Saying that though, if one of the younger ones of the 5 - say Storton or Milnes had wanted to stay, I don't think a choice was offered by the sounds of things. If your club tell you (out of the blue) they've come to an arrangement with another club and your agent has started to negotiate your new contract I don't think Storton (for example) gets the chance to say - "actually I would prefer to stay, thanks. "

I think he will. His agent should be acting for his player so shouldn’t be negotiating a deal his player doesn’t want and as hard as it would be going forward, a player can’t be forced to sign a contract at a new club even if his club need to get rid

We are still in such a state of flux you could forgive any player for opting to go sign elsewhere. We have interim people in charge and no indication of the financial backing or funding model required to stop us going pop again. If you were an agent and we came knocking wouldn't you ask what's different this time?

The rfl were given our budgets and forecasts, no? So I would say that there probably is a model in place.
Or are you expecting it to be made public? Because that's obviously not going to happen.

We've always had quite a few of the 'top' rated juniors - too many to name in fact, and there's absolutely nothing to suggest they won't still get an excellent education in the game at the Bulls. The best juniors won't be short of alternatives though, in truth they, and their parents, are likely to be sifting through a bundle of offers from SL clubs and hopefully from us. Given our recent record of upheaval I'd think it would hardly be a shock if a few decide to go elsewhere.

Well I personally am not going to just accept bland assurances that everything will be ok. Not anymore. So they can either demonstrate to me and everyone else, who are understandably jaded and cynical, that things are going to be different, or I'm not emotionally investing.

My point however was that Agents have a duty of care, and irrespective of the budget made available NOW, wouldn't they wish to assure themselves that the club won't go bust again and leave the players in the lurch.

Demonstrate how?
And we're talking about jobs and employers here, it's the same as anywhere else. Did you ask your employer for assurances that they wouldn't go bust before you accepted their job offer? Of course you didn't. If anything you'd probably look at their track record and decide whether or not to take the risk. The players who have agreed to sign with us will have done the same thing.

Nobody can make those kind of assurances.

Well if my employer went bust we’d all be effed as I work for the Government.

It can’t be business as usual being a fan anymore, something has to change. I’m not going to take anymore bland and vague assurances that somehow this time is going to be different. There is a myriad of different ways they can demonstrate a shift away from the relentless cycle of bust, stability, bust, stability, bust. I don’t wish to see specific financial projections, but it’s not beyond the whit of man to give some comfort that they have identified the causes of our relentless financial losses, and to provide an indication that they have a credible plan to address it. Essentially, I want to know what’s different this time and so far I’ve seen nothing at all to provide comfort.

We seemingly agree that a responsible agent would want to satisfy themselves, in whatever way they, can that their clients best interests and financial security are served by going to Bradford.

I think the closest thing you're going to get are the question & answer features the new owners have been regularly putting up. I can't see them being any more forthcoming than that.
For many that's probably not enough and is reflected in our dire season ticket sales. It takes time to build trust, there's no other way.

So what is enough then? Are we generally happy with the last 2 months?

Negatives - we sold a bunch of home grown/exciting players
we've moved from Odsal
Wood is involved.

Positives - we've not gone into admin - which was helped by 1, if not 2 of the negatives.
we seem to be paying invoices and staff as we go along, whilst coming to terms with and/or paying previous liabilities
Any playing squad overseen by John Kear will have certain standards. JK seems to be happy. We've appointed a couple more backroom staff. Players are saying all the right things about preseason.
All the things other teams are doing this time of year, we're doing.
Renovated shop at Odsal - selling merchandise. Maybe some questions about quality, but again, driven by past issues.
4 friendlies set up, then Hunslet said they had been promised one and JK & the board decided it had to be fulfilled as we had made a commitment.
Social media is much, much better.
We've announced a whole bunch of sponsors and the shirt design they will be on looks great.
Season ticket target was low, but has been met.
Perez is a good operator, the negative being he's only a short term fix.

Anything else?

My cynicism certainly isn't rooted in the involvement of Perez or Sawyer. It's the fact that they are temporary and we haven't a clue what or who comes next.

Thats the massive thing for e. All our recent owners have been temporary although we didnt know it at the time. This time we know they are temporary for an even shorter period whith not even an indication of what comes next.

It genuinely seems the people involved (barring Perez from the outside but who knows) are still in it for what they can get and wont commit to sustaining the club going forward. A lot of fans must see it this way. I certainly do. It pains me that my 6 year old is saying he is looking forward to going to Bulls again when it starts. Cant bring myself to dampen his spirits at this present moment. Bit of time between now and then so time for something to make me change my own mind yet, albeit until it happens ive no idea what that could be

So, when Perez leaves, if we have appointed a credible chief exec who will be there long term - that will be enough?
The shareholding has been splintered, like it was 10yrs ago with (approx) Caiseley 35%, Hood 25%, Agar 10% + others.
Instead we have Wood, Sawyer, Fogerty + various Wood family members. If the shareholders stay quiet, in the background and let the new Chief exec get on, that would be enough?

Obviously, we'd need to give them the obligatory 10 games....

Not enough for me. That whole opaque thing really is so 2019. Transparency is required.