Oh right typing errors

The only thing I don't get Phil is if the original colour was set out as red why isn't whoever made the decision to change it to blue responsible for any costs incurred to put it correct. Also the seats. Whose decision is that to have them in white. Surely you want it matching the West stand where you have Red seats and the letters HKR spelt in white. I'm seriously doubting the intelligence of the person who has decided to have a different colour scheme to the main stand?

Agreed.

To be fair Easty, the colour was given on a fob as a generic colour for planning purposes, then they were ordered in that colour thinking it had been agreed, it was only noticed when I was going round with Hobson and Porters and then asked at the next project board meeting when they were to be painted, so yes it was a cock up, as far as the seats are concerned they have been agreed by the club, they had a choice of any configuration they wanted and that is what was chosen.

Phil
So what company is responsible for the cock up and who ordered the wrong colour cladding?
Was a colour ever discussed during project meetings?

Mrs B
Would you be happy with that cock up after fighting so hard to have the stand built for 5 years?

We all know it's not about the colour of the cladding or the bogs.

Abother thing that is strange about the current situation at rovers is if the stand is going to bring in an extra £million, why do hudge and crossland need someone else to come in and support the club financially? Surely there must be enough profit in that £million to cover the losses

If I'd been on the project board directing it, I'd take a share of accountability for failing to pay adequate attention to what was presented.

Hudgell may have "fought hard", but the reality that represents is just mithering the council, including his personal friends like Phil Webster, to bend over backwards to dream up this scheme (hardly the optimum East Hull location for classrooms), borrow £6mill from central government to do so whilst shelling out £0 himself, then kicking off because of some minor details. I'm sure Phil is delighted to hear the "A" word being used with the underwriting obligations he's put into the arrangements. It beggars belief really. More to this than meets the eye. Whatever unsatisfactory elements there may be, to have a say, you need to be on the board.

I do not care what colour the cladding is but I like the idea of white seats and red lettering spelling out hull Kingston rovers on them

You keep taking this A word as if it's been banded about everywhere. You've taken it completely out of the context Hudgell said it in. If I mention the word lottery in an interview it doesn't mean that I intend to win the lottery. Listen to Mike Smith yesterday.

Thanks for taking the time to reply Phil. Makes a little more sense now.

Until the facts are printed we will never know.
The Hull Daily Mail print a story without answering any questions that are relevant to the story.

Maybe. The fact remains that Rovers were "skint" - that's a word Hudgell used in the press IIRC - at the time of the deal but were assessed by the council as good for £2m worth of asset financing. No doubt the new owners will bring wealth to reduce/eliminate the risk, but until the takeover is formally announced the uncertainty creates a perception of elevated risk, surely?

What purpose does standing down from the board serve, Easty? Perhaps as a temporary move it makes a rather clumsy point, but to resign permanently and therefore renounce ongoing influence - what does that achieve?

If he stands down neither you or I can assume what state Neil & Rob will leave the club in so It's pointless trying just so you can score cheap points.