The problem is that AP is not "rich". Sure compared to myself and other posters he is very comfortable but compared to the Allams he is poor who compared to the owners of Manchester City are poor. It's all relative. The latest guide that we may have to the cost of a new stadium may be the cost of Hull KR's North Stand which cost circa £8 million nearly 10 years ago for 2,000 seats. So 4 such stands would cost a minimum of £32 million without allowing for inflation and a capacity of 8,000 is not big enough. Even with free or low-cost land, it cannot be built without some serious financial backers and these backers will want a return on their investment. The Council won't be able to help; they're strapped for cash so that leaves supplying the land. And selling land at less than the market value may be illegal. I heard probably 5 years ago now that he had explored the possibility of building a stadium on the site of the old Birds Eye factory on Hessle High Road but I don't know how true this is. But with only 7 years left on the lease he has to move quickly. As said previously the cheapest option may well be to purchase the football club.

Probably EY, but at the moment all the grass is being removed, hope they are not selling that as well.

Many interesting points made re the SMC.

I wonder if this concept of a stadium being managed by a company created specifically to do so, is unique to the KCOM or if it’s a common practise?
How does DW Stadium work ? Or the Salford /Sale Sharks arrangement ? Etc etc. Is it transparent and fair in other arrangements ? Or does it work against one of its host teams as with the KCOM stadium arrangement??

One would think also that the council, in handing over management of the stadium, to the said, SMC, it would have been far wiser to have given equal control to both users/teams ?

Yes hindsight is a fine thing, but of course the way ours operates, the controlling party would always butter their own bread first wouldn’t they?. Wouldn’t that be clear to anyone unless rules guaranteeing fairness had been drawn up first by the council. But they were not !!

And the other party (HullFC) would then, effectively become paying tenants, whilst the SMC can have accounts that are tied to the association football club and may not reflect what is actually being paid by the football club, whereas the true tenant ie HullFC is not tied to the SMC in a business or accounting sense, so FC know exactly what they are paying as it leaves their accounts ‘never to return’

If there are other examples of SMC type arrangements in Sport how do they work ? What is the benchmark ? Do they all have relatively new stadia with tired even dilapidated look ? Are they all running at a loss like the SMC ? Is an SMC actually needed ? Could it be dissolved ?

The whole idea of an SMC seems to be a misnomer to me, because they are not actually managing it, the stadium is actually being mis-managed, and the evidence is clear for every travelling supporter to witness, every time they enter it, to our shame.

Surely the SMC has to be accountable in some way ? It must have minimum targets of safety/ cleanliness/ hygiene, structural wellbeing etc. If they are not achieving those minimum levels, surely they are not fit and proper managers of such an operation?.

I wonder how Derby County was run when Adam was there ? what percentage of 1 teams turnover went into
The management of Pride Park ? And did that one team manage to keep an even bigger stadium than the KCOM in good order ?

There is something not right at all about the whole contrived way the SMC/ Tigers arrangement works, lack of clarity, absence of checks and balances. A Situation which is slowly squeezing the Airlie Birds to financial bursting point.

In a normal renting situation the tenant has a choice to leave and rent at better value, whenever charges are increasing whilst services and quality of accommodation reduces. However, the Council have fashioned an arrangement where their is no alternative for tenant Hull FC.
They, the council have created a recipe for disaster. This is serious, and without intervention one association football club could be responsible for the death of its partner Rugby League Football Club in full view of the local council.

Of that there is no doubt, it’s real and happening, and the council look on, whilst their lack of foresight in their decision making must have them wondering, what actually could be the worst case scenario of the folly of their incompetence?

The council need to act now, there is an iceberg ahead , the council have seen it and they have the wheel and the opportunity to change the present status quo or they too may be left with blood on their hands if this great club, present since 1865 falls simply because the people who built and owned the stadium, have allowed, without legal recourse, for it to be delivered into the hands of those who wish only discomfort and pain to it’s partners who play, and whose supporters love Rugby League, who of course should from day 1 of the stadium’s existence, had absolutely equal say in the management of the stadium.
Wilfs often held back comments re donning tin hats and fighting for the club may become reality sooner than we think, unless the council act soon.
Right Now is the time for the Council to act before it is too late.

I think Man City had a similar arrangement when they first moved into the Etihad from Maine Road.

The stadium was built for the Commonwealth Games and then converted for football. At the time, they could keep the revenue from the first 30,000 fans (average from Maine Road) and then shared 50% of the remaining gate. Originally the Council owned the ground, but don’t know if this was via a SMC?

Not sure what arrangement they have got since their mega rich owners took over. However, that stadium is a success story as it’s been extended capacity wise and a whole sporting village built.

The question you have to ask is why if the SMC is losing so much money under Allam did they ask for £5 million for it on top of a deal for the club.