Perhaps better not to have arrangement or CVA given the HMRC situation.
What is being looked at it seems is a "newco" looking at making an offer for the existing Bull's company. Again, I can't see the advantage of this as HMRC will not be happy taking a reduction in the £300K+ they are apparently owed.

It seems obvious that the best solution - providing the RFL and SL Clubs are OK with this, to let the old company go into liquidation and its old debts die with it and Newco then buys the few assets worth buying, enters a new lease with the RFL, negotiates contracts with players and coaching staff and finishes the season and just carries on, albeit with a poinyts deduction ans possible fine.
I cant think why BG isn't taking this route a la Rangers. Perhaps the Bull's owe other clubs money which they would not be happy seeing being written off.
Companies go into liquidation all the time - there is no reason why the Bulls can't and rise from the ashes.

Whatever happens; good luck, you are a great bunch of fans and SL needs competitive clubs like the Bulls with your levels of support.

Would the RFL and the other clubs accept the Bulls going into liquidation and just receiving a points deduction? If we go down the Rangers route, isn't there a much stronger case for relegation?

In a nutshell yes, plus all the players become free agents. A newco without liquidation is preferable route IMO, as there's precedent already set for clubs going through admin-newco route and getting points deducted without suffering relegation (crusaders and wakey). The only difference since there cases is that rules have been changed to allow the option of revoking the license. But thing to note is that its just that, an option, not automatic as a lot of fans of other clubs are making out.

T&A Updates with plenty of new information on the consortium www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... ord_Bulls/ What do we feel about the whole business of needing to get their hands on Odsal, given that 'property developers' are involved in the consortium?

T&A Updates with plenty of new information on the consortium www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... ord_Bulls/ What do we feel about the whole business of needing to get their hands on Odsal, given that 'property developers' are involved in the consortium?

We're very much in a "any port in a storm" scenario and I'm delighted that local business men are looking to get involved and save the club (I took the girlfriend to Akbars in Leeds last night for a pre-celebratory meal,) but I have 2 concerns.

1- They want Odsal more than they want the club. While I didn't like Valley Parade, I'd rather go there than lose the club.
2- Aren't be just back at square 1 with multiple people owning the club and a fractured share holding? Who knows what could happen in 6 months time - we could end up with another warring board

Quote: vbfg "Special favours for Bradford: But none for Wakefield over a measly 300K www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 75,00.html

Quote: vbfg "Special favours for Bradford: But none for Wakefield over a measly 300K www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 75,00.html

Todays t&a makes reference to Noble helping with the consortium to determine player selection for this/next year. Doesn't seem like were going to see Potter back....

1- As a Warrington supporter, I have no horses in this race. Well, one actually, that I follow a minority sport (RL) passionately and I want the best for it. Bradford Bulls surviving in SuperLeague is clearly that. Anyone with a brain in their nut can see that.

2 - Lots of SL clubs have had advances of TV money in the past. It's a more distressed situation now, clearly, but if that's all that the Administrator is asking for then there is no issue.

3 - I understand why supporters of clubs that had been in admin might cry foul and "consistency". I don't know what inconsistent treatment there has been; presumably none. However it's too reductive to say "Wakefield got A, Bradford should get A too". Wakefield aren't Bradford. With the best will in the world, they're not and it's important each club is dealt with on their own terms. That's not special treatment, it's common sense.

4 - There clearly does need to be a review of top flight RL. The Bulls' situation may be down to rank bad management (well, clearly it is) but the question has to be asked as to how sustainable the current model is. The sport may need to contract in the future. That's something facing both codes of Rugby in this country.

The RFL is already a laughing stock as you put it. By changing- bending the rules to suit SL clubs and themselves.

I think one reason why the consortium wants the lease might be to give us security once more, as the previous sale took that away hence where we are now !

The rfl can always argue that they bought the lease in good faith for the reasons they give at the time. They could now argue that there is no longer a viable solution that will allow rl to continue at odsal. They gave it their best shot, gave the bulls time to find a solution to their financial problems. As long as they get back what they paid for the lease, I would say this is the least of their concerns.

Unless they were complicit with what seems to be the biggest scam in the history of The RFL.