The SMC belongs to the Allams they would have to sell it for someone to take it over.

The council can "evict" the SMC from the KC complex for a breach the terms of the lease. If the court finds in their favour over the Airco they would have legal grounds for terminating the lease.

Anyone taking over the running of the complex would have to negotiate new agreements with Hull FC and Hull City AFC for the use of the stadium.

Complicated isn't it? No wonder Hull City Council have taken their time. Hopefully they've spent it wisely and asked all the right questions.

I think it would be in both clubs interests to agree a deal with the new lease holders of the KC. Maybe Allam is looking for a reason to blame the council for moving City to Melton?

No, but it could remove control of the stadium from the SMC.

it could all get very messy (and expensive!) I am not sure if the lease is HCC>SMC>Hull FC or if it's HCC>Hull FC and the SMC are managing agents.....one for Wilf?

Hull City AFC and Hull FC have user rights but have no legal interest as tenants, according to the City Council.

Under the current agreement Hull City AFC paid rent of nearly £5 million for the KC in the year ending 30 June 2014. West Ham will pay £1m a year for the Olympic Stadium. If the lease goes back to the Council do you think they'll get anywhere near £5 million a year rent?

Hull FC paid around half a million in rent. According to the accounts that doesn't cover the costs. I'm sure the Council have thought all this through.

you got a link to the comment about no legal agreement?

So from some of the comments on here you are suggesting that Allam maybe happy to lose the KC and renegotiate the lease to reduce the £5m p.a. rent? If this can not be done the spin would be council kick out City from the stadium. Also Hull FC can't afford the KC without another club to help with the bills.

What are the legal implications if the council were to take the KC off SMC and gift it to a joint partnership/company with an interested party. The joint company would own the KC and use equity to develop the land around the stadium and gain an income from this to help fund the running of the stadium without our championship soccer team? Profits would be shared and the council will gain additional rates from the development.

The Council couldn't borrow against a crown asset.

Where are you getting that West Ham figure from? Their rental terms are being kept confidential, and the rumours are £2m+, not £1m. Plus, naming rights for the stadium will be up for grabs as a further income possibility for the LLDC, rather than nailed on for a local firm. I'd wager they'll make much more money that way than KC likely pay., as they also will through their catering.

Also, have you seen the amount of uproar currently going on about how beneficial to West Ham and detrimental to the taxpayer the whole deal has been?

I've no idea what sort of rent might be renegotiated with City/the Council, but the West Ham comparison is fundamentally flawed and meaningless.

The figure of nearly £5m (£4.3m, I believe) drops down to £3.2m the previous year, so the rental must be very flexible.

Linked to number of games and the 2013/14 cup run?

The comparison was a poor one, IMO.