Still waiting for Allams £10 tickets and the first full International from the city youth structure

You're not getting what I'm saying, you're not comparing like for like. You're right that a renegotiation would see City pay a market rent, you're wrong in the examples you pick being the same.

West Ham - allegedly getting a ridiculous deal that is at the centre of a media/public backlash questioning/condemning it. You also came up £1m a season, which is half what is rumoured.
Manchester City - Again, where have you got £2m ish from? They agreed to pay £2m a year just for the naming rights, they reportedly pay circa £4m for their overall rent.

Swansea is a closer comparison, but again there has been significant concern over the fact that they only pay a peppercorn rent, so I'm still not sure how you seem to think that these 3 are strong indicators of how much City could expect to pay at market value. Your approach seems to be that if I somehow managed to rip off Audi for a brand new A4 at half price, you should then be able to come to a similar arrangement on a Skodia Fabia.

The market rate for the KC would be what Hull FC pay the Council per game for its use.

Manchester City pay £2 million rent and £2 million for the naming rights if your figures are correct. Which means they pay £2 million pa for the stadium. Half of what Hull City AFC paid in 2013-14 accounting year.

Swansea City is similar to us. The football club and rugby club pay monies to the stadium management company for the maintenance of the stadium as well as the peppercorn rent. Both Swansea City and the rugby club each pay over a £1 million a year for the stadium up keep.

My approach is simple, the SMC is making losses and if the lease is revoked Hull City Council will be responsible for running the stadium complex and any losses it makes. Hull City AFC pays rent of £4.3 million which is above what would be judged a market rent, so the rent is likely to be reduced significantly when a new agreement is negotiated. In broad terms it would be similar to the rent Hull FC would pay for use of the same facility. Unless the Allams agree to pay more out of civic duty.

Without seeing detailed accounts, I'd take any running costs, profits/losses with a pinch of salt. Since the days of bartlett the finances of the football club have been intertwined with those of Hull city and I don't beleiee for one minute the figures which have been banded around. From memory, a couple of years ago, Hull paid £750k for a yer which included the small shop and offices they use and 13 or so rugby games. We then get told that the SMC are losing money hand over fist on our contract. Too many questions are unanswered but I for one don't believe it costs north of £5m a year to run the KC for the football and rugby clubs when the likes of the DW and John Smiths seem to be operated for much less.

It#s long past time when some vindictive individual should be able to hold a sword above the head of a professional sporting club in a council owned facility. About time someone stood up to him

Point of order, West Ham will be paying £2M/annum AND they stumped £15M up front to offset part of the debt accrued in developing the stadium for soccer use (£400Million to convert it apparently!!!

)
Based on 19 home league games per season that's £105k/game, however they will be getting the benefit of all the corporate.
Given the location, they are getting one hell of a deal, I would be annoyed as hell if I were a Tower Hamlets resident as they loaned £40M towards this and it would seem WHU aren't paying 'market rates' for a 'community/legacy' stadium

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.

Only positive from tonight is the new floodlights are good, far brighter and less shadows (some would of course argue it'd have been better if they'd gone out!) also the speakers in the East stand seem to have finally been fixed!

South stand speakers were still as bad as ever.

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.

Sorry, what did you say?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

again, a LINK TO THE FACTS. Hull FC signed a lease agreement, stop peddling your nonsense, it's embarrassing for you.

Quote ="HullFC_1865"again, a LINK TO THE FACTS. Hull FC signed a lease agreement, stop peddling your nonsense, it's embarrassing for you.'" Hull City Council briefing note Date 12 December 2014 "2.2 Hull City Council built the KC Stadium in 2002 at a cost of approximately £44m. The stadium is subject to a 50 year head lease with the Stadium Management Company (SMC) and Mr Adam Pearson dated 1st September 2004. The lease indicates that at the point of completion Mr Pearson was the sole shareholder of the SMC. Hull City Football Club and Hull FC Super League have user rights, but are not tenants with a legal interest in the property" Link: https://cmis.hullcc.gov.uk/CMIS/Documen ... Ff55vVA%3D

Quote ="HullFC_1865"again, a LINK TO THE FACTS. Hull FC signed a lease agreement, stop peddling your nonsense, it's embarrassing for you.'" Hull City Council briefing note Date 12 December 2014 "2.2 Hull City Council built the KC Stadium in 2002 at a cost of approximately £44m. The stadium is subject to a 50 year head lease with the Stadium Management Company (SMC) and Mr Adam Pearson dated 1st September 2004. The lease indicates that at the point of completion Mr Pearson was the sole shareholder of the SMC. Hull City Football Club and Hull FC Super League have user rights, but are not tenants with a legal interest in the property" Link: https://cmis.hullcc.gov.uk/CMIS/Documen ... Ff55vVA%3D

Quote ="Obadiah"Hull City Council briefing note Date 12 December 2014 "2.2 Hull City Council built the KC Stadium in 2002 at a cost of approximately £44m. The stadium is subject to a 50 year head lease with the Stadium Management Company (SMC) and Mr Adam Pearson dated 1st September 2004. The lease indicates that at the point of completion Mr Pearson was the sole shareholder of the SMC. Hull City Football Club and Hull FC Super League have user rights, but are not tenants with a legal interest in the property" Link: https://cmis.hullcc.gov.uk/CMIS/Documen ... Ff55vVA%3D'" So "legal interest in the property", that doesn't mean a LEGAL TENANCY AGREEMENT, enjoy championship football, troll.

Quote ="Obadiah"Hull City Council briefing note Date 12 December 2014 "2.2 Hull City Council built the KC Stadium in 2002 at a cost of approximately £44m. The stadium is subject to a 50 year head lease with the Stadium Management Company (SMC) and Mr Adam Pearson dated 1st September 2004. The lease indicates that at the point of completion Mr Pearson was the sole shareholder of the SMC. Hull City Football Club and Hull FC Super League have user rights, but are not tenants with a legal interest in the property" Link: https://cmis.hullcc.gov.uk/CMIS/Documen ... Ff55vVA%3D'" So "legal interest in the property", that doesn't mean a LEGAL TENANCY AGREEMENT, enjoy championship football, troll.

There's no rent payable though, is there? There are central costs of maintenance, utilities, stewarding, ticketing and so on. Many of these vary with customer volumes, not simply occasions of use, surely?

Having a legal interest in a property does mean having a legal tenancy or lease agreement.

The City Council document says that Hull FC have user rights but are not tenants with a legal interest in the property. What the documents says is neither Hull City or Hull FC have any legal interest in the KC because they are not tenants.

Hull FC have a contract which is legally binding with the SMC for the use of the KC. That isn't transferable to the Council if the lease is revoked.

again, untrue.

Surely if the SMC deal is terminated, the council will use it's new leisure management entity to operate the stadium. We can't really prejudge their cost allocation mechanics.