What I am saying is there are two types of owners in sport; Those who are guided by an emotional attachment to ONE specific club and are therefore prepared to effectively play the role of philanthropist.

Not ideal in the long-term I grant you, but fine as long as it lasts.

Then there are the cold, hard investors like Pearson - a man who would sell his grandmother if the price was right.

He's decided to buy into Hull FC...it could just of easily been Milton Keynes Dons, Salford Reds, Sheffield Steelers or Wasps RUFC...wherever he spotted most profit potential.

I don't honestly see what fixed assets Hull FC hold as a club at the moment, or what riches are on the horizon for RL as a sport, to constitute a lucrative 'end game'. Or are we simply expected to believe he is just buying into the club to 'milk' healthy dividends each year?

From what I personally know and have heard from various associates of Pearson, there has to be more in it for him...a hitherto unrevealed bigger picture.

Redevelopment of the Boulevard perhaps?

Worst trolling for a while (and you have some stiff competition).

How do you redevelope something that doesn't exist anymore?

Disappointingly whilst you try to claim you want a sensible debate on the relative merits of an emotional or commerical owner of a club, the bit I've underlined is full evidence that you're ill-equipped to so. You admit that Hudgell's failure to run a self-sustaining business, and intention to take on a further £2m of debt, is "not ideal" in the long term but dismiss it as inconsequential. No administration lasts forever. Are you seriously suggesting that it's of no consequence that little progress is being made to prepare Rovers for its inevitable sale down the line? That as long as Hudgell is swaying about on top of bar stools and stopping clocks at 6.42 in the bar at Craven Park tomorrow will take care of itself. Forgive me, but you're simply in denial of long term consequences. Lucky us. You are confirming 2 things hereFC made profits of £250k a year at one point when we had some success. You are saying that Pearson's agenda is not driven by FC making profits. I think you need to be clearer about what the conspiracy theory here is, exactly. You implied earlier that he is a pawn in the Allam's game to acquire the KC, but oddly failed to respond to my earlier question on how those plans are progressing with the stadium owners. Perhaps you missed it. How do you think that's going? Council engaged and ready to roll? I'd say, er, no. OK. So to be crystal clear, you are now saying Pearson has spent £3m on the club, binned off coaching staff and players, brought in a DOR and sought-after new coach,and is talking up filling the KC and paying fees for players, on a sort of twisted route to the actual final destination, the supreme prize if you will, of relocating FC to a much smaller non existent ground in a residential area at the behest of the Allams. Introducing the Boulevard is a new line of argumentation, granted. Perhaps it's easier to fabricate this than address my own points on the Allams. Glad we got that cleared up. I do find it interesting, but entirely unsurprising that you have failed to address the key points. 1) No club stays in one ownership forever. To optimise the chances of re-sale, it's not a bad idea to build up a profitable business to make it a more compelling investment for the next incumbent. 2) Pearson's new broom has provided hope. More so than the previous regime. This is a good thing for the supporters, right? 3) You paint the spectre of the scheming Allams in the background, yet ignore my point that as it stands Rovers are more in bed with them than FC are.

I think you're just being mean now, personally.

I see JMR's been on this board for the last 15 minutes so can only guess he's creating a reply that addresses none of my points but suggests Pearson's actually being paid by the Allams to sell FC to Neil Hudgell with a 275 year lease at Costello with no planning consent for any more capacity ever. Diana was murdered too. FACT.

To address your points; 1) We are not talking about football. With no global TV rights deals in the offing, there is a clear ceiling to what a provincial RL club is ever going to be worth, particularly one based in a congested sports market. Pearson will not 'price the club out of the market', therefore his actual investment will be limited.

2) Don't disagree.

3) I merely suggested that the 'scheming Allam's' (your words) may form part of Pearson's 'end game'. This is borne out of his obvious reluctance to break association with them through Hull City. I am not alone in thinking that the Allam's 'soft loan' to Rovers and Pearson's purchase of FC are synchronised somehow!

Pearson's exact motives will come out in time, but I find it very hard to believe he is only interested in £200-300k residual profits, and that is all!

Neither Hull FC or hull KR hold any significant fixed assets. Both stadia are owned by ther Local Authority and operated via commercial concerns... Hull FC via the Allam owned SMC and Hull KR via a trust (formerly gain group) that hold a 99 year lease on the stadium.

The principal difference for profitability is that FC (after paying rental) do not maintain the facility, nor are they responsible for its upkeep. Hull KR do not pay substantial rental, but are responsible for the stadium's upkeep and meeting any requirements from the sports governing body.

The stadium upkeep and ongoing work mean that CP is a massive drain on the clubs finances and there will always be unbudgeted expenditure. The North stand is the biggest project the club have on the horizon and more significant than the East Stand extension. Simply because the temporary stand is alreay a huge drain on the clubs finances and has (for each of the last 3 years) been close to losing its safety certificate.

Personally I don't think there needs to be a conspiracy theory behind Adam Pearson behind taking over the club. I see it as a straight forward business proposition that compliments his current position at City.

I agree there isn't as much money to be made in Rugby league as there is from (Premiership football). However, Hull can become much more profitable and Pearson can rightly make a return from a reasonably modest investment.

Hull have one of the best set ups in the game. The likely purchase of the KC to the Allams will have probably encouraged Pearson to buy, just as much as he may have been encouraged to buy Hull (by the Allams) to pave the way for the decision to go through smoothly. The potential for Pearson starts here. With an increased capacity, he will no doubt look to grow Hull's strong fan base further and incentivise fans accordingly.

If we had a 35,000 seater stadium, I'm sure he would look to fill it against Rovers for example. Therrefore, gate revenues will increase.

The cost of the team is in affect fixed via the salary cap. However, with more success on the field, further revenue will follow. An appearance at Wembley gives the club c£500k and a Grand Final would give a similar amount.

Therefore, with a bit of commercial know how and hopefully a Coach who can propel us up the league, then the clubs profitability will further increase.

Pearson is not daft, he knows Hull have a very solid fan base and that this can not be merged with Rovers (or vice versa). I think the decison to release Agar is also a sign that he knows he would have lost money (season tickets) if he had continued with him into next season.

To me the future looks good. The future will be a profiatable Hull FC playing at the KC and hopefully with some silverware to come. Profits will grow and good luck to Pearson if he makes some money on the back of this. It's his investment and no one else put the money in to buy the club.

I agree, i can i say what a great post this is, its the most sense i've seen written on here for a good while !

If the Allams purchase the stadium, the council could always use the cash to build us a new ground and upgrade Rovers' so that in effect they've touched all three clubs?

Wouldn't mind seeing Hull play in an 18-20k stadium with standing. The atmosphere is dying at the all-seated KC.
Could have an agreement to play our home derby at the KC as well to maximise attendances averages and (if a good deal) profit?

Failing that, maybe Pearson could hire someone to rip up a chunk of seats in the corner of the East Stand after City play on the Saturday so that we have a lovely standing area for the Sunday home games? Could call it "Threepenny Corner!"

It was pretty good at the start of the Wire game. Once we get a decent coach on board and stop playing crap rugby, the atmosphere will come back.

Extract from HDM article rlhttps://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/don-t-want-buy-stadium-ndash-want-free/story-13242691-detail/story.htmlrl

"At the recent full council meeting held in July, council leader Steve Brady was asked two simple questions. Have the Allams made a formal offer to purchase the KC Stadium and have the Allams recently asked for a meeting to even discuss the purchase of the stadium?

On both questions the answer was "no". That is now a matter of public knowledge.

Now for my opinion. The Allams don't want to buy the KC, they want it for free, or if not free, then not the many millions of pounds the KC Stadium and the surrounding land is worth.

Having got it, they then want to raise a mortgage of £60 million to pay for development of a sports village.

If I am right, what we have is the Allams expecting the people of Hull to donate assets worth in excess of £60 million so they can build facilities worth many more millions, using borrowed money, secured on the valuable assets we currently own, and then to rent that facility back to us and when it is paid for they retain ownership.

Their plans are breathtaking in their audacity."

Totally agree