Not sure if his name was released in summer of 2012.
He does exist though.
He threw a considerable sum Avenues way in sponsorship last year and this.
Considerable by their standard.
But these were serious numbers needed here.He allowed a bid to be made so .....who knows.
Marc was in the driving seat though and this way the RFL have a man in they trust.
Who was part of a successful Northern era

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this ludicrous suggestion that Green has done what he has to "get his money back".

I will accept that had the old company gone into liquidation then he would have done his cash.

However we have this failed company, who various posts above claim no-one would have bought if they had done due diligence as it's a basket case, and lost, what, £2m? £3m? within 12 months - but by some magical undislcose means, Green will not only instantly stop a penny more being lost, but will also make that much profit, that he will be able to take out of the business £1/4m or whatever it was.

I am sure they must be right, it's just that I am struggling to see just out of whose pockets this multi-million pound sudden reversal of fortunes from basket case to highly profitable company with cash to burn is coming from.

Speaking personally, had I lost £200k on lending it to a company that went bust, if it was a pro sports club the very last thing I would do is buy it. I would keep in my pocket the purchase price + the RFL advance repayments + the "old debt" repayments and instead sink an equivalent amount of money into some sort of business which might actually be profitable. Not professional rugby league, which is, simply, not a way to make a fast buck.

Would I stump up - at the very least - substantially MORE money than I had lent, to get the loan money back? Where's the feckin sense in that?

And of course while the report states he put the club into administration to save it from being wound up by HMRC, that would be one thing, but why - given that there were a number of other buyers who would have taken the poisoned chalice - why would he decide to put in the winning bid? Whatever his motivations, making a quick killing doesn't seem to me very likely at all to be one of them.

Agree with you.But it gives him a chance to get his money back.
How I have no idea.
But the Bulls will be a better proposition to sell (if avoid drop)from Sept.
Is it potentially £1.7 or £1.8 from Sky/Central funding next year?
As opposed to £650k this season.
Three big earners have already gone.
Only 5 boxes for sponsors sold out of 17.
A gamble no doubt.
But about 20 per cent of payday loan market go bad.
So I guess hes used to a gamble.
6 months losses to fund.
And we are told that Calvert & Co had already made inroads into reducing them.
Personally I hope Calvert turns up as Finance Director.
From all I have read he comes over as seeing what was needed to some extent in very murky waters.Guess you met him

Does the info from the administrators report pretty much extinguish our hopes of appealing against the points deduction?
Or is this report simply covering why OKB ended up in administration in the first place?

There is no word from the new owner on any deal to try pay any creditors.
Would not hold out hope

So why do you think he bought it? and indeed you wonder what OK was thinking when he bought it? Two owners with no apparent connection with or previous interest in the game.

However costs have been reduced by a suggested £0.5m and if we are still in the SL next session the TV money would be about £1m more - so a £1.5m turnaround even without getting more fans through the gate - so not so far fetched to imagine over the course of a few seasons Mr Green could recover his cash - or be able to sell a stabilised club on to a new owner. Green appears to be a hard headed business man, keen to get some control back into the business, so he must think it is to his advantage to own the club.

chuff me its replying to itself now....

I have no idea if FA has had a history of serial insolvency, and I certainly have never stuck up for Whitlessc**t

Word of advice - lay off the sherry before posting eh!

OK bought it to save the club, as no-one else would. Whether he had any further private motivations, who knows, but only fools and trolls (not aimed at you of course btw) believe he did it thinking it would somehow make him money - from the off it was always going to be a money pit, especially initially, and especially with the distribution robbery (which remains unique to OKB). I do find it hard to accept that anyone on here, or anywhere, believes that the Bulls (or any professional sports club) is a vehicle to personally "make money". So no, I am sure whatever else, it won't have been that, and not sure what else there is.


Would it? We just read a very short sentnece thrown in a T&A report that the new company would have to, in effect, "pay off" the rest of the last company's distribution loss, but since then, I know of no further comment, and don't know how much was still owd. Then we read that the new owners would have to repay the RFL advances to the administrator, but don't know how much that is, or if it was confirmed when the deal was done. Then we heard that the winning bid would likely have to include some form of old creditor repayment but again, not a word about that. And of course (unless OKB is going to be the only SL club ever to suffer a one year distribution fine) the powers that be have been conspicuously silent as to whether any similar fine is going to be applied to BBNL. By which I mean, they have not said it will, and curiously nobody has yet said that it won't, either.

But depending what the actual position truly is regarding these issues, our share of any distribution money over the next year or two might easily be (net) a whole lot less than anyone elses. And I do think it is ridiculous and unacceptable that we have not been told one way or the other and are left to guess.



I do find that notion very far fetched, but if he somehow ran a pr SL club at such an exceptionally profitable rate, and eventually recouped by way of taking profits, the amount of his loan, that would be more a case of simply very successfully running a notoriously unprofitable category of business, and a surprising reward for doing so. How would it represent "recovering his money"? If it WAS "recovering his money", then that means in effect the company made zero profit. And anyway if he did miraculously make the club profitable to that degree then it would have to pay a bunch of tax on any such profits. Whereas normally we can't even afford to pay the day to day HMRC bill. So no, i don't see that at all.


Possibly so, but do you believe that a purchaser would, in effect, pay a price that included a profit on the purchase price, PLUS in effect repayment to Green of all he will have had to spend (to run the business, pay the RFL, debts, advances etc)? What would THAT figure be? Would anyone really pay it? Wouldn't they just be very posthumously repaying the old debts of OKB, or the equivalent? If not, then you have to also take into account all that money that Green would have waved goodbye to forever.


I presume he decided it was for whatever reasons better than the alternatives, and maybe he also has other motives that we haven't so far heard about. But paraphrasing someone else, if you were in this context that hard headed a businessman, would you have (a) lent the money to a basket case being run by a basket case in the first place, and (b) bought a serially failed RL club? I don't realy understand how Green got himself sucked into all this in the first place, but the loan wasn't my idea of hard headed business. Was it yours?

Have to say, OK comes across to me as a guy who likes to be liked, so whatever motives he had I don't feel he had any real idea of making a 'killing' out of the club. Maybe more a feeling that he was doing some good which might earn him credit and make him more liked? I certainly don't think he went into the implications of running a professional rugby club in any meaningful way before the purchase and quickly got out of his depth. Though it coulld be that I'm talking total rubbish and ought to leave the psychoanalysis to the real shrinks ..

To be fair, none of us is inside their heads. My initial, and I admit cynical, view of Mr Green was that he would take what he could from the business to get his cash back. However it seems he's done the exact opposite and is investing in the company with a new player and just as importantly new 'backroom' people, including managing and finance directors. All in all he gives the appearance of gravitas and being businesslike - which is a nice change..

Apparently after being approached by Mr Whitcut - so maybe he had had a serious bang to his hard business head before the meeting?

However if you do bring the Bulls back to an even keel there are numerous ways of getting some pay back - directors fees, interest on loans, pension contributions, employing relatives and friends. If £'m's were at stake then no he couldn't reasonable expect to get the cash back - but £'000's is possible.

As for OK - he might have deleted Mr Sutcliffe and Greenwood from his Christmas card list?="Ferocious Aardvark

I don't realy understand how Green got himself sucked into all this in the first place, but the loan wasn't my idea of hard headed business. Was it yours?'"