We saved them every bit as much as they did us as that was there only way of getting there money back which they had put in

good comment, they may have come like knights in shining armour over the hill but they were in just as much crap as we were. the difference being they were 750k in debt, us as fans had no financial commitment, just passion and love for our club and it was the directors of the hull club that were responsible for any debt at that time. if the hardcore fans hadnt got behind the club at that time then richo could possibly still be here now trying to regain his investment, who knows? luckily weve had a good couple of years of success. the obvious argument for the current board is that they will say they were bailed out by receiving 2 sums of sky monies at the time of the merger and that they were merely looking for another club to take on the players contracts. at the end of the day no one can argue that the merger saved our club, is was the best offer at the time. no local business men came forward to take the club off the late roy and the rest of the directors. the disheartenin thing is the way they have cut the fans off from the club and everything at the moment seems to be negative coming from the club. it really does beg the question, do they really have hull fc at heart?

Thought you never merged !!!!!!

We amalgamated, there is a difference. Just ask Easty

Nah, the 39 life pass holders did. As told by Goldsmith many a time when she was around

well he still had them at the end of last year

I'll get shot down for this but here goes!

The main problem with your club is not income but revenue and the sooner you get rid of all the hangers on,jobsworths and carpet baggers the better.
The late Roy Waudby always maintained that the game could not stand it being full time. Subsequent events have proved him right.

Get rid of your C.E.'s, Marketing Gurus,Press Officers,and all the rest of the deadwood and you would be debt free within 2 to 3 years. Get back to the days when people who loved the club were involved who would concentrate more on the team on the field not the one in the office.

Fire away

And we'll soon be playing in NL2!

Super League is a business, not a hobby. Negotiating long term advertising deals wouldn't happen with some "passionate fan" and a major coporation.

Im quite happy with FC as a whole at the moment (off the field), they are working towards some long terms goals and making steady progress.

Amazes me how so many people claim to know whats going on when they know nothing at all.

weve got rid of most of them, or theyve left

just the deadwood (think its actually hard boardicon_wink.gif ) left to go

Well thats me then

We bought 3

The club was saved by loads of people, the main one being colin hutton.The point is that even after it had been saved it was only touch and go for a long while.It is a credit to the board that we improved enough to win a cc and get to a grand final. I am NOT saying they are perfect,that there isn't room for a lot of improvement but you should recognise the positives even though we are going through a problematic time now.Not everything that goes wrong is down to the board but it is in their interest as much if not more than us ,for the club to be successful

I should perhaps have qualified my statement by saying that the local people who should be involved would have a business background.Don't tell me that they would'nt put more heart into the club than Hetherington,Plummer etc.. Its not as if its a massive enterprise Standee,in business terms its just a small business.The trouble is the people running it can't see that or rather don't want to!

I actually think it's better to have someone who isnt a "passionate fan" running the club, it means minds run the business rather than hearts.

Whats the problem with Plummer/Hetherington? What is it people want them to be doing that they aren't? Again, people are commenting on issues they have no personal experience of.

I assume you think Hudgell is better than any of them, why? Because he unsettled a contracted player to the point where the player decided to breach his contract? Maybe it's because he made the decision to force the FC fans into an area unfirt for cattle (which we have fixed of our own accord), or is it because he has sanctioned the signing of journeymen past it players?

Not read the rest of the thread, but surely selling shares as Pearson is doing at city would help our club pay these directors loans off and put us in a stronger position?

Not at all, just how much do you think the FC shares are worth, in comparison to the loans?

Would it depend how many shares they release though?

If the club are 1 million in debt, and they release 2 million shares worh £1 each. The current board share 1 million and they sell off the other million.

The club will be debt free and owned 50/50 between fans and the existing board. Would that not work? £1 per share for a 2 millionth of a business that will be out of debt and is in a prime position for a franchise sounds ok to me.

you'd have more chance of sticking you quid on the number 7 in todays flying pig race at beverley

Yup i know, sounds ok to me though.

Didnt realise beverley was on today, damn traffic getting back into hull! Wish i was driving a flying pig!

DaveT,

Lets put this in simple terms so everyone can figure it out.

I buy 10 shares in a company for £100, that company also owes me £30 in loan form.

I sell 5 shares at £6, which generates £30 in income.
My loan is paid off, the club now has £0 debt.

I now own 5 shares, that cost me £50, but are now worth £30, so I have lost £20, and 50% of my shareholding, just to clear a debt.

How, in any way, shape, or form, is that attracive to me as a shareholder?

Despite all our arguments I do have some respect for you because you see to have a "business brain". But when you say whats wrong with Plummer I begin to have my doubts!

Let me put it in Simple terms too, the current board of directors dont buy the million pound of shares, they are given them. The million pound investment is used to pay off the directors loans. All 2 millions shares are still owned and are worth £1 each with a solvent club valued at £2 million pound. If a director wants to sell their shares they make £1 per share. Lets keep the directors loans seperate as they are now paid off.

Selling your own shares does not relate to recalling a directors loan.

How does that not work?

surely if they are their own shares whats to stop em selling em?...must admit i havent read the full thread so its just logical to me if you own shares in whatever...and you wanna sell em you can...its just a case of who you sell em to?

If you sell your shares to pay the loan then of course it's related. And who was "given" shares?

But seriously, what examples do you have of his failings, PROVEN examples that is, likewise Kath?

The only one I have a propblem with is Mr Rule, and thats more to do with the Brian Johnson issue than anything.

You arent selling your shares.

If im a director i may be given a percentage of the 1million kept for directors.

The other 1 million that are sold have just been created and are owned by the club not the existing shareholders.

The club sell the extra 1million shares which pay the directors their loans back. Everyones happy? The shareholders have a smaller percentage in the club i suppose but financially i dont see how they are worse off.