Before 5pm Friday? Looks like no time has been left for answering questions!

Joking aside I don't this Caisley will welcome input from the fans. In the past he was always threatening to move the franchise elsewhere.

Looking like this thread going to hit 100 pages before the day is done.
Good work everyone!

That would be one hell of a gamble to take re: force the club into administration.

The announcement of Caisley potentially riding in on his white charger to save the Bulls cannot be allowed to distract the fans from reaching the pledge target. The goal still remains the same, avoid administration.
Caisley has done the club's present BoD no favours what so ever and the in fighting that this generates could diminish the huge amount of good will that the Bulls currently have.
KEEP PLEDGING

[url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportbulls/9631577.Comment__Bradford_Bulls_chiefs_talk_of_a_sustainable_long_term_plan_but_backers_want_guarantees/T&A COMMENT[/url

More interesting words from the press,

"[iBradford’s chief executive Ryan Duckett spoke last week of a sustainable long-term plan which the club can implement once their short-term future is assured but they will need to provide more details if they are to be taken seriously.

Why should sponsors suddenly queue up to put money into the club when they have been so reluctant to do so over the last two or three years, especially with the same people in charge of the club? [/i" By Ian Laybourn


This after the Caisley piece

It was only a matter of time before Caisley emerged from the shadows. The timing of it certainly pulls the rug out from under the current board and could sabotage the pledge.

I've a feeling that this has been brewing for some time. I think it was Agar who criticised Hood recently for not making a more serious effort to secure a new club owner. If he's now backing Caisley it figures.

When you consider that Caisley was responsible for a lot of the ills the club is dealing with now and made us one of the most unpopular clubs in RL I fear his return. At the same time the current mob have yet to show how their business plan is going to get us out of this mess if we raise the £1m.

A rock and a hard place doesn't cover the half of it.

The T&A Comment piece seems to raise fair questions IMO.

People are prepared to believe the worst about Caisley because he's the kind of person about which the worst is easily believed.

Of the four possible outcomes inmy head this is third in desirability. Fourth is ceasing to exist.

That's not what he's saying though. I hope that any Caisley supporter who hasn't pledged yet doesn't think that because it isn't true.

He's asked for a review etc. this will all have to happen next week IF we reach the 500K mark. If we don't reach the 500K mark the club either goes into Admin or is wound up by the tax man. Caisley or no Caisley. He's talking about seeking investors as a going concern it won't be come Tuesday if that figure isn't reached.

We can worry about this next week. What awful timing and explanation!

Out of the frying pan into the fire comes to mind! If the current board have the plans in place to make the Bulls sustainable post-pledge, why are all the shareholders throwing their weight behind Caisley? And what are Caisleys true intentions? I doubt the timing is accidental. Once again an awful lot of questions and not many answers.

So, the great thing is that BOTH sides have a cunning plan, which will soon make us the top, and richest, club, with all the best players.

We can't tell you what either plan is, but rest assured it's nailed on.

Am I the only one who thinks that - apart from the lack of a rich backer - the single thing which has done for the present Bulls, and without which we would at worst be stumbling along financially like most of the top half clubs with no crisis, is the cash which the Harris deal cost us one way or another?

Or am I missing something?

Pump all the legal costs and compo back up out of the toilet pot and into our coffers, where would we be financially then? Not counting any element of wages or signing fees, on the back of my fag packet it says about £2m better off. In hard, cold cash, which we have actually handed over. of course, it's a pure guess, as nobody will ever say, but I doubt it would be any less.

Whatever the figure is, does anyone disagree that without going for Harris, we wouldn't be in this mess?