Hull pay in excess of £600k

Also, I don't believe that pearson has mentioned reducing the cost, merely re-negotiating the deal. 2 very different things

What return do the council get from the freehold of New Craven Park? Perhaps they're planning to renegotiate the peppercorn lease with KCD, with knock-on effects on the sub-lease with Hull KR.


This is the worst observation ever. Come back when you've read the SMC accounts.

the deal was made back in the early 00's when 7,500 was a rare and spectacular crowd at the Boulevard. You also have to consider that we were not a regular 'playoff' team, and relegation was not completely out of the question (imagine how nervous our 2008 and 2009 seasons would have been without franchising )

IIRC it was Richo who struck the deal with Hull CC and at the time Pearson was near apoplectic when he finally saw it and made an attempt to renegotiate on Hull City's behalf



I wouldn't take anything he ever said as gospel and looking at his quoted figure, I doubt it covers more than ground rent, with all the other ancillaries (ticket office, office space, groundsman etc) being an aded extra and appearing somewhere else in Wigan's accounts

If you'd actually bothered to read my post you'll have seen I was responding to a quote specifically about ground rent.

HTH.

I'd give up if I were you. Start with learning the difference between a gift and a loan.

We were given a gift and all of you lot fantasise that it's a loan

Right. It's important for the SMC to have a successful tenant in Hull FC. With the correct new terms it's quite possible for FC to continue to contribute these levels - and more - to the SMC and also see our own income improve with much higher crowds.

Forcing FC's crowds to be low does not benefit the SMC in the long term either, as their tenant's financial strength will continue to weaken. Both Hull and the SCM can gain from the increased revenues that higher FC attendances will generate, with the appropriate renegotiation to the agreement.

Indeed Adam was none to pleased with the deal Richo got for FC seems strange that he does not like it now.

The thing is the user agreement protects the club in hard times and we have had fairly good times since we moved to the KC. I would not like to predict that the times of high crowds will continue forever. Whilst I welcome the move to look at the user agreement I would not like to come back on here in 2020 to find we where in deep do do because the crowd has dropped to 4k and we where paying the same as we did in 2013 when crowds hit an average of 15k.

How is SMC only running at break even when the council received £48k over the first 8 years. What IS required is that the salaries/outgoings/expenses of those who own/run the SMC be looked at and how the income taken in is spent. After all they are the caretakers of the ground on behalf of the council & thus the people of Hull.
There has obviously being poor management/ownership of SMC which has under utilised the stadium as a whole (shown with the lack of non sporting events taking place) but given there seems be little incentive to make a 'profit' to pay back to the council it wouldn't surprise me if the salaries/monies taken by the SMC ensure that the council do get very little back by paying themselves over inflated salaries within the upper echolons of the hierachy.
I don't know what the full turnover of SMC is (but must more than a couple of million pounds annually) but for it to make so little 'profit' to return back to the council over so many years is disturbing and somewhat dubious to say the least.

Download the accounts from Companies House for quid- there's a full P&L in there detailing how much income is generated from different areas suchs as FC, sponsorhip, Gemtec arena etc and a list of costs, albeit some quite generic headings. Basically the company turns over £5m with the same costs. Clearly with the owners of the SMC being the same as the owners of City (Bartlett at the time of the last accounts), you might interpret the fact that the company is so close to breakeven every year off £5m turnover as a bit "creative". E.g. "Management Charge £0.2m", "General £0.4m".

So does it state what the salaries of the SMC owners/higher paid execs are or does it give just a general figure for 'wages'?

It sounds good in theory, but it is hard to see a model that makes very much difference.

Increased attendance is good for Hull FC and the SMC [inow[/i.

The extent to which FC's crowds are artificially depressed by the SMC deal, is difficult to judge. I'd be genuinely curious to know the model that Pearson would prefer.

What would you ask for?