Basically he wants to buy the ground - or at least 50% with Peel. The losses by the Council will surely only help him.

Personally i'm sure they will honour it, but I don't think they will get enough credit for doing so, either from many fans or the RFL.

I suppose it's sort of good business up to a limited point, but the brownie points they may get will be small beer compared to the stick, abuse and distrust which is the cross to be borne by every owner, so charging season ticket holders wouldn't go down well but then none of you were going to invite any of the board to your Christmas party anyway, be honest.

Is a bit odd that they haven't maximised whatever brownie points might be available by making a formal announcement, though.

A quick visit from me, to update you on something, then I will leave you to it again.

For those who are interested, the report from the Administrator, outlining the background to what happened, the reasons, the amounts involved, his proposals etc is now available online from Companies House. I have just downloaded it.

I suggest it should put a stop to a great deal of the nonsense and ill-informed speculation that has been circulating ad nauseum for a while now. It reads to me as a clear, concise and well-written factual summary. Whilst it does not extend to the final sale to BBN Ltd, I suspect its content will answer maybe 90% of the questions that have been raised. Like just how much Khan put in, what happened to the employee TUPE, what Khan personally guaranteed, the role of Whitcut and much else.

I suggest for those who are interested in facts, it could be £1 well spent.

[url=http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo=#400040Here.[/url

OK, as you were.

Would this be company number 00813289? Can't wait to have a look then ask you lots of dumb questions on here and have FA rip me for my ignorance while everyone becomes an accountancy expert for the day!

Thanks Adey.

Oddly enough, the administrator seems to have exactly the same mistaken ideas as to the purchase price and as to the 50% reduction for two seasons as me. Those who know better need to write in and set him straight too

Fascinating read and the administrators summary is remarkably clear though I suspect it wont go down too well in the Khan and Whitcut households, or indeed anyone who though they were "fit and proper persons". The interim guys actually seem to have made a fair job of trying to reverse the massive losses but with OK's interference from beyond the grave didn't really have a chance.

Anyway in summary:

1) Ok paid £150k for the club - the other amount would only have been due if we had a franchise in 2015.
2) OK put in aprox £400k , though claims to be owed over £1m. The Administrator is investigating related party transactions?
3) Council put in £200k - but guaranteed by OK, who also seems to have made a pledge for the surrendered Sky money
4) However the looses mean a deficit of over £1m remains so nothing to share out with creditors, of which over £200k is the us (represented by the tax man)
5) The admin fees to date £47k

OKBL purchased the business and assets for £150k

There was an additional £100k if OKB got a 2015 franchise, "due to changes in SL structure from 2104 onwards no further franchise will be granted and as a consequence this additional payment will no longer fall due". (In other words, even if the club hadn't gone tits, OK would no longer have had to pay that 100k. He was fully paid up)

Mr Khan agreed to take a 50% reduction in the amount the company would receive from central funding for two seasons. The original proposal by the RFL was that no central funding would be paid in season one... it was subsequently agreed that this would be spread over two seasons.

All employees "were transferred under TUPE to BB2104 but "due to non-completion of the sale the employee's (sic) remain employed by OK Bulls Ltd". So they were TUPEd. And also they weren't.

Don't suppose it matters much any more.

Unsecured creditors are unlikely to get a penny. They include £255k HMRC, nearly 550k trade creditors and 375k Omar Khan.

So, reasons for insolvency - according to Mr Wilson

Reduction in Central funding - proposed by RFL, accepted by OK - blame 50:50?
Continued trading losses - all due to OK
Accounting irregularities? Wtf? Criminal? Fraudulent? Just incompetence? Blame for this one? Who knows
Lack of available capital - due to Ok.

OK has also requested a creditors meeting.

Accounting irregularities - the directors have a statutory responsibility to maintain proper accounts, so they should have known what was going on.

Creditors meeting - could be a lynching at the OK Coral stand - any odds on Whitcut attending?

According to oddschecker.com, there are two chances:
Skybet: Slim
Everyone else: none.

thanks Adey, that makes interesting reading.

Whilst OK didn't put £900k in cash in, he did get near that in cash and guarantees. the report says £150k for the purchase plus (£401 kcash put in minus £26k repayment) = 375K plus 200k to the council on PG which is £725k. what it is not possible to determine is whether there was an advance of Sky money that they would want back from him. and if there is, what are the RFL going to do with it, spread it around the other clubs, or make an ex gratia payment to the unsecured trade creditors/hmrc?

As FA says, the administrator states it as it is, one years worth of Sky funding split over between two years, ie 50% of normal funding, and not 50% of the other clubs funding.

You're a trier, I'll give you that, but no, in the end the agreement was that OKB would only receive 50% of the distributions received by other SL clubs in 2013 and 2014. The agreement incidentally specified "distributions" and not "Sky money", which is not quite the same thing, even if not far off.