Absolutely, minimum of 15K would be needed for us we were getting over 10K last season and we were an absolute dogs egg of a team.

I alwayts thought a 16k stadium would be fine. I know we can get 22-23k for the Derby, but thats with 4k Rovers fans. a 16k stadium would mean we would only give them 900 tickets - see how they like it

That was surprisingly somewhat positive from you Bonaire!

I think those plans were for a 12k stadium. All pie in the sky for me. If it did happen they'd probably increase the mkm to 30k seats which would be too big.

I'm hoping the new owners can do something about match day prices. It's about £30 a game to sit in the east stand I think

A few weeks ago people were getting their knickers in a twist that we missed out on 0.2 IMG points against the likes of Rovers, Cas and Wakey for stadium usage. It would solve that problem.

The rule is 50% of capacity to gain those points lost isn't it? (ignoring the LED rubbish), averaged 11.5K last season, so an extra 1K+ would get us over the 50% mark we're not far off clawing back those points by any means.

From memory I think the total amount available is 1 point for that criteria and you score the percentage your average attendance against the capacity of the ground. So if you had a 10K stadium and averaged 10 you get the full point, so 5K in the same stadium would get 0.5 of a point or something like that. I reckon we’d have got about 0.4 points. Even Wigan would have only been around 0.6 points that would be easily achievable for us with a decent side.

I'm not sure from what I'm hearing from the council that the bit about the 10,000 stadium is totally correct as at present that bit is 'a moveable Feast' as is its capacity, but otherwise the purchase of the land is well down the road and then its all systems go. The liberal Democrats are on board with the scheme and pushing ahead in the guildhall.

The Fair is a thorny one though because there could be a public backlash on reducing its size and indeed if the Showman's Guild of GB decide to boycott it because of the reduction in size. The fairground layout at present featured around 130 sites that are 'owned' by different showman's families the rights for which have been passed down over the years from generation to generation. Some sites that are allocated separately every year are owned fully by the council whilst the rest (the majority) operate under this ancient convention of family rights.

If the site is reduced, there will be a lot of hand wringing and doom mongering from them as they talk of robbing the community of the fair, its heritage etc. they are a good crowd in general but in the end for them its all about money as it is the biggest earner by far that some get in their whole travelling year. Many I knew told me they lived through the winter from the takings. Whatsmore, an alternative site is completely out of the question as planning and safety legislation deems that any new site for the fair would have to be up to the standards of a current pleasure park with in addition massive car parking provision and with horrendous traffic management issues and anyway development land within the City Boundaries is extremely limited.

So for now as our new owner says we have to concentrate on getting as many as possible through the gates to get those points back.

Playing in the best and possibly the biggest stadium in the country makes a bit of a farce of the percentage of capacity rules in the gradings but at present it is what it is.

Agree also that any stadium would need to be 16k capacity minimum from the start and with scope to expand. As even during a very poor few years we were attaining plus 10K crowds so a £10k capacity gives no room for growth of the fan base or club whatsoever.

So for me moving to a new stadium is not realistic when we can build the fan base with a winning side and more professional off field set up.

It will be a great day if they bin the fair off. The site would generate income for the city if developed rather than sucking £millions out every year

The fairground site is also a complete eyesore for the rest of the year.

I agree to an extent as the Council need to find ways of generating income for the public coffers much like many up and down the Country who are all struggling to fill financial holes. Many are selling off assets such as land and/or buildings however that in itself is shortsighted as once you sold off the silver you have nothing else to bargain with.

I personally feel HCC need to use the land around stadium to develop a leisure area to a) bring people in to the City anot just just the suburbs and b) set it up so it generates a yearly incone for the Council.

As much as I’m one for keeping the city’s traditions I think Hull Fair sees more money going out the city these days than it brings in.

A city the size of Hull should have a good quality leisure complex and area.

Still feel for Hull FC staying at the stadium is the best option as it is still the best stadium in SL.

Thirkhill also commented that the MKM would be home for 'at least the next 10 years' which seemed a sensible time to me. The stadium would be 32 years old by then and we may decide it's a bit long in the tooth by then and want other options.

Agree people who have businesses have told me over the years that the pubs and restaurants have a lull before and after the fair as people are spent up and the fair income of course mostly goes out of town (except for the councils rent fees)

I'd like to see the club go back to targeting one other game that isn't a derby to get a good crowd. One thing that was better in the Kath era than Pearson's era was games against Bradford and Leeds felt like big events, we had crowds of 16-19k for these games 20 or so years ago. The club would give almost daily '12k seats sold' type comms and hype it up. The then new stadium was more of an attraction to away fans than it is now after they've all been many times though.