Adeybull's comment is spot on!! These guys (Guru's Beard and Incrdibullman) are clearly insiders on either side of the BOD divide - so one of you is at best being economical with the truth or at worst lying to a group of people that rescued this club 2 months ago.

Shame on you both - we deserve better!

When Rangers put in their "intent" to appoint an administrator in the morning, HMRC had been to court in the afternoon to force them to appoint an administrator immediately rather than wait 2 weeks.

Was that a difference in Scottish law? or just because of the huge amount of money Rangers actually owed?

To clarify a point about VAT on Season Tickets
Generally the Invoice date is the time of supply for VAT purposes and VAT is due to be paid/reclaimed on that date.
BUT
Where season tickets are sold without the issue of a VAT invoice, such payments are deemed to be deposits against future supplies. Only then when the supply is made will VAT be due.
In this respect the supply would be for each and every league home game.

Thus the Bulls selling (say) 10,000 season tickets @ (say) £100 = £1,000,000 attracts no VAT at the time of sale.

As and when a season ticket holder turns up for a home match then the club has provided the supply and VAT is due in the proportion- Cost of his/her season ticket divided by the number of home games their season ticket covered.
Should a season ticket holder not turn up then no VAT is due as the supply was available but not used.

So: the VAT cost for every home game will be:
On season ticket holders turning up at future home matches - say 9.000 season ticket holders x £120 cost of season ticket /13 number of home games x Vat factor (/120x20) = £13,800 Vat to pay

Doubt for either of those reasons.

Sounds like HMRC may have petitioned the High Court (I think may be the Court of Session in Scotland?) to appoint an administrator as nominated by them? Other than the company, it's directors or ak debenture holder, only the court can a,point an administrator if I recall correctly.. I am guessing though.

This thread is far better than anything on TV, Radio ot the Newspapers and its quite clear both sides of the divide posting quite openly.

I have certainly improved my vocabulary & literacy with such gems as ' calumny ' and 'mendacious' to name but two.

If he wasnt dead I would have sworn that Leonard Sachs from the Good Olde Days was active on this Forum.

Keep it going lads please - excellent stuff - and we dont know the ending to this Who Done it.

agreed mat. In 2006 when Caisely resigned as chairman, having taken on in 2002 what he described as the significant increase in overheads of Odsal, those "stadium" employees numbered 51.5 (2002 - 23 (tho may be pro rata full time equivalents so double that may be more realistic)), and the admin marketing and shop employees numbered 11, 9 and 3 respectively. In 2010 the equivalent figures were 85 for the stadium, and 4, 4 and 7 respectivley. So we have a third of the admin and a half of the marketing employees when Caisley left, but being generous nearly twice the number of stadium staff. to look after a black hole called Odsal. so save overheads by moving from Odsal, or lose our young players so we can pay casual stadium staff, which is the better long term option? If it was me I would f@ck over BMC and the RFL by going into admin with a prepack to reassemble with investors money and a bright young team, higher ticket prices and corresponding lower numbers at a stadium that was not a relic predating the industrial revolution. Or use the threat of that to negotiate the desired end result without admin.

Adey

I think following my earlier post that the ball is in Gurus Beard's court, to explain how Hood was going to avoid VAT Notice 701/45, why the figures dont stack up, etc etc. Only membership of clubs founded for charitable purposes get exemption from VAT, if its a commercial business no chance. Even charitable clubs have to pay VAT on any commercial element of their outputs. Of course, it could be that you are not challenging GB because he is in fact your alter-ego, Jekyl to your Hyde, whimsy and fiction to your facts and figures, but you both have in common a certain use of language, and a inclination to say you know the full facts but cant tell anybody any detail to confirm your knowledge.

Just joking Adey.

Gurus Beard, put up please. Explain how the club thought it could get around VAT Notice 701/45. What was the name of the VAT consultant that sold the scheme to Hood?

It certainly is entertaining, but do not mistake the verbiage, sorry vocabulary, for anything other than superficial gloss for the bull sh@t that usually lies beneath those words.

According to a report on the BBC site"Bradford Bulls could be forced to go into administration within a fortnight after being hit by a winding-up order over unpaid tax.
The club owes HM Revenue & Customs £90,000 in payroll tax, plus £250,000 in VAT from the sale of the stadium."

"The figures were passed to BBC Radio Leeds by Brendan Guilfoyle of The P&A Partnership, the company brought in by the club to review the state of its finances."'"

With filed accounts stating a Turnover of £4.6mil in 2010 droppong to £3.9m in 2011, with the same overheads it took no brain specialist to guess what was going to give. The RFL really looked into the accounts when issuing licences out didn't they?

The £500k pledged has been and gone. YOU were told it was a bottomless pit you your pledging to and still did it. Where's the return and loyalty from the Bradford Bulls now to the fans, its gone on players wages for the last 2.5 months. You were fools to pledge, it was better to buy shares in a Newco, Well at least the Boss of Thomas Cook will be happy sitting on his £15mil wages over the last 4 years while 500 staff are made redundant

You;re on the wrong forum. I think you want travelagency.con

IF existing and/or former directors are trading insults on an internet forum, then we really are in a mess.

No we weren't we were doing something that a lot of people had reservations about out of loyalty. A lot of people not even connected with the club gave to the cause because they were loyal to the sport.

We'd have been fools had we pledged after knowing what we know now but hindsight is a wonderful thing. It's easy to make comments like this two months down the line.

This is t0$$ this. Where are these mythical investors? Where is this package to secure the long term future? To say I am p1$$ed off would be a huge understatement.

Quote: debaser "This is t0$$ this. Where are these mythical investors? Where is this package to secure the long term future? To say I am p1$$ed off would be a huge understatement.'" This could be the latest reason but it doesn't explain it that well www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/18455849

Quote: debaser "This is t0$$ this. Where are these mythical investors? Where is this package to secure the long term future? To say I am p1$$ed off would be a huge understatement.'" This could be the latest reason but it doesn't explain it that well www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/18455849