Allam Meeting Notes - November 1, 2013

This was pretty much my line of thought, (and I suspect many others) as the whole sorry saga progressed. I don't get why there are some having a go at those present at this meeting for being pally with Assem at the time. Except for a small few (who, in retrospect were probably more astute than me) most fans were still relatively in favour of the Allams staying and were hopeful the name-change crap was just a misguided idea that could be dropped.

I mean I remember briefly meeting Assem outside the Reebok stadium around Feb/March 2013 (the match when we went 3-0 down in eight minutes) and thanked him with a cheery thumbs up sign. I bloody well cringe now when I think about it, but that's how it was generally back then.

 

I'll weigh in...

I've had issues with the Allams for quite some time. The earliest I remember is a home game against Reading in August 2011 (I only know that because I did a match report on the game in which I made a dig at the Allams and a few people objected). I'd been told things by a few people that I didn't like, basically, and was one of the earlier Allam critics on Amber Nectar (something you can look up on the forum, should you so wish).

The week before we this meeting, we had a meet-the-club night with the HCSS. The usual crew were there - James Mooney, Ash Lord, etc... but we were generally there to see Nick Thompson and Steve Agnew. All City employees at that meeting are no longer at the club as far as I can tell. Thompson had announced he was resigning that morning but went through with the evening anyway. He spoke a bit more freely than he might, stating that he'd felt undermined by the name change issue when he'd made his 'sacrosanct' comment among other things (he has, I am told, claimed to Bath City fans that he left because he didn't agree with the name change). Anyway, we had a pleasant evening, but I did have an eye on the next week's meeting. I was hoping we could ward off the name change issue still, and figured that a fight at this point would be somewhat counter-productive. So I spent the evening trying to glean the best approach for the next week's meeting. I'd been hoping to attend on behalf of the HCSS but work put paid to that in the end, so we sent someone else.

Having spoken to numerous club representatives at that first meeting, I came away with a few things that I reported back to handful of people who I knew would be attending the meeting the following Friday. For starters, if I referred to 'Assem Allam', 'Mr Allam' or even just 'Assem', I was corrected by someone with a "Well, Doctor Allam would say..." or something along those lines. No one referred to him as anything but "Doctor'. I reported this back, with a message that in the interests of a productive meeting - something everyone was hoping for - he should be referred to as 'Doctor Allam' at all times. It was stated to me by one employee that he thought the owners has misunderstood the strength of feeling regarding the name change and were looking for a way out. I reported that back too, but it seems I was misinformed (I don't think deliberately). Finally, I had it explained to me twice that the Allams wanted the fans to work with them. Nothing concrete was said but that too was something that I reported back. It seemed to be stuff to do with the stadium, but nothing was said explicitly along these lines that I can remember.

Anyway, my point of writing is that the tone taken by many members of the meeting is possibly/probably in some small way down to what I reported back. I was an Allam cynic at that point, but I just desperately wanted the name change to be dropped and thought, naively, that it was still a possibility at that point. I was also hoping that I was wrong on them.

It is worth adding that there were people in that room (and many City fans elsewhere who opposed the name change), who were open to compromise, who were happy to try to do something that would have ended this whole sorry saga (I spent ages in conversation with Thompson and Mooney asking if we could market ourselves as Hull City Tigers internationally but keep Hull City in the UK). Some people in this thread seem to see that as a weakness. But three or four years ago part of the criticism was that those opposing the name change were set in their ways, were too harsh on the Allams, etc... I firmly believe the mood of the fans in that meeting, from what I know, was a conciliatory one. And that's to their credit. There was no going for the jugular straight away, and nor should there have been. It's easy to look back now and say what the groups present should have done, but the Allams had saved the club. We'd just been promoted. Everyone wanted a happy ending. Very few people enjoy this type of rancour and bitterness. For my very, very small role in the way this meeting went, I apologise if it in any way screwed things up further, but I don't regret that all other options were exhausted before we went nuclear.

 

Perhaps the person who brokered the deal when he bought the club gave the Allams the impression that the Labour council ( who were then in opposition) would back his plans for the KC and perhaps AA believed them ?
Perhaps the leader of the opposition Labour party thought they/he could do a deal with the Allams and raise some cash from the sale of the stadium and get the surrounding land developed too, perhaps he agreed with the Allams plans for the club and the stadium whilst in opposition ? Perhaps when Brady's Bunch were back in power ( a lot sooner then they imagined they would be) he then realised he couldn't trade the KC Stadium off as promised ? Perhaps that's why Brady sent in his hand rag in to meet AA and not himself when AA presented himself as the owner of a newly promoted Premier League club at a meeting with the new council to discuss developing the council owned stadium and surrounding land ?
Lot of if's a lot of maybe's, but AA must have thought he had morale high ground on this when he offered a £100k to charity if the minutes of this ill fated meeting could be made public.
I posted at the time that the fans protests should begin at Guildhall and not with the owners.
Seemingly I wasn't the only one.

 

Remind me of the timescale

When did the infamous Allam/Geraghty meeting take place ?

 

I d

I cannot honestly remember but it must have been about the time of our second promotion to the PL ?
I remember the headlines in the HDM about the club wanting to buy the stadium and the '£100m' worth of investment.

 

I know the name change was first mentioned publicly Sept-ish 2013 so I assume the meeting was a few months before that.

So, if Allam had a 'nudge-nudge wink wink' nod from Brady prior to buying the club in 2010 he wouldn't have waited a year or more to discuss the freehold. He'd have been like a rat up a drainpipe as the soon as the May 2011 council elections confirmed that
Labour were back in power.

 

I think this is all fascinating, particularly Richard G's input.

What would be very useful if anyone could be bothered is a timeline as I forget when things actually happened, so we could understand when this meeting took place in relation to other things the Allams have done/said.

Was this before or after the farcical Allam vote on the name change, for example?

 

The name change vote was March/April 2014

As said before at the time of this meeting people were generally optimistic that Dr Allam could be persuaded it was a bad idea

 

allamout.co.uk is pretty decent for the dates at which certain events happened.

 

http://stadiumdb.com/news/2012/12/england_hull_owners_consider_leaving_kc_stadium

the Council said no well before we got promoted under Allam - his bluster here proves he has always been full of ****

 

L

But I haven't said that, have I?

 

We were not a Premier League club when the Allams bought us so the money coming in increased massively a few months down the line when we were, also there was more of a demand for tickets. Possibility ?

 

They didn't say no, Brady said he would put it to a public vote. He wouldn't or couldn't make the decision himself when push came to shove.

 

This is what I'm talking about. If I'd have been at that meeting I'd have behaved myself and addressed him as Dr Allam. But that was what was required at that time. Respect and diplomacy.

Now of course I'd address him as daft ****.

 

That's how I see it.

 

So what do you think AA was calling them liars and cheaters about?

 

why did he say he was going to Melton, why did he say he would leave in 24 hours, why did he say he would give the Club away, why did he say our name has always been Hull City Tigers, why did he say hew wouldn't change the badge without consultation, why would you believe him when he says he's cured cancer etc etc - because he's a ****ing nutter, so why would you think there was any reason for him calling the Council cheaters and liars - seriously you really should take anything he says with a large pinch of salt

 

So why did your mate believe he was giving him 50% of the club??