: Mon Jun 08, 2009 7:49 pm  

Neil HFC wrote:

He managed to squeeze 2 decades worth of planned losses into a year and a bit? (and is deeply unpopular with the fans)

: Mon Jun 08, 2009 11:13 pm  

Tarquin Fuego wrote:

My point for last 10 years -we can pay our coach what we like .......but a board made up of non Hull born bred Hull fans etc WILL NOT stump up the cash as it comes out of their profits each year.

A board of true Hull fans would be happy to break even each year as long as we were competitive.

Mike Ashley at Newcastle expected to lose £20 million a year from his own pocket but wanted success ........our board want success but not at risk to their profits and loan repayments.

So to be a true hull fan you have to give the club money for no return?
Why should you expect board members to be well out pocket and put the club at risk by not fulfilling their loan payments?
The profits you're talking about are paltry (£165k last year).

As to Ashleys finances, a £20M loss is nothing to this guy as he lost a £1/3Billion on one lot of shares last year alone. The £20M loss can be offset against any profit his businesses make (and against those in the future) this hardly applies to the board at Hull FC and to be honest I think there aren't any Hull FC fans able or willing to put a few million into the club

: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:28 am  

So to be a true hull fan you have to give the club money for no return?
Why should you expect board members to be well out pocket and put the club at risk by not fulfilling their loan payments?
The profits you're talking about are paltry (£165k last year).

to be honest I think there aren't any Hull FC fans able or willing to put a few million into the club[/quote]

There are NO local businessmen prepared or maybe able to put their ££ in.
So we have what we have - a board focused on profit and getting their loans back with juicy interest - fair do BUT don't complain if you don't like the fact they pay coaches peanuts etc.
I complain because I would love a Hull board of local men with enough £ to pay a Tim Sheens £300,000 pa to coach Hull FC

: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:33 am  

Isaiah wrote:

Bump!

Paul M; "If relegation was an issue, would your opinion be different?"

Obviously, but what's the point in that question as there is no relegation.

Either way I still feel we need a complete change in our coaching setup but it's not going to happen.

: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:36 am  

Tarquin Fuego wrote:

So to be a true hull fan you have to give the club money for no return?
Why should you expect board members to be well out pocket and put the club at risk by not fulfilling their loan payments?
The profits you're talking about are paltry (£165k last year).

to be honest I think there aren't any Hull FC fans able or willing to put a few million into the club

There are NO local businessmen prepared or maybe able to put their ££ in.
So we have what we have - a board focused on profit and getting their loans back with juicy interest - fair do BUT don't complain if you don't like the fact they pay coaches peanuts etc.
I complain because I would love a Hull board of local men with enough £ to pay a Tim Sheens £300,000 pa to coach Hull FC[/quote]

Would you be happy with the said board quadrupling our debt within 3 years to try and sustain a shot at the league.(most people when ploughing money into a business would usually make that as personal loan even if they are a fan. Obviously everyone wants a fan to be in charge of the club but this club has been so close to not existing in the past by trying to chase a dream.And also by complaining your not going to make the chance of local business taking over anymore of a reality in fact I would say these people may just think heck if I buy the club I could be turning into the anti-crist type figure unless I splash all my money

[Chris71]

: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:48 am  

Tarquin Fuego wrote:

There are NO local businessmen prepared or maybe able to put their ££ in.

I have heard that there is a group that are interested and have tried to buy the club previously before being stiffed on the deal.

: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:52 am  

Does one of them groups include a certain agent thats owns a few of our players?

[Chris71]

: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:57 am  

Coach wrote:

Does one of them groups include a certain agent thats owns a few of our players?

Not the one I know of as far as I know.

: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:55 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

I couldn't agree more, but therein lies the problem the board won't invest the required money for the right quality coach which has left us with Kear, Sharp and now Agar. Our whole system needs changing from the youth development upwards, the right coach could transform Hull into a top 4 side within a season I feel.

A good coach MIGHT be able to transform the on-the-field fortunes of the club for a short time. But for genuine positive change to occur and - more importantly - PREVAIL you need things right upstairs. If you have muppets at the top even Wayne Bennett would struggle past a second year.

Saints are extremely fortunate in having McManus. He's not in the David Whelan wealth bracket, but he has a few bob. Enough to clear the mountain of bad debts and bad faith left behind by the previous administration, which threatened to send Saints the same way as Widnes, Halifax and the rest. McManus has got the club off life-support, single-handedly driven the development of the new stadium through (ready some time in 2011 and owned by the club) and has financed the acquisition of world class talent (Gidley, Lyon, Cayless, Soliola etc.) without running up mind-boggling debt (as was the case with Newlove, Sculthorpe etc.).

But where McManus has REALLY delivered is in creating a comprehensive and cohesive strategy for Success at all levels. From the kit man through to the chairman - everyone understands his role within the machine and what the 'Big Picture' really is. No where is this more important than in the field of junior development. For years St. Helens was a laughing stock. Before Graham we hadn't produced a single top class prop in my living memory (excluding Andy Platt, who didn't come through the ranks as such). Now we have several excellent prospects following Graham (Clough may gravitate toward prop but at this moment he is an excellent young second row). In other positions we're practically awash with talent - Lomax, Ashurst, Eastmond, Wheeler, Ellis etc.

McManus hired the best people to develop the kids (special mention to Mike Rush, who has attracted interest from the RFL to become a national performance manager) and let them get on with it - provided they worked within the framework he developed to take the club forward.

Of course, none of the above guarantees success. Only a fool thinks his club will be at the top forever. But it DOES mean the club should - barring serious ill fortune (such as McManus keeling over dead and a lunatic like Maurice "Spend...Spend...Spend...and the banks be damned!" Lindsay taking over to run the club into the ground) - remain at the very least COMPETITIVE. And that's good enough even for the most fickle fans.

: Tue Jun 09, 2009 2:29 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

A good coach MIGHT be able to transform the on-the-field fortunes of the club for a short time. But for genuine positive change to occur and - more importantly - PREVAIL you need things right upstairs. If you have muppets at the top even Wayne Bennett would struggle past a second year.

Saints are extremely fortunate in having McManus. He's not in the David Whelan wealth bracket, but he has a few bob. Enough to clear the mountain of bad debts and bad faith left behind by the previous administration, which threatened to send Saints the same way as Widnes, Halifax and the rest. McManus has got the club off life-support, single-handedly driven the development of the new stadium through (ready some time in 2011 and owned by the club) and has financed the acquisition of world class talent (Gidley, Lyon, Cayless, Soliola etc.) without running up mind-boggling debt (as was the case with Newlove, Sculthorpe etc.).

But where McManus has REALLY delivered is in creating a comprehensive and cohesive strategy for Success at all levels. From the kit man through to the chairman - everyone understands his role within the machine and what the 'Big Picture' really is. No where is this more important than in the field of junior development. For years St. Helens was a laughing stock. Before Graham we hadn't produced a single top class prop in my living memory (excluding Andy Platt, who didn't come through the ranks as such). Now we have several excellent prospects following Graham (Clough may gravitate toward prop but at this moment he is an excellent young second row). In other positions we're practically awash with talent - Lomax, Ashurst, Eastmond, Wheeler, Ellis etc.

McManus hired the best people to develop the kids (special mention to Mike Rush, who has attracted interest from the RFL to become a national performance manager) and let them get on with it - provided they worked within the framework he developed to take the club forward.

Of course, none of the above guarantees success. Only a fool thinks his club will be at the top forever. But it DOES mean the club should - barring serious ill fortune (such as McManus keeling over dead and a lunatic like Maurice "Spend...Spend...Spend...and the banks be damned!" Lindsay taking over to run the club into the ground) - remain at the very least COMPETITIVE. And that's good enough even for the most fickle fans.

And we have james rule