Based on what?

I still don't see the evidence for this, in their 2nd season in the Premiership tickets were already becoming easier to obtain, and that was in a better economic time to now.

I don't doubt that a bigger capacity is needed eventually, but the 30-35K that the KC is capable of being expanded to is more than sufficient IMO

its also worth pointing out that teams such as Wigan, Fulham, Stoke, Swansea & Norwich are surviving just fine with similar capacities or smaller.

Correct! They won't even need a ground extension. In their first premiership season everyone who wanted a pass got one, in the second season they were a couple of thousand down on sales. Only chance of a 35,000 crowd would be against a Man. Utd or Liverpool for a major hounour. This Allam guy needs to change his acid supplier.

Cleared your overdraft yet and improved your credit rating?

The Man Utd christmas game the other years was easy to get tickets for, there were tons of empty seats

haha laughable once the freshness of the Premiership began to fade, the bandwagon jumpers abandoned ship. City would struggle to fill 30000 stadium unless they are playing the top four or five teams. Let them move to Melton, he can't afford to build a stadium anyways.

Allam is a lunatic. All he is interested in is feathering his own nest. He wants what we all want - Something for nothing.

This is all a bit much for me at this stage of the football season. Hull City are not running away with the Championship, they are certainly not in any way or form promotion or even play-off certainties and this whole thread is based on ifs and buts! The Championship is a very, very difficult division to get out of and there are many teams of a similar or superior financial and support based standing to Hull City.

SHOULD Hull City ever reach the dizzy heights of premier league football again, they will only ever be a yo-yo club and can not plan to have or expect regular 25k-35k attendances for a prolonged period of time. Therefore stadium expansion should not even be a consideration.

As for Mr Allam, well he has a few more pennies in the bank than me granted. But he is not wealthy enough to support either a Hull City relocation programme or sustained premier league status. However as a Hull fan rather than a City fan, ownership of the KC stadium by Mr Allam would be a catastrophe for our club and I for one certainly hope it NEVER happens........

Roll on February 1st so we have something worthwhile to discuss!

The council can't give him the stadium and he's shown no inclination to put in a realistic offer to buy, afaik.

It's owned by Hull City Council, so in the (essentially hypothetical) event of a referendum it would be the people of Hull who would vote.

In which case we're all foooooked considering the people off Hull kept that knob Prescott in a job for 40 years with their votes!!!

But I diversify........

You're very welcome to come along and ask him yourself so you can't say you weren't asked.

Geeeeeess and you're coming all the way from Nebraska. Now that is committment to the cause

Thats the Nebraska in East Hull

You might want to check your facts, it sold out! 14 out of 19 home games that season sold out, the lowest attendance was 22,822 against Wigan who will have brought around 500 fans.

If they got promoted an increase in capacity would be useful but not essential. I'm not saying they will sell out 30,000 - 35,000 every week, that's just not feesible but having the extra capacity for those big games, plus being able to allocate more tickets to away fans (The bigger clubs often take 3,000-4,000 to places like Wigan where the away allocation is big) would boost their income.

They would only have to sell out 5 games at 30,000 (easily done, with the interest generated by the big clubs and their increased away support) and it's like having another home fixture at 25,000 capacity.

They don't NEED an increased capacity but it certainly would help, however doing anything before establishing themselves in the top flight would be short sighted in my opinion. Go to the Riverside where Middlesborough play in a 32,000 capacity stadium in front of 14,000 fans and you'll see what I mean.

I would not be at all surprised if AP hasnt already done a study on land with a thought to FC moving to their own ground at some point because as it stands clearly we will be homeless at some point in the distant future if allam and the other krays he hangs out with have anything to do with it...
wonder how many fc fans would want that ??

Allam is cracking on a bit now, he'll be gone soon.

Well said.

Hull City in the Premiership long enough to buy/plan/build a new stadium. !!

If he want a lift I will give him one He can come with me if he likes

xx

ps The man want the KC Stadium for nothing and the land around KC stadium.Like posters have said put an offer on the table .For me it's put up or shut up.The PRA- Not getting it for nothing .He knew when he bought Hull City what he was letting himself in for.If he want a Stadium that holds more let him build one with his own money

Thats very kind of you. Hutchie won't feel left out then and he can ask questions on behalf of the "fanbase"

Middlesbrough are a great example of expanding a ground unnecessarily, the Riverside was originally built as a 30K ground, when they returned to the Premier League they filled the corners in to make it 35K. In hindsight 30K was more than adequate, and I bet they wish they were playing in a smaller ground now they get <20K crowds.

This is how I see it, although I'm no expert on the detail of the contract.

The SMC's role is to act as custodian of the council's community asset for the benefit of the tenant[us[/u and the public of Hull. Whilst some people have slated the council for the asset not turning a profit, that's a bit stupid IMO. The SMC's role is to optimise usage of the facility and maintain it to a good standard, not to earn money from it. Other assets like museums and galleries aren't famous for massive dividends, they're for the benefit of the community

Obviously appointing one of the tenants also as controller of the SMC creates a monumental conflict of interest. From what I can gather (i could be wrong, but there appears to be little evidence of this) there appears to be no council governance of the arrangement to ensure other tenants are treated equitably by the Allams in their dual role. There have been instances cited in the past of new charges being introduced to FC for display of club signage. Presumably these variations of contract are permissible within its original terms. The Allams could say both tenants pay these charges by raising an invoice from the SMC to City but at the end of the day as owners of both they're no worse off but we are. You get my drift. It sucks, but the Allams hold all the shares and therefore cards if we've not got protection under the SMC deal for variation of contract and the council are unwilling to offer us any intervention.

So, if City want to relocate, how would that work? The SMC still has an obligation to maintain the asset to an appropriate standard. Without City at the stadium, that leaves us to pay the SMC for the upkeep. If our contract is relatively fixed at £600k per annum, the question is who pays the balance of costs, assuming that it's more than this to run ground maintenance, ticketing, facilities, offices etc? The Allams in their lovely vast new home won't want to subsidise us, so they'd probably seek to either increase our rental payments or scrimp on maintenance costs etc. The question theN would be whether the council has the appetite or ability to defend our position. I doubt it.

It's a big statement by the Allams that there's no future for City at the KC. Had the extension plans gone ahead on the stadium as they wanted, with a free asset to mortgage against and provision of a huge supermarket and boutiques for culturally and intellectually impoverished folk like me (i.e. women) to distract ourselves with, I could at least see that there could be a hard commercial justification for it, albeit dressed up in "sporting gift plans" garb to distract even more vacuous folk than women. I'm talking about local journalists BTW. But to build a 35,000 facility costing probably north of £80m with no stadium to leverage borrowing against and no certainty of achieving uplifts in gates, arguably putting them at risk by re-locating, and insecure Premiership tenure, seems a bit unlikely. Could it be silly posturing? You decide.

In all probability, I'd guess the plan is to continue to push the terms of arrangement until we reach the point that Hull Wasps recently did at the Bonus Arena and had to relocate to Ennerdale. I'm going to see in the SMC accounts whether the SMC controls the Bonus Arena. The Wasps chairman said their proposed charges to remain there were going to double year on year without negotiation, hence forcing them out, but I'm pretty sure any sincere sporting philanthropist wouldn't create that situation so there must be a different controller of this venue.

Gosh, a long winded post telling us that you don't really know anything.

Why the surprise? You not read my other 18k posts?



Interesting alternative opinion by a poster on a City forum. Reckons City doing their own thing at Melton or wherever and forfeiting the lease opens the door for AP to renegotiate the terms and leverage his good relationships with the council to do a joint venture with them to redevelop the area.