Very tenuous link, but putting it that way you can see why they think there might be a way in to newco. IF with capital I and F this link gathers momentum and they start piecing more things that make newco liable it shows that the RFL haven't done their homework properly before allowing newco to start the season. As I said previously none of this would be happening had the RFL accepted Thornes bid, we would have had the squad we were thinking we were going to have and probably challenging. There had to be some question of the process somewhere and i'm sure this will bring things out in the wash

It's not that tenuous at all, we were watching Bradford Bulls last season, we are watching them this season, it's a continuation of the brand with the same customers without a shadow of a doubt and none of us would be posting on here if we thought otherwise.

It’s an exercise in technicalities isn’t it? The bit of paper saying “this is a totally new business” is the bone of contention, because in reality this totally new business has taken the place of the old one exactly where it left off despite “no longer existing”. If you were owed money by them, you’d think it was a total con job. I’m very surprised HMRC hasn’t come knocking so far for the debts of the old club, especially in light of us playing in the exact same league, stadium et al. Perhaps if this action is successful by the ex-staff they will.

Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s particularly harsh for any new owners to be punished for the sins of the past, and I’m not saying that in law they are liable for anything, (when it comes down to it I think the old owners and RFL are more answerable) but it’s utterly ridiculous to say this isn’t a continuation of the old “brand” when everyone knows it is, except perhaps in law. Then again the law is an ass.

Very easy to see why they have been dragged in, never looked at it that way

Very glibly, they are saying all contracts were still valid? Hudds, HKR, Sheff and Salford could theoretically be done for tapping up then?

I don't think the "Bradford Bulls" part is relevant. It's all to do with the company that own the Bradford Bulls.

I remember watching one of those Sheriff/bailiff and the court ordered a car company to pay back a customer for selling him a faulty car. When the Bailiffs arrived, the name on the banner was the same, the premises were the same and the guy running it was the same. The cars had all been sold to another company owned by the same guy so the sheriffs/baliffs couldn't get a penny back.

Don't suppose the "not actually being wound up" means we could get some of those points back? Reducing it to six, just for being in admin, would suit us....

worth a try.
It seems nothing is clear apart from we always manage to get the $h1tty end of the stick whatever we do

Yep. Six points back.
Plus all the players that were tapped up and have gone elsewhere. Plus compo from those clubs for breaking the rules.

Just wait and see...

Well, the winding up procedure was supposed bring about an ending followed by a new beginning - not open Pandoras box. But if it is the box we may as well dig deep..

I don't think it's harsh at all, and I can see exactly where Cramer is coming from - the new ownership benefited directly from the old club in terms of goodwill, supporters and benefactors, existing sponsorship opportunities, a place to play, a league to play in and the opportunity to pick up players who had no other means of finding employment so close to the season and after all the other clubs had filled their salary caps.

If any of us started a new company tomorrow, we'd have to go out and earn all of that goodwill and status over time.

I think there's a good chance of him making a successful argument in court and I hope this comes back to bite the RFL and their surrogates ChaLo royally in the backside!

The whole process stank to high heaven and IF there were bids to keep the Bulls going, exiting administration rather than liquidation rejected by the RFL effectively making them worthless to the administrator - then some chickens ought to come home to roost.

Most of all, I hope the lads who lost their jobs or had to accept reduced deals at the Bulls and elsewhere leaving them worse off and maybe even struggling financially by the whole sorry process get something back - I really do.

Wow those grapes are sour.

Vinegar sour

I'm far from sure what "goodwill" was derived from, Green's company, or indeed any of the immediate predecessors.

The previous two or three regimes have left more bad will and mistrust than anything else. I wish I'd a pound sterling for every post on this board proclaiming that the last regime has left them in the position of not trusting "the new lot", and I'm sure all the suppliers who were treated with disdain by the system feel likewise. Precious little goodwill emanating from that lot for anyone, and even less inherited by the newco, imo.

Indeed Bulliac.

The whole process led to me and others NOT buying season tickets. Almost the opposite of goodwill was generated.