just got a quick mention on talk sport about the current situation and open for calls on it. If anyone who wrote one of them letters could call up and explain how bad the situation is and is not just about the odd photo here and there might open peoples eyes more?

He attempts to come across as ‘generous’ to the local community, because he has an agenda.

He believes that the local community vote can be bought, and many in the local community have been bought, and he has their vote.

[url=http://www.ambernectar.org/blog/2012/01/citys-accounts-observations/This gives a good insight into how the Allamhouse parent company injected £43M into Hull City[/url to, it would appear, transfer their net debt from other creditors to the parent company and to "buy" the club from Bartlett. I too wonder if the £2.8M loan to Bartlett is something to do with this £3.5M mortgage taken out during Bartlett's reign.

As others have said several questions are immediately apparent.

As City don't own the stadium, how could Bartlett procure a mortgage? Against other assets? If this debt was transferred to the SMC on the City buyout, why? How can the SMC take on the debt of one of their tenants? Either way, Hull FC have nothing to do with this mortgage and Allam knew what he was taking on when he bought City. His problem that he has chosen to make the SMC's?
[iOR[/i
Was the Mortgage an SMC mortgage. Taken out for what and secured against what?

What exactly are the £280,000 "rugby related costs"? As our rent covers matchday costs and some maintenance costs, could it be the removal cost of the pictures

? Or what? Without more information, the statement could mean anything. Spurious at the worst.

The agreement changes in 2005 and 2006? Again, meaningless with no meat on the bones.

And "2(f) - The adoption of new accounting procedures since 2010 has provided much greater transparency which has revealed a truer reflection of the company's financial position? "

WTF?

Tomorrows hdm should be very interesting. News on how the smc subsidises Hull fc and news of an astonishing ticket buy up agreement. Crikey.

Agreement. In other words, they agreed to it. Whatever "it" is.

I read that to mean that the costs associated with us using the stadium ran to £280k [imore[/i than we pay in rent. That would put the total at somewhere around £880k for the season, which I find difficult to credit TBH.

@HDMsport: In tomorrow's Mail - we reveal until now unknown agreements between the SMC and #HullFC covering big costs for the Super League club

Blimey. How can the club stay silent now? Will see what's said tomorrow, but in the 2010 accounts they said FC paid £600k rent and FC-specific costs of £200k.

From the same journo regarding SMC finances:

[iPlenty of spare cash in the kitty despite recorded losses[/i

Glad somebody's noticed at last.

That word again

Yeah fair point I would re-phrase it as problematic. As in the longer this goes on the more pressure there will be on Hull FC to make a statement.
They are playing it right by not commenting BTW.

Agree up to now. But in the event we're all wrong and Allam is actually subsidising us to exorbitant levels, a word to let us know how reasonable and amicable everything is wouldn't go amiss.

I don't think Hull have to make a comment yet, Allam is doing a good job with the long length of rope he has.

A small point that when the SMC paid over the small sum of £5,000 they had made £100,000 profit ,this puts more pressure on Allums losses

I was given to understand that Hull City's debt was not paid off by Allums but he just stood as garunteur of it ,thats why he cut back on his clubs wage bill .
Some thing can't get through to City supporters

Still think not enough attention has been paid to the SMC accounts. I have personal experience of a company who manage to show a modest loss every year (hence not paying any corporation tax) and yet have a pile of cash in the bank that gets quietly shuffled off into a Directors fund. And they've been around a long time with a solid credit rating.

Interested to see what tomorrows revelations bring, but can't see that Adam Pearson would have bought the club if they were dependant on SMC subsidies to stay afloat.

Been reading these posts with interest and have been trying to think what subsidies we have been getting from the SMC. The only thing we could think of was the issuing of free tickets. Seem to think we never used to offer freebies as we would have to pay the SMC half the value of the tickets. Think this changed around the time of the floods when flood victims were given freebies then they were also given out for selected games I.e. London Broncos.
If we gave 2000 tickets worth £20 each the SMC would entitled to half which equates to £20000. Do this just once a year since 2007 and your looking at £100000.

Its common knowledge that we get 'free' stewarding and ticket office staff as part of our deal and this will cost the SMC a lot, but its always been that way.

also as our crowds have dipped, we won't be contributing as much in ticket revenue as we once did (we give 50% of any crowd over 8,500 to the SMC)

What City fans think. Cut and pasted from a forum:

[iSo just how much does Hull FC owe the SMC ?
Take the ******* to court for breach of contract and recover all outstanding depts including all fee's plus compound interest.
If they don't pay throw 'em out of the ground.The pitch is already deteriorating.Don't believe the bull about rugby not spoiling the pitch.Ask Steve Bruce.[/i

what A city fan thinks.

Seems to be quite a few agreeing

Are all fc fans like the judge.?

And that sums up pretty well all you need to know about a proportion of city fans.

Its obvious when you think about it, what with Rugby action being ed on the goalmouth and sport etc.

If the Twitter trails are anything to go buy we should all be buying Fezes. Is that the plural of Fez?

If Allam has accepted that he is extremely unlikely to get ownership of the stadium then perhaps he's also realised that owning the SMC has no benefit for him. In fact it's become a drain on his funds. The deal and losses would have been ok had it led to getting the KC but not without that prize. If they get promoted maybe the SMC costs will increase? I would guess that the contract for the SMC to run the KC will have some sort of term or would be very onerous on the SMC if they wanted to walk away. The Council won't want to take it back and bear current losses and future costs , it's probably unlikley that anybody else would want to buy into the SMC and allowing it to go bust would hardly be an option. Maybe he feels the best way out is creating enough bad feeling to be asked to leave , be sacked or goad the Council into breaching the contract in some way??

I have a season pass for both FC and City because I like my sport. I am an FC fan first though and a neutral at the soccer