rlAllam's key financialsrl

I'm at a loss as to which company controls the SMC: Superstadium Management Company Ltd or Superstadium Holdings Ltd. Either way, something seems to have changed round about 2011

I like the way the "British Egyptian Society" accounts form a pyramid !

This is why the council should order a full forensic audit of SMC/Whatever's accounts

The accounts for Allamhouse are quite interesting, if you like that sort of thing. Accounts are the consolidation of the Marine stuff, City, SMC etc. Latest ones are up to 2013, so exclude City's promotion season.

The group actually posted an operating loss of £3m before parachute payments and profits on selling players.
Dividends of £2m were paid - presumably to Allam himself, I think he's the only shareholder (could be wrong)
No tax charge in the year - a credit in fact.

I didn't think you could pay a dividend if making a loss?

It's an operating loss - after parachute payments and player profits PBT is £2.4m. I think the rule is on negative reserves(cumulative) rather than in-year.

Ha - so Allam used the parachute payments to pay himself a dividend, then? £2M paid to himself against £2.4M parachutes and money from selling players? Is that what the parachute payments are intended for ?

£1.5M he wants the council to pay up for a plastic pitch for City's use at the KC. Then he'll leave the arena alone...

City's parachute payment in 2012/13 was £5.8m.

Instead of being abusive which is against the forum rules and makes you look stupid to boot, why not explain in detail what you disgreee with, why and exactly how things work..away you go sonny, you're homework has being set.

I think the certainty of affordable outgoing is the nub of it. An entirely sensible desire, but when combined with the council's own equally understandable desire for certainty of no outgoings, all the risk is borne by the independent operating body. Nobody takes on risk for the sake of it - there has to be a pay-off of some sort. For a commercial operation that'll almost invariably be profit. There were, from what I've read on here, no independent takers when the SMC when it was first set up. So it might well have to be incentivised with a better deal. But, you can't charge the tenants much more - it might tip Hull FC over the edge, which'd be self defeating, and Pearson would surely just stick with the status quo, imperfect as it is. Allam is hardly likely to make life easy for the council, by paying more rent while giving up control.

People might suggest other possible revenue generating opportunities, such as concerts - but they carry risk too.
As you say, It would be the best outcome - but it's not a very likely one in the foreseeable, I fear. Looks like a stalemate to me.

These were certainly my thoughts, but the new not-for-profit leisure company that is assuming control of council facilities adds a different option, wouldn't you think?

some very interesting stuff on Burnsy twitter feed tonight!

I've been wondering for a while that maybe Mr Allam has found a "buyer" who wants a few loose ends tidying up, like, say, a Category 2 Academy.
They've been around for a while now, and only City and Burnley in the Premiership haven't got at least level 2.
You'd have thought Mr Allam would have been making plans for one a couple of years ago.