I would love for us, the fans, to get the money together to replace the memorabilia in the JW suite. The great man deserves it. Perhaps FC Voices could organise something?

Just a thought...

IF the SMC was independent and we were still offered the picture agreement would we thing this would be an easier pill to swallow?

Whichever way you look at this taking down the images of people who suites are named after is wrong!

Is the problem with the SMC down to previous owners and another mess Allams are trying to sort out? Increasing revenue I guess is vital however, there must have been other strategies that could have been used first without putting rent up, creating additional costs for tenants or being given the land for development.

Not only are you illiterate, judging by your poorly constructed posts, but you appear to lack any form of reading skills.

The SMC get a rental income. Most of which is fixed from two tenants. If they set that rent under the running costs then that's poor management on their part. Now, considering the rent agreements have been revised since the original agreements, and that the Allams took on theses (or were involved in revising them) it would appear they are not quite as business savvy as some would like to make out.

Also, if they have lost rental income, why not utilize the stadium with other events (concerts etc)

But I doubt your bright enough to think that laterally

I could be wrong, but I thought that the ‘business rates’ are levied to each business tenant separately, and not to the SMC wholly?

The rates are calculated to the size of the rented area x the rent value.

Unless the lease is locked to include rates and rent:
FC will have their business rates according to the rentable value. City will have their rates according to the rentable value, and the SMC will have their rates according to the rentable value.

Do the SMC actually rent any space at the KC?

The fact they are NOT independent is and always will be the problem for me.

BUT. I want to know that we are treat fairly and with the same terms as Hull City FC. This means that they should currently be charged the same amount for displaying there pictures where ours should be.

If not that is clear discrimination.

Quote: The wrong Messiah "A total boycott of sales in and around the ground should be our first line of protest as as already been mooted. The Allams through the SMC own the catering franchise so start to hit them there.'" these hold the catering franchise www.spotless.com/uk/Food/venues/KC-Stadium.htm

Quote: The wrong Messiah "A total boycott of sales in and around the ground should be our first line of protest as as already been mooted. The Allams through the SMC own the catering franchise so start to hit them there.'" these hold the catering franchise www.spotless.com/uk/Food/venues/KC-Stadium.htm

The problem is; 90% of what he pays from Hull City stays with him as owner of the SMC with the other 10% (profit) going to the HCC or none if he 'claims' the company is loss making.. If FC pay the same then he gets our 90% thus us facing the highest bill..

My suggestion would be that if the SMC is such a burden and 'loss making' to him, then give (or sell) the company to someone independent to run. Bet he won't go for it!!

Also, I don't think FC or the fans should offer to pay anything for these pictures. Why line his pockets? Hit him in the pocket!! Don't pay for the pictures and don't buy anything in the ground. Maximise OUR tenancy and milk it as much as we can to our advantage without paying ANYTHING we don't need to!!

But "the community" paying £500 to have pictures of a local hero displayed in a community stadium...it really doesn't show the SMC in a good light even in the eyes of a neutral

Had another reply from Councillor Sheila Waudby this time simply saying she agrees with me as does Terry Geraghty and to also contact Steve Brady whoch i already have.

Have started a new thread, just for email contact and copy letters if anyone has any good ones viewtopic.php?p=17264600&tsmp=1360852445#p17264600

Have started a new thread, just for email contact and copy letters if anyone has any good ones viewtopic.php?p=17264600&tsmp=1360852445#p17264600

It can be denied quite easily by simply looking at what he did to Johnny Whiteley.

What's with all the anger and abuse?
Maybe you should seek help.

It was a shocking thing to do. The photo's should be put back up immediately. However, it wasnt done as a personal attack on Johnny Whiteley but rather to get his bigger point across. It was clumsy, pretty crass but ultimately very effective.

Or hes just writing off against Tax ?