances could be in that region before there is any green light to start any possible redevelopment.
I just fail to see the real benefit of another stadium of 12K as for me it would be too big for reserve/youth/community use and too small for a permanent home for Hull as the club couldn't grow its fan base further which it has real potential to do.

As for the MKM the stadium for me needs using more as it really has been underused and neglected during the Allams reign. For me staying at the MKM has to be the No.1 option but looking at options to improve income streams to the stadium to offset/reduce costs for all 3 parties being us, City and the Council.

Its still all pie in the sky and alot of hurdles to be overcome before any ground is broken but a lot of possibles and positive dialogues between both clubs and the Council which is a welcome change.
Another flip side is also the impact of the IMG involvement in terms of the sport of RL, as its fair to say that could/would have a significant impact on AP's plans depending on the success or failure to deliver for the sport

I can see us playing in the 12k stadium, but for Derbies and the odd match we can just play it in the MKM stadium

dont trust the tory clones or the football grubs

A lot of the Sydney clubs split playing between stadiums .

They do a lot of things differently down under and I don’t think home advantage counts as much there as it does here?

They don’t all play each other home and away for example.

It always baffles me when people think we would average 15k+ if we were successful. On what grounds can they even base that on ? The derby rarely scrapes past 20k and that is with 4/5k from the East. Even in our most successful period recentley we didnt average those numbers.

Infact they is no evidence to suggest in RL that success would bring such growth on a regular basis.