Well let's just hope that if we do end up in admin, that these investors with the £800k waiting are still interested.

All signs point towards a pre-pack? Probably our best case scenario at this point in time I'd say, although it would be a serious strain on Adey's morals

HMRC cannot appoint an administrator. They would need the High Court to appoint following petition from creditor/s.

I always said I assumed it would be an insolvency practitioner conducting the "Review". Doubtless one reason they strove so hard to keep the identity secret.

This all looks like its playing out to the conclusion that so many felt was per-ordained. I am working on the basis that there is no way you can trust a word of what anyone is saying, in the game that is now approaching the endgame.

Seems increasingly probable to me that we will have half the team next year we currently have. And may well be playing at VP. All those who were so sure of a bright new future under Caisley, a return to the shining city on the hill, doubtless still subscribe to that view, notwithstanding their relative silence of late?

hopefully the RFL can shift the lease on Odsal on at a profit, if not they may not look on the "New Bulls" favourably if any of the existing members are part of the new set up.....

I still find it almost impossible to believe that the RFL would allow us to play in SL at VP having just forked out £1.25m for the Odsal lease. I know that there are scenarios whereby they could sell the lease for a profit. But I just cannot see them taking the flak they would undoubtedly get from fans of other clubs if they were to take that gamble.

I know. Which was why I seriously doubted VP could be a consideration.

But if we see a multi-party deal which sees the RFL clear a profit, then the flak would more likely come from Bulls fans? Bearing in mind that the Odsal purchase was done under Lewis, so they could justify distancing themselves from that decision if they so chose? And given the Future Bulls could well be the runt of the future SL litter, doubt any other clubs' fans would perceive much advantage to us from the Odsal deal?

Is this opposed to the Golden Years we had under Hood's reign. Consecutive season's outside the 8, the quality team of average journey men we had the pleasure of watching, all the best prospects getting sold off...?
If only we had tightened our belts during the last few glory years, we would not be where we are now.
Oh hang on....

£200k a month is only £2.4m per year, which considering the salary cap is £1.65m sounds quite a low figure if Bradford are spending near the cap.

I don't understand though, how a wage bill of £200k per month leaves a PAYE tax of £98k, that sounds very high to me.

I don't see how Bradford would be able to quickly or easily reduce the players wage bill significantly by next season without going into administration. Admittedly some players could be sold, but the players in high demand are Bradfords young academy products that the article said would be retained. There might be the odd one or two who could find other SL clubs willing to pay them a similar salary like Jeffries or Elima, but plenty of the others would require paying off.

I imagine it's PAYE and NIC (both employee and employers) which sounds about right to me.

Ah that could be it, the article just says PAYE and doesn't mention NIC but that could explain it.

with so many out of contract at the end of the season a chunk could be taken out, but as you say possibly not enough. Lestrange and Kearney would have to go though that may not be easy, theres unfortunately a question mark over Purtell. But when there are 80+ stadium staff I would rather cut such overhead costs first then see what trimming of the players is needed, rather than launch into the players costs first off. and the overhead costs need to be addressed, so why not now rather than later? Cutting player costs is lazy cost cutting, not sensible cost cutting.

Its all here for those to read - Taken DIrect from Accounts filed at Companies House, and nothing to do with any Harris payouts to Leeds. The simple thing is that the turnover has dropped £600K from the previous 2 years and you have FAILED to reduce the Cost of Sales (Players Wages, etc) accordingly, while also failing to reduce Staff Wages and overheads.

Totally miss-managed

Date Of Accounts........31/12/2010........31/12/2009..........31/12/2008
Turnover....................£3,956,715..........£4,600,518.........£4,639,613
Cost of Sales..............£3,127,144..........£3,364,438..........£3,271,108
Gross Profit...................£829,571..........£1,236,080.........£1,368,505
Wages & Salaries.........£2,447,753..........£2,399,834..........£2,314,391
Directors Emoluments......£16,978............-..........................-
Operating Profit...........-£373,530..........-£76,455.............-£16,302
Depreciation................£101,518............£92,306.............£103,859
Audit Fees....................£12,500...........£10,500..............£11,500
Interest Payment.............£3,267............£2,289...............£1,950
Pre Tax Profit..............-£311,403...........-£78,728.............-£10,105
Taxation .....................-..........................£6,519...........-£6,946
Profit After Tax.............-£311,403...........-£72,209............-£17,051

Also if you are expecting £1.2 mil in losses this year, then a further reduction of £900K in Turnover, or increase in overheads/players wages has occured.

Although these are only basic figures, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to spot the problem. Massive drop in turnover and no reduction in costs, however as with all accounts, these are 12 months out of date and they dont show the figures for 2011.

when is the deadline now then and is there any more fund raisding the club are doing. I dont know about everyone else but to save our club I would certainly but some more money in.

Next Tuesday will be 2 weeks (10 working days) since we gave notice of intention to appoint administrators to protect the club. So I suspect there will be announcements before (if positive) or on Tuesday (if negative).

I wouldn't put anymore cash in until I am certain of what I am being told....and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Homer it is there for all to read, but some are better at reading than others. You say that income fell by £600k, however in 2010 there was no deferred Odsal settlement income in the sales figure, of £300k, so the drop in "real" income is £300k. Cost of sales reduced by £200K, and admin costs by £100K, which if I add the figures up looks like costs were cut to match the reduction in sales. As previously posted, "profit is an opinion cash flow is a fact", so go back to the figures and check out the operating cash flow figures. The reason for not cutting costs since these accounts - in other words players costs - in the last two years is because Hood and Bennett took the riskier course of trying to increase fan numbers and ultimately income through the pledge scheme, which has floundered on a combination of whining Aussies and serious depletion of the squad through injury. So you can criticize them for that strategic choice and their failure to implement that strategy, which was to increase turnover to cover those costs. And before you criticize the decision you have to go back a couple of years. the team with a massive number of young players were in free fall with a coach that fans wanted rid of, sales going down etc. as shown on the rather more comprehensive dashboard below. So rather than cut costs they tried to get an injection of cash in through pledge 1, get a decent coach, and start the club on a virtuous circle rather than continuing descent. That meant trying to keep players rather than sell them. As you will see from the middle graph on the left, the red line is cost of sales and it take a big hike upwards when we moved back in to Odsal, which has never come back down. the extra Odsal costs over and above VP looks about £750K judging from the increase in direct costs between 2002-3, which was not all player costs as the staff numbers do not show that. the staff costs line by the way in that graph is an extra line and is the total of the staff costs within the Cost of Sales line and the Admin Costs. So now that the policy of trying to get the club on an upward trend has failed, we now have the less riskier and easier plan, of reducing costs and accepting that we are a bottom third team for a few more years yet. Hence the discussions about moving to VP, cutting the squad etc. (I havent seen any posts about cutting the coaching staff, JD would be a lot cheaper than MP wouldnt he and not doing a bad job.)