Dont want to seem all gloom and doom, but why would a consortium of foreign investors with apparently no previous rugby league interest want to buy a club, also stating that as part of the deal they would want to buy the ground back of the RFL.

No one buys a Rugby league club to make money from the game, Rugby League doesnt generate any profits that are worth investing in.

Why would they want to buy the ground is the big question. Obvious answer.

Good luck to the Bulls but investors need to have an interest and history with the Bulls.

please do some research and answer your own questions/comments!

Foreign investors? What foreign investors?

Why does anyone get involved in RL? Nobody makes money at it apart from Leeds due to their corporate set up. So you could ask the question of a lot of club owners.

Odsal's pretty much all on contaminated land so you're very restricted in what you can build on it.

Yes, you do.

Foreign? Identify the ones that are foreign. Or are you just bullting?

Name which investor/s have no rugby league interest

And?

Er, the big question is whether the Bulls can survive. Your "big question" is in fact so small that it would give a Higgs boson a good run for its money. WhoTF gives a flying one why they want the underlease?

Hang on, you just said there is by definition no such thing as an "investor" in rugby league. And no, a person putting money into any business really doesn't need to have any previous connection whatsoever with the club. Why on earth would they "need to"?

Weird post.

Surprised at the hostility towards scabby cats comments, it's been well documented that so called white knights rescuing several football clubs have
Used the rescue as a means to extract monies from these clubs.
A lot of damage can be done under the companies Ltd liability act.

True, but football has lots more money to be misappropriated than RL does. If (and I stress, IF) the ABC consortium are looking or a "quick buck" then the only way to do this will be in relation to the land - and it seems that they've already gone on the record to counter this.

At best, Scabbycats post was naive and at worst (perhaps unintentionally) a little bit too "right wing" in relation to a multi-cultural city.

I see no hostility in FA's response to scabbycat.
It was well reasoned point by point.

At the moment nobody knows what's happening,so all points on this thread are relevant . I suspect it will all come out in the open many months from now. Then we will see who is right and wrong, but at the moment the so called bid based on the information I have gleaned is not a valid one.
Like all rugby fans I want the bulls to succeed either as the bulls or any Phoenix team that arises from the ashes.

I love the 1950's attitude implying that the ABC are 'foreign'.

Does anyone know when (1) legally and (2) according to RFL rules, contracted players become free agents?

It would appear that going into administration doesn't trigger players becoming free agents either way.

But what if the undertakings of the Bulls are transferred to a Newco? Legally, the contracts of service do transfer [ Transfer of Employment (Protection of Employment) Regulations - so the newco would have to honour the contracts (as per Rangers). Can the newco afford it?

Why has the Administrator not made the players redundant?

What are RFL rules on this and what legal validity do they have?

If the newco won't pay/can't pay the RFL the full rent under the sub-lease, the RFL should realise what value it can by offering Bradford Council to terminate the lease on payment of a suitable capital sum - thus giving Bradford Council the unemcumbered freehold so it can do what it wants with Odsal. - Use it as a landfill site for ten years before selling it for development when level?

ABC would get better value for it's money by agreeing with
1) the administrator - to pay a suitable sum to buy the Bulls' undertakings via a newco
and
2) the RFL - to keep Bulls going to the end of the season if the SL licence were transferred (for 2013 and 2014) to another RFL club of their choice then
3) agree with an existing RFL club (with a ground) to buy a 51% stake for £1 subject to that club getting the SL licence for 2013/14.
Candidates: Halifax, Keighley (still in the City of Bradford Metropolitan District
by the way), Featherstone, York, Hunslet, Dewsbury, Batley or Sheffield.

I'm not going to pretend i know the true reason but looking in, we have a successful businessman from Bradford. One of it's great sporting clubs is on the verge of going under. The said successful businessman saves the club creating excellent publicity for him and his company. Also Odsal has the Coral stand with ample parking in a place where there is not really any competition. He turns the stand into a restaurant expanding his business while putting something into the community that is made him the successful busiman he is today. Everybody wins! Obviously it sounds simple but i believe this is what is happening and i wouldn't have a problem with him turning the Coral stand into one of his restaurants. It will get used more and all it is doing is helping the man who is ploughing a reported £3million.

I can see the point being made by the OP.

The consortium have made a conditional bid. One of the conditions is to buy back the lease. A member of the consortium - at least one - is a property developer. I'd say it wouldn't be too far fetched to wonder at the riskiness of handing over an asset to such a consortium, especially one that isn't willing to back the club regardless of their status, as per Wakey's new owner.

I also wonder whether this consortium was the only interested party.