well said sheldon, in a nutshell mate!

One thing he (Pearson)saidat the 1st fans event was he'd never lied, and he had no intention of starting now. We may not always want to hear what is said, but it will be the truth.

I'd sugest that the past few weeks, and the latest announcement have shown that to be true.

As you say, very refreshing.

Parasol's sponsorship of Rovers last year was £nil according to their accounts.

So, just as Rovers have "10,000 break even gates" thrown in their faces every verse end, it appears you need 14,500 to break even? Good luck with that, lets hope you get 2 home derbies per year (as per 2007) to prevent you missing this target every season.

That old line

How many years you gonna use that for. You're a SL club end of and therefore should be competing like every other club.

If Rovers get over 8k fans they see it as a success.

Hull have got over 8K season ticket holders and see it as disappointing.

Says it all!

Aye. Fair enough.

Looking forward, I think Pearson and the HDM make some interesting points in the two articles released today, covering related issues.

The 2007 peak attendance of >14.5k did include 2 home derbies, so maybe ~13.8k would be a better figure for comparison. Although the previous era now seems to be considered disasterous, it did include a successful period in the middle of the decade, when gates increased - but not massively. A winning team, by itself probably isn't enough.

I think Pearson is effectively acknowledging that with the talk about changing the tenancy agreement, and delivering more attractive pricing. I've been playing with the figures and it is difficult to see a silver bullet. If you lower prices significantly, you're immediately offsetting a big part of the increase you get by getting more people in. A small decrease likely only has a small effect.
He presumably wants to persuade SMC to take a smaller fraction of the cash from the gate above 7.5k, providing the club with a greater incentive to increase attendance. SMC would be wise to take that, IMO - depending on what they get in return. The possibilty of more people above 7.5k works... to an extent. On top of that I'd want the crowd threshold lowering and/or a bigger basic ground rent. Assuming it is a business choice.

I agree that Pearson seems like the right man for the job. It does now look like a big job though. Investment takes time to bear fruit, and he seems to accept that further losses are possible or even likely.

On a more positive note, Hull FC have paid a number of fees for players in recent years, so they probably have more than most to re-direct to where it is needed most.

There may also be an element of painting this as the darkest hour before the dawn, given the ill-will between the old and new owners. Sets up next years figures as a good news story 12 months on. Spin never really dies, it just changes direction.

No it doesn't. Who exactly said Rovers see 8k+ as a success?

Success should be measured in the trophy cabinet when talking about sports clubs and in that respect both clubs are failing to meet aspirations.

I don't see a distinction. Unless 14499 is break even.

Any thoughts on what Pearson is aiming/hoping for there?

Didn't Hudgell say this time last year that 10k crowds wee needed to break even,hence the urgency for ground re-development?

No 8k isnt success when 10000 is needed.

Remind me was it 2010 when the 14k capacity Poorhouse Lane would be open?

As for cabinet full of trophies,

er,

our last one is from 2005.

Your last major one was, er.

hmmm