For the millionth [well, it feels like it..] time, the rugby lease does NOT run out in 2019. The only thing to run out in 2019 is the time in which the club has to play the majority of its games at Odsal, in order to comply with the Odsal settlement.

Now, I'm no expert on the laws surrounding leasehold property, but I'd suggest that as long as the primary leaseholder [the RFL], continues to pay the agreed rent to the council then RL is safe at Odsal for the next 100 years or so. None of that, to the best of my knowledge, precludes the owners of the club introducing commercial aspects to the site in order to gain better income from it, but I can't imagine the RFL, or indeed the council, sanctioning anything which prevents RL being played there. Unless, of course, another more manageable ground could be found or built within the city.

You worded it much better than I! I meant like we are not necessarily tied to Odsal after 2019 as we don't have to play there. RFL own the lease not the Bulls so once our contract to play the majority of our games there goes we don't have it as a millstone? Could be wrong though. I mean you seem to know more in this aspect of it than I.

No I agree, the RFL won't want anything preventing RL from being played there. But would I be right in saying that after 2019 and that Odsal settlement game deal runs out, the Bulls could decide against playing there. Therefore the RFL would have no choice but to sell the lease for development otherwise it becomes a black hole they are paying for.

My own personal thoughts on the matter is that sooner or later something will be done with Odsal and it wouldn't surprise me if the RFL does follow through and move themselves to Odsal!

To be right, BB my 'knowledge' comes from newspaper articles at the time [T&A, mostly] and what Peter Hood said [I know..] at a fans forum, just after he sold the primary lease to the RFL. As to the settlement deal and the need to play games, I'd guess ut don't actually know] that it would have been 'front-loaded' as in if they'd reneged on the deal in, say 2005, they'd have had much more to pay back than now, when it's nearly up anyway. Though, potentially that may not be the case.

Theoretically, the club could decide it wasn't worth the money, particularly as we have to pay the very expensive upkeep, though clearly, that would mean upsetting the game's governing body and whether that is wise is a moot point. It was always said, at the time the 'settlement' deal was struck that the club might need to bring in capital from outside the game to do any serious upgrades. To me, that probably meant retail, like a supermarket on the site, or some such, or some other smaller industrial use for part of the land - it is quite enormous, let's not forget.

As for us moving out and the RFL selling on their lease to an outsider, we shouldn't forget that the council are the landlords and the RFL have a lease to a rugby ground, so their plans may well be limited, mainly due to the council wanting to be first in the queue to gain money if the stadium is not to remain a rugby ground. I'm no lawyer, and have never seen the lease, but I'd guess that selling their lease for a totally non-rugby purpose might well break the terms they took it out on. So, basically I'm saying that, if the ground were to be totally sold off, even as part of a deal which got us a new ground, then I believe the council would need to fully involved.

All that happens come May 2019 is this:

The tenant (i.e. the RFL) no longer has to use the ground for playing rugby league.
Subject to planning permission, they can after then do whatever they want.

Except they can't, because they now have a sub-tenant (us)
So they have to stick to whatever terms are in our sub-lease for as long as our sub-lease lasts. As we are in occupation and unless we agree, they can't interfere with our occupation.

Just to add to the conspiracy theory but is that not our chairman sat with Marwan?

I said koukash is the mastermind..ha

Then the RFL would be in breach of the rugby-playing term.

But as you said they only have to play there until 2019. If that coincides with the team no longer existing then the RFL are the primary tenant but no sub-tenant as you stated.

Though, outside the signatories to the original[or subsequent renewals] of the lease, and, I'd guess that covers everyone on here, no one actually knows the exact terms of the lease.

If, as I thought, it was, 'front-ended', then at this stage, the cost of repayment to the council might not be too onerous anyway?

With the 4 signings this week is everyone resting a little bit easier as to where we are at now?

I think we are heading in the right direction..smiths 2 year contract hints we are aiming to be in championship next year..

Totally agree. I'm more confident. Could do with a win tomorrow.

Could we ever!

Will be taught ask looking at there squad.

The voices in my head are telling me the RFL have a diabolical plan
There will be a return to 3 year licensing
Salford and Wakey to miss out and be replaced by KR and Bulls
Kockrash to take over at Odsal after walking away from Salford