To be fair, we’ve all had experience of reporting to bosses who know less than us!

Enjoyed the forum, it flowed well and for the most part had some good questions raised, a refreshing change and hopefully something the club continues to host maybe twice a year.

They've got the priorities right, investing in the playing squad and backroom staff whilst reconnecting with the community game. Starting to win on the pitch will see things like the 'matchday experience' thrive off the back of it.

I genuinely think i'm now ready to forgive Richie Myler for cheating on Helen Skelton.

Apparently Hood is a good friend of Thirkhill and they have worked together on a few business ventures in the past. Whether he's got much interest in Rugby League I've no idea, but it would be a strange move for him if he didn't. A well run Hull FC can be profitable I'm sure, but the amounts you would be talking would be pocket change to a guy worth nearly half a billion. Surely he has an interest beyond simply making a profit.

Most interesting for me was the stadium comments. So despite the victimhood some of our fans have manufactured about the SMC and no doubt helped by lies spread by Rovers fans AT said him and David have looked at the lease and think it’s a very good deal. Two self made businessmen worth half a billion quid have looked at it and knowing the terms have decided to buy the club, I think we can safely say it’s a complete myth when white trolls claim the rent is ‘crippling’ Hull.

Also, maybe it’s just my interpretation but the words AT used were interesting. He said they didn’t really want to re-negotiate the lease. I know it’s been mentioned on here but never confirmed that the lease is actually for 50 years but the 25 year point was simply there for re-negotiation if circumstances had majorly changed. To me that seems to make massive sense now. I find it hard to believe the club would have been sold especially to major players like that had there been any chance we could be ‘booted out’ and left homeless in 3 years, again another popular myth mostly peddled by our red and white friends. AP and AT seemed very relaxed about the situation and seems maybe as fans we’ve put too much emphasis on the 2027 stadium situation.

Just watched the extra 15 minutes and recommend it to everyone to do so. One thing that has really struck me from that extra part is that they acknowledge that the matchday experience has to improve and whilst they talk about improving fan zone's pre and post match, they still feel the best way to do that is by delivering an attractive product on the field that we can get behind.

I think something that also added fuel to the flames on the lease situation was AP's very poor relationship with the Allam's when they were in charge of City and the SMC which at times was publicly fought out in the media. That's not a dig at him as he's made it very clear how much that relationship has improved with the new owners, just saying it helped create a picture in people's minds of tensions and that the lease may have been more precarious than it actually was in reality.

AP even admitted in that extra bit of the forum that the club has been choosing not to pay for certain things at the stadium whereas the myth there was that the SMC were behind it all.

Absolutely. I mentioned that on here just before the forum. AP called it stadium branding and we’ve taken a decision not to spend on it. With Covid and such it was likely the right call and hopefully now might be able to make it more like home again. Hardly fair if City pay for these things (the tiger print on the stairs for instance) if Hull got it for free. Get things sorted on the pitch and then I’m sure the other stuff will follow.

I especially enjoyed the bit where AT mentioned about a conversation he had with Nigel Wood?

With both Hull clubs cashed up and with good coaches there clashes will be the hottest tickets North of the Trent

We are lucky to play at one of the best stadiums in the North of England. We might not own the ground but therein lies the business opportunity. To compare our clubs situation to that of the unwashed across the river (as so many of them do) is futile. Both clubs have been close to liquidation over the years and have dealt with the situation in different ways due to the circumstances at the time. A SWOT analysis of any business would reveal premises ownership to be in both the Strengths and Weakness column. Hull FC doesn't have the capital costs of stadium purchase or the maintenance, cleaning, refurbishment and revenue costs (as they are included as set costs in the lease agreement) of maintaining a deprecating stadium asset. Providing the club ensures that revenue streams increase and exceed revenue costs over a counting periods Hull FC is a financially viable business. The business opportunities will be realised by improving first team performance and improvement of community involvement. This will see increasing attendances which will drive the other elements of the match day experience.
All of this "Hull City's tenants" stuff is complete nonsense. Hull FC at the best stadium in the league is good for all parties concerned. Even Paul Lakin recognises it, which leaves him out of sync with the majority if his club's supporter base!

I think it's fairly obvious Pearson, just run out of cash, went all out signing players just before covid and it was pretty much downhill from there, made some poor decisions with coaches too.

But he has kept us a float and we are still in SL and found us what seems like good RL owners.

Anyone else still having a "pinch me" moment after yesterday? Still not sure it's sunk in yet.

Think the recruitment for the 2026 season will be very eye catching with the funds we will have available, could see some significant mid-season signings for 2025 also.

Just a point of order here in that yep you are completely right. Adam always made a big deal of it cos he wanted to negotiate a better deal for the club and used the 25 years clause as an excuse. I would respectfully point out that I have mentioned the terms of the lease as I understand them in here at least a dozen times and indeed in the Dentist Diary on many other occasions over the 15 years that ran. The lease is for 50 years with a chance to review by all parties after 25. But any changes had I believe to be mutually agreed by all. So if anyone is completely happy we continue on for another 25 years.

That inclusion was insisted upon by the owners of both clubs (City and FC) in 2001 in case either club had fallen on hard times and needed to renegotiate it to survive. The 50 year lease and insistence that at least two of the Cities Clubs signed up to use the Stadium, plus a massive community commitment was part of the agreement with the Government, before they would sanction release the 35m of the Capital funds gained by the council from the sale of KC.

Incidentally I believe there is also a clause about it having to be renegotiated immediately were we relegated from Super League (Just us not City) because of the massive difference between the financing of the two leagues, built in to protect our tenure, which was always a major worry for me under the Allams, cos I could see them using it not as it was intended but against us had we gone down. The deal particularly the percentage of receipts clauses is not ideal, but was agreed by Adam as chair of Hull City (of course it was as he was the only agency that would take up control of the SMC at the time as the Stadium was deemed too small for some of the major national Stadium Management organisations) and Richo (who was personally planning only a short term stay anyway) before it was signed. There is flexibility in it but that is in the gift of the SMC as the Allam's gleefully used it against us in their reign. Well that's how I remember it anyway and for my sins I was in the room when it was signed by the two owners and Cllr Pat Doyle Leader of the Council and John North Head of HCC Industrial Development.