Unless the population of Northampton has increased by about 40,000 or that of Hull decreased by that many then they aren't the same size. If areas which would be included in other cities populations were included in Hull's then itv would be much higher. As it is the urban population fir .Hull is over 500,000 and the amount of people with City as the nearest club makes it one of the highest in that category, Which if course makes our crowds down the years even more disappointing compared to some.. In any case size of somewhere doesn't make you irrelevant or not.
Pity we cannot inflate another few seats when the plastics return. On a more serious note,does anyone think Waggy will ever be replaced ? Allam OUT.
I've always thought the sensible argument on here was based on increasing to 30-35K. That needs PL games. It also needs ground ownership or a more constructive partnership. The ticket pricing policy is also of importance.
That's your opinion, which I disagree with. They are chancers. They saw a commercial opportunity, buying a struggling club was the way in; it would also give them, they thought, a huge credibility lift for their future plans within Hull. Hull was perfect, they thought, for their style of dominance. Yes, they pumped money in. Yes, they had other options. Yes, Pearson's involvement was not entirely as it seemed. But they made mistakes, these perfect businessmen (look at their CV) they broke the rule of due diligence. They saw riches in and around the club, but they made assumptions and we all know what they can do. They should have been astute businessmen but they behaved like chancers, they did their best to make it look like largesse, but it wasn't. Subsequent actions define them far better than the purchase of Hull City AFC.
Was It Lambrettaman, who said the new owners would gather pace sometime in January, it's now February
I said they believed a deal was close, they probably misjudged the situation, they're good at doing that.
You are entitled to your opinion - but it's totally subjective, completely lacking in facts, and absolute rubbish!
I'll take your word for it.it wasnt weatherspoons to blame for my dodgy memory back then.three tuns and fiveways were the places.untill port vale came of course.that was bloody carnage. it was just fiveways after that lol.
There's plenty of supportable facts in there: it was openly admitted they moved too quickly and missed critical debt; their model of their commercial aspiration was there for all to see; their demands, threats, blackmail, lies, and manipulation were real, not imagined. It took two inquiries of the FA to halt their key strategy, one built on a tissue of lies and deceit. They spent a good few bob, they dragged the club and it's support through the mud, they never hesitated to abuse and lie, but most of all, they failed to achieve their true goal. The football was a sideshow for them, a decent but necessary gamble that is ongoing, but has now become an unwanted distraction. The publicised outpourings about their legacy plans are simply stretched truths about them getting their money back and getting themselves reestablished as community heroes - ready for their next commercial venture. The daft thing is they have done some good, but they taint it by their other nonsense. But perhaps you will tell me, specifically, what it is I am wrong about?
Would you rather be Hull City in the EPL or Hull City in League 2? There is no club called Hull Tigers and hopefully never will be.
I agree with some of your comments but signing cheques for over £30m in their first few hours after taking over is not the form of your average 'chancer' A chancer would have let the club go bust and then paid £1 for it.
Had to read that again to get what you were driving at. If you mean it has twisted people's attitudes towards City or twisted them against City I tend to agree.
I think there is more to that idea than a simple statement of: I do wonder just how fully they had grasped the detail of the situation and whether or not it would have happened if they had of been aware of the debt they admit they found after their takeover. On that I am guessing, on everything else I am using well established facts that puts them firmly into my belief of what constitutes a couple of chancers - not very good ones at that.
On that basis I believe a deal is close on us signing Messi, don't blame me if it doesn't happen, blame the Allams
