Clearly we need to think outside of the box a bit more often...

Out of the box thinking can overlook what's in the middle of the box.
The Lease held by the RFL on Odsal.

Are you implying that in 2 years time we will get the lease back having paid RFL back for it? That would be good but I think if that was what was going on OK Bulls would have made a big deal about it by now. Is this a guess or do you know more?

That thought had occurred to me too, and I nearly mentioned it, but I really struggled to see how that would be accepted by the other clubs so I dismissed it as being too outrageous to warrant consideration...

Its probably just a big coincidence that the sums being talked about for the Sky monies reduction, the recorded creditors (less Peter Hood's company) and the amount the RFL paid for the lease are all very similar in size, at between £1,25m and 1.3m!

Are you saying that the RFL will pay off the recorded creditors?. If they don't then only the lease remains in your equation

It's all guess work until the accounts are seen.

I rekon the RFL will just pay the creditors off with our Sky money. Basically just cuts out the middle man (us).

Leaving aside the possibility that maybe the irony in my comment went by a bit fast, no I am not. There are a whole raft of possible explanations and possible applications of the money. Paying creditors is one; some deal with the lease is another; one I did not mention, but a guy on another forum has, is that all the other clubs get a cut, and that was their price for alowing Bulls to be re-admitted. Another is that it goes to swell the RFL coffers, and yet another is that it goes to swell Big Nige's lunchbox. Another possibility is that we get some back later if we pass probation. That we are realistically considering all of those (and more) as possibilities, and that we can't really bring ourselves to rule any out no matter how unlikley or unreal they might otherwise have seemed (OK, maybe the lunchbox...) shows just how crazy this whole situation has become?

Right, can,t stand this unknown any longer, I,m cutting my payments to Sky by 50%.

When Wakefield were promoted to SL we received no Sky money for the first 2 years and spent subsequent seasons trying to catch up with everyone else!

Already reported that creditors have nowt to do with ok bulls. They are not getting paid. It was khan who suggested he would operate off lower sky monies IF they kept you in SL. So you have effectively bought your place in SL.

However how can they make a two year sky monies decision when you are on a one year probation. If you dropped to the championship in 2014 you would only get rfl monies of 70k PER YEAR....and people wonder why the gap is so big lol

Pure speculation of course, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is some kind of scheme to buy back the Odsal lease. The reason I say this is because OK has already spoken about investing significant amounts into Odsal. Why would he do that without owning either the lease or the buildings ? It'd be like renting a flat from a landlord and paying to put a new kitchen and bathroom in yourself. Nobody in their right mind would invest the kind of money talked about (~£6m IIRC) into a facility without owning it first.

Was it? That is news to him and Mr Sutcliffe.

Funnily enough, Blake Solly flagged up that a prospective new owner may have to make do with less money some weeks ago. He never said a prospective new owner had volunteered to.

He owns the Coral stand. He is investing in that.

He rents the terraces. I believe he has a longish lease from the RFL. He is planning - when funds permit - to put a lid on the popular terrace. That will be leasehold improvements, same as any normal leasehold improvements. If it generates more income and recovers the investment cost, it matters not one jot whether he owns or leases the site.

He has plans to put new buildings on some of the site. Ditto.

If you had a reasonably long tenant's repairing lease for your flat, you would have no qualms about putting in a new kitchen and bathroom. Indeed, my mother did precisely that when she had a housing association flat (which she never bought). I think she would take great exception to you telling her she was not in her right mind, you know.