Not really. They don't take any dividends, that much we know. Apparently their loans have been repaid, so they don't get any interest. The fact that FC make any profit at all, in the context of the other financial "performances" in SL, the fact we spend the cap, there or thereabouts, we pay transfer fees, run a reasonable sized academy and pay a commercial rent for a fancy stadium, would suggest the board don't dial in for a monthly FC conference call from their yachts in the Caribbean, all paid for by us. It's possible, but unlikely, IMO. The alternative scenario is that they actually enjoy being on the board of a SL club and have its best interests at heart, and their valuation takes that into account. Ridiculous I know, but it is a possibility.

I'd be for a change,

Looks like the Allams at some point will have a share issue at City to let fans own a share of the club...

Would not want this to happen, the board have turned the club around financially when a lot of other clubs are going to the wall. They are doing a good job all round apart from the playing side. Now if i had concrete proof the board were to blame for our onfield situation then i would have a different view.

yes but with their debts how long do think they will manage it for?.

Personally I am not for a change. Sometimes steady progress builds a long term sustainable position rather than the short term glory that throwing cash at it does. Repaying the directors loans will have given them a cash income over the past few years (and is more tax efficient than drawing a salary or dividend) and the capital value of their shares will have risen on the back of an improved net worth. Our investment in youth and quality british players is a more sustainable investment than short term imports.

Would ownership of the club allow the rugby lease to be varied to our detriment? If Allams owned both clubs and the ground then they would hold all the cards - would it be cheaper to buy the club and do this rather than try and buy out the lease?

If it aint broken, dont fix it - and for me it isnt broken (save for the odd cup or two!).

I have no issues with the board, and believe they have done a fantastic job turning our club around.

What the Allams have promised city is just what football needs, I'm not sure if it's just a pipedream though, I hate city but if the Allams are genuine they seem like the best kind of owners around at the moment, talk of 10 quid tickets, share issues, sustainability etc should be music to every football supporters ears, especially when you see scum like the Glazers in charge of Manchester United or the reckless spending of some of the clubs it's refreshing, I'm not sure if they are just naive though.

Rugby league and Hull FC especially are in less need of this, the game is closer to the fans as it is and we live by our own means, has people have said if it ain't broke don't fix it, but the Allams seem genuine enough up to now.

Stick with the board, at the moment off the field is great and they seem to be making strides to put things right on the field, preapared to invest in players for example.

Some won't agree but I feel that if we dont succed this year Agar will go and they will go for a top replacement.

I very much doubt the club is so awash with cash that the board take salaries to reduce the number to an "acceptable" level. The context here is that the majority of clubs, pretty much all including Warrington and Wigan IIRC, have notes in their accounts that the accounts are only prepared on a going concern basis because of the confirmation of ongoing support by the directors. FC pay hundreds of thousands in rent to the SMC, this much you can deduce from their accounts, it's hardly a gift-wrapped peppercorn rent. So in summary we have big outgoings and turn in better results than most of the competition. I don't believe that all 5 directors can be living it up at our expense, although obviously this is just an opinion, albeit with some pieces of "evidence".

Most of the other boards in SL have directors shovelling money in left right and centre. Is it so ludicrous that, if the venture is cost-neutral, that it's an interesting hobby?

So the general consensus is that most fans arnt interested in success but are more concerned in how much money the club makes. No wonder this club has no desire to succeed when the fans have no passion but prefer to play it safe.

Westerman was a panic buy to sell season tickets after every else had turned us down. We didnt actually need him as its a position we have plenty of cover in.

Disagree on both counts Seb, we have been after him for while.

Also in our squad I dont see a ball handling LF.

If he didn't sign we would be short in the prop department.

The board has the club going in the right direction on and off the field, it's maybe going slower than the supporters want due to past mistakes by the board and previous coachs..