That would be why it was seperated from the one before.


Wrong. On a number of levels. You carry on though and see where it gets you.

Especially when you factor in Hull City's accounts prior to the Allam takeover showed a net worth of minus £30m, their July 2012 accounts show a net worth of minus £50m.

Also, he's blaming others for hidden costs etc. whatever happened to caveat emptor?

Totally agree.

If and I'm assuming they are in breach of any clauses, Surely the Council can terminate the agreement they have with the Allam's

Game over. This is exactly what 180,000 people in this area that have no interest in FC will think. This is going to prove a very difficult fight to win.

For me the alot of the information in the SMC statement should have remained behind closed doors. All this statement does whether factual or not is paint both Hull FC and HCC as the wrong doers as it was intended and all the people with no real interest will only see it one way.

There are holes in all the PR releases, statements the Allams release and seem to be adjusting their story and figures to suit as they go along.

There is only one aim here and it is so plain to see, they are trying to force the Council to give up the Stadium by stripping all income streams to it and leaving both the Stadium & HCC isolated with no other option.
For a some one who claims to be man of his word why hasn't he started building the ASSET STRIPPING ALLAM Stadium at Melton yet??? Surely a man so wealthy shouldnt have a problem funding it himself....... oh hang on a minute.

Looking at it purely as a maths problem, that part is [iplausible[/i. Because of City's bigger crowds, it could be that each City game with roughly an extra ~4k in attendance (above the 'goes free' threshold), generates an extra £30k or so for the SMC. If that gets the event to or close to breakeven, then it could be that each Hull FC game is losing the SMC £15k. But, of course, numbers can be lined up in different ways to tell different stories, and how compelling they seem mostly depends on your POV. The Johnny Whitely issue is nice and straight forward - this looks like a can of worms for somebody, and it isn't clear who yet.

With a local press that seems unable or unwilling to ask all the difficult questions to try and fill in the gaps it leaves Allam to peddle his one eyed view of the situation.

Di I read correctly ? a Mortgage on the Stadium for £3.2 million was it ? who took that out , the Council ?

Can we start putting houses/hotel on the site like in Monopoly to raise revenue ? ...oh hang on a minute

just been to the stadium for St helens tickets and just just been passed the skateboard park back of the arena and its now a dump ( who looks after that) and also some one in a earlier post comment about hull city player andy Dawson posters been up on the outside of the stadium they aint any but was and now just hull city poster offering cheap hull city shirts

It's given me a great business idea has this,i'll start charging my employees £2 for every cup of tea and coffee they have,if they argue i'll say it's fair and i'll put £2 in the tin for every one i have,you can't say fairer than that.

I do recall Bartlett obtaining a mortgage against Citys user agreement with Barclays for c£3.5 mill

might had been Paul duffen so he could give Jimmy bullard his wages

Some form of (peaceful) protest needs to made at the Saints game to keep this at the front of people's minds. It will be on the radio so some clean chanting ("One Johnny Whiteley" ? etc) might be a good idea.

Just because we have a game, we shouldn't forget about this. Support the team and raise awareness of how petty the SMC are being

So in other words this cost was part of buying City and nothing to do with the stadium whatsoever?

If only some responsible journalist had bothered to investigate the claims made in the press release instead of just printing it without challenge.

Indeed, but then HDM don't "do" journalism, they just do fellation and onanism.

couple of things

Why don't Allams just return the smc to the council if its losing so much money?
suing the council wont solve anything

How could Bartlett take a loan out against the kc? they only rent it. obviously I must be missing something

That statement by Allem puts Hull City AFC in a very good light as he states that they have coughed up everything requested by the SMC without any objection.

If the SMC was run by an independant would he be so obliging??

If another person was owner of Hull City and Allems had the SMC, would the Hull City owners be willing to pay up on the 'accountancy changes' without protest?

The problem for us is that he's painting us as the bad guy in the eyes of the public....a very dangerous man indeed. The HCC need to get a hold of those accounts asap.

If it is losing money in fact as well as on paper, and at least some of the SMC press release is an accurate reflection, then the council won't want it. There's a general assumption that taking the stadium back is a threat and offers leverage, but there is a possiblity that it works in the other direction. [uIf he's behaving rationally[/u, then Allam must, IMO, think that is the case. Otherwise, if it is potentially a little gold mine or even simply doesn't carry much risk, the council could 'generously' offer to unburden him.

the Council don't have a pair of gonads between them, gravy train, simple as that.

Dont get peoples dejection. Hes making the council out to be a load of useless numpties. Thats hardly gonna go down well in his quest for ownership of the KC is it

In my view he has taken the opinion that the council set up the SMC in the first place as they were scared to death of being left with a massive drain on council funds. He knows they have know appetite to take it back, especially if it is perceived to be loss making. Imagine the uproar if HCC have to cut budgets to front line services to prop up a loss making stadium for two sports teams to play in. To say the current losses at the SMC have been engineered is an understatement.

They should take it back - say to him that he shouldnt have to absorb the costs. Then they can get sponsorship for the Arena at a decent rate to attract sponsors, and rent out office space for the unused units. Put various events on at the stadium etc to generate income. Easy

Crafty from Allam

Use a relatively minor issue in terms of pictures around the place, get you lot booting off so all the media looks into it then come out with this statement citing bigger issues

Very crafty

Yeah i get that the council wouldn't want it but this must be the only smc is the country thats losing money.
But i'd guess that an independently ran smc would make a profit.

I'd love to see what this £3.5m was spent on in the stadium.

Its quite an interesting release.

The Council should see that the SMC is in fact keeping the burden of cost for them whilst maintaining their asset to the gold standard required.
Thats not something the Allams really want to do.

What is the SMC mortgaged to the tune of £3.5m for? It can't be secured against the stadium or other facilities as they don't own them. Is the £3.5m mortgage Hull City's against the user agreement? If so, there is confusion here between the two companies. OR has the SMC mortgaged future income from the sponsorship deal with KC - which seems more feasible.

Our user agreement sees us getting the facility at less than the SMC want, but they cannot do anything about that.

In the meantime, we have to ensure we do nothing that harms our club and continues to fend off the SMC.