O 'brien was the only one who signed a new contract who could not have it ratified. Whitehead signed his before all problems came to light and was never mentioned about it being a problem. If it was not ratified if we came out of admin the contract would be there and signed anyway.

Maybe somone trying to fish....

I'm sure I remember a Wakey official saying, circa April, that they might be interested in some of our players.

Have they made any offers and been turned down?

As far as I recall when we were in the brown sticky stuff we didn't have the luxury of being able to turn down offers?!?!

Afaik whitehead is in same situation as o'brien. His contract was signed and announced but paperwork was still going through when everything blew up. But his prior contract coves next year so should only be extended portion that could be an issue.

Which offers has Guilfoyle turned down?

A few clubs have been sniffing, afaik we have had an offer turned down for one player and dealings to make the Sykes loan deal permanent have been made difficult.
Reading various things in the RL media and what with SL being fairly dog eat dog, I would be amazed if the likes of Hull, Hudds and Warrington haven't made offers.
Has the administrator made any effort to raise any funds for creditors?
I appreciate he has cut back the wage bill by losing back office and coaching staff wages but has he actually realised any assets yet?

Hull, Hudds and Warrington have made offers We have turned them down or delayed to see what our future holds A well documented £300,000 bid went in for Bateman but we refused to sign it there and then (which was a massive risk as we could have gone into liquidation a week later).

the problem is the only assets the club has are the players. The offers received have been ridiculously low, think 5-10k level. that sort of money doesnt make much of an impression on the level of debt so administrator has taken the view that the players have a higher value as part of a sale of the club as a going concern. Just because the wakefield administrator took a differnet view and sold players for peanuts doesnt mean that it is the only way to handle a administration.

The 300k offer for bateman was before we went into administration. It will have dropped dramatically once we were in admin, plus bateman allegedly refused to agree personal terms with any club other than bradford making him worthless as a saleable asset.

Aye true but I though the offer were just before we went into admin (at the point where everyone knew it was inevitable). And well he wanted to stay until they died or get back on their feet. He didn't want to leave a sinking ship especially if that ship is repairable and called Bradford.

If I remember correctly Wakefield were made to sell two or three players for about £10k each.

To be honest id rather keep them if there is a chance of getting on our feet and risking it instead of selling players for 5-10K like you guys did. I understand why Wakey did it but Bradford are taking a different view. Yes we have a right to turn down money if we don't want to accept the offer.

In the eyes of a creditor I wouldn't care if there was bids for the club willing to pay the debts off. Why get £10,000 when all the debt owed to you could be paid off by Khan/Sutcliffe or BPA ?

Depends entirely on how much the creditor ends up getting paid in the end doesnt it?. If admin sells of assets piecemeal for a lot less than there worth the creditors could get less than if club is sold as a going concern. Until this is resolved and we know how much of debt is repaid then its impossible to say.

But given level of offers being received entire playing squad wouldnt have realised much more than 250k sold piecemeal and then club itself would have sold for peanuts. Sold as a going concern its potentially going to bring a much larger sum for the creditors.

Wakefield weren't made to do that. Your Administrator chose to do that to keep club going in off season. Did he TRY asking RFL for an advance on TV money,before selling player, like ours did?.

If clubs had been making genuine offers for Bulls players, which have been turned down by the Administrator, don't you think we would have heard about it? Why haven't there been any complaints in the media from the clubs involved?

Isn't it possible that those clubs have not made offers because they expect the players to become available as free agents?