I think you're being naive about the value of a lease.

And I think you're being overly pessimistic. I guess we'll find out who's nearer the truth in due course.

Aren't terms of a lease and protective covenants subtly different things, though?

I'm not being pessimistic at all. allam won't shaft us as soon as he gets his hands on the KC, it could be years or maybe never that we encounter problems but there is potential for problems which is what I am saying and you're claiming that a lease will give us good protection.

I once had a watertight lease on a unit which was owned by a company with assets greater than £100m. They told me they wanted me out, I said no and they laughed and said they'd see me in court then. Needless to say I was out within a month. Believe me, you can't win against a landlord with near unlimited financial resources

Not subtly different, totally different. Covenants are likely to stop the sale of the stadium or development. the lease is just an agreement between the landlord and tenant.

So it's the quality and content of the covenants that are the defining issues as far as FC are concerned? I asked for the right thing in my FOI request, then.

I'm 'claiming' that commercial lease law offers [isome[/i protection and more than I'd thought. I've also specifically stated that we could still run into problems in the medium and/or long term.

Why is it that people on this board seem to struggle to read what's actually posted?

You now pay rent to play in a stadium that is run by a Rovers benefactor.

Sometime soon you'll be paying rent to play in a stadium that is OWNED by a Rovers benefactor. BUT ONLY IF YOU ASK NICELY.

From a Hull FC point of view, I don't think Allam himself is any more of a problem than Pearson, Duffen or Bartlett.

The problem is the ground-share, if or when, Hull City establish themselves in the Premiership.

You would have to be naive in the extreme to not believe that the Premier League juggernaut won't find a way of outlawing ground-sharing eventually...whether that is two, five or ten years from now! Sadly, it will happen one day!

A more pressing problem would-be the effects of a stadium-expansion, and the associated hike in costs that would go with it!

The atmosphere isn't that great now...I shudder to think what it would feel like with 12-13k rattling round in a 40k-seater stadium?

I for one will be hoping that City don't return to the Premiership any time soon, but with Mr Allam's backing, that scenario is far more likely than it was!

I think the phrase you were looking for is: "but with Mr Allam's backing, Hull City are less likely to go bust any time soon"

The Allam family's total, estimated wealth is less than the player valuations of any of the top Premiership clubs. Please get some perspective

You mean a Rovers [icreditor[/i, obviously.

As one of the main culprits maybe you could answer that for us

I'm not losing any sleep, to be honest.

People have been saying for years that the FA would outlaw shared stadiums for Premiership teams. Hasn't happened yet and I don't see how it could.

It any case City are a long way from becoming an established Premiership club. Allam's wealth is considerable but he'd have to get City into massive debt to compete in the top flight.

Just think about it, the rent we pay at the KC is equivalent to 1 months wages of the top players

2 weeks of that guy at man city

Depends on the term of your lease, if the lease has a one month notice then they can serve NTQ and you cannot do anything about it, FC's lease at the KC is for a lot longer, I don't know the exact notice period, but it's something like 25 years.

Even IF HCC sells the KC to the nutjob, he will still be legally bound by the terms of our lease, in fact, it would be a condition of sale.

If the council wanted some money out of the stadium why did the previous encumbants allow a third party to manage the stadium? Surely the profits that have been squirreled away by SMC over the last 9 years would have meant the council would have had a reasonable return and not be in the position to need to sell at any point? Short sighted & incompetent to say the least, it wouldn't have been a Labour council then by any?

One day to go .. www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... ticle.html

One day to go .. www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... ticle.html

Quote ="salthouse red"One day to go .. www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... ticle.html'" Put the sock away daft lad.

Quote ="salthouse red"One day to go .. www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... ticle.html'" Put the sock away daft lad.

our original lease agreement was 25 years, with an option for another 25, that options is quite clearly OURS. I've looked into (some of) the legalities and any transfer of ownership COULD NOT affect our lease or our option, or what it costs us, there are also (i believe) three deed of covenenants in place, one on the "public open space", one on the Canegie Library and one on the Fairground, but details are proving hard to come by (without paying a solicitor, which we've no need to do, yet)

i thought your lease was 100 years

nope, 25 from what I have read.

ah right thought it was 100 years with the lease been looked at ect after 25 years

When are the rent reviews and are their any limitations on rent increases?

from my understanding it's 25 years, and it' reviewed every three years (in terms of what we pay etc.) I can't find any details on limitations of the reviews.