That depends on the club in question. To a SL club, 7k might not be a great deal of money, but for a club at Rochdale's level? It can be the difference between life and death.

So how much was the loan ?

Not necessarily correct what the article actually said was:

"The loan is around £7,000 short of the club’s current tax bill – but Hornets’ directors will make up the shortfall."

That can clearly be read in two ways, either the loan was £7,000 which was short of the total required OR the loan was the value of the tax bill less £7,000

The Manchester Evening News school of grammar and punctuation strikes again

Yeah, I mis-read the article. rlThis onerlhowever, has a few more interesting figures. A winding up order for £55k, the RFL loan being around £7k short, meaning a loan of around £48k. Which as you pointed out, makes my point even more solid. And as the argument was that the Bulls have been solitary in their support from the RFL, I don't see how other clubs getting the same sort of hand ups can be irrelevant.

Yet again a potential misreading!
The article in The News & Star does state that the winding up order was for £55,000 to HMRC but also says:

"Rochdale, who were established back in 1871, had debts totalling £190,000, with £150,000 of that owed to the Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise, with a further £40,000 due to local suppliers"

Couple that with the MEN article which refers to "... the club's current tax bill...." which would include IR and Customs & Excise and the loan could well have been £143,000 ie £7K short of £150K

Don't they do comprehension in schools any more?

Last post on this complete mess, 48 K is a lot different to 600 K, nobody is suggesting other clubs haven't had support from the RFL, Leigh were supported by them a couple of seasons ago

It is the level of support, the clandestine nature of it, the complete ' bull ' that was used to justify it, the fact this support was needed a matter of months after they had been awarded a ' B ' licence

Its the whole sorry mess, defend it all you want , would other lesser profile clubs have recieved similar? , we dont really know, personally, I doubt it

Lets hope the latest people in the hot seat get it right, because I doubt they'll be offered it again

It's also to do with the fact they spent lots of money, money they didn't have, turning themselves into an "iconic" club.

The sport then ran around to keep their licence, a system, we are repeatedly told, that persuades clubs from overspending. Remember their "B" licence? I don't know if it's ironic or just shoddy administration of the licensing system.

The sport has to rally around the next club this happens to, whatever its level, in the same way. Giving a green light for clubs to continue bad financial management! Brilliant

You aren't trying to have a debate, you are trolling. Your ridiculous contradiction simply highlights it. You aren't going to fool anyone by pretending to be the victim now Mr Busted Flush

The problem is that when circumstances aren't the same, the response can't be the same and nor should we expect it to be.

For example Wakefield have no assets to secure against, the have no stadium or owned facilities with value to act as collateral. Bradford did. Do the RFL need to extend a loan to Wakefield as the did to Bradford to be treating them fairly?

And I think this green light o bad management issue is a red herring. No one wants to be losing money, by the time we reach this point the owners have already lost money and are already likely to be gone or going. This is about how we recover clubs for the game, those who got them into that position will lose out.

It was paid back through the lease. The million plus pound was taken from the bulls share of SLE and sky funding. That money was given to other SL clubs.

A £700k loan secured against the lease on Odsal has cost Bradford over £1m in sky funding and the lease. This according to some is a sweetheart deal for Bradford.

To those who think this was a good deal, if you want to send me a PM I have some really attractive financial products to talk to you about.

The Licensing report for the Bulls read:

Bradford Bulls provided a solid submission detailing a strategy, tactical plan and targets to achieve improved commercial and financial performance. The club has a solid fan base, a strong brand and good operating structure/governance in place. However the club faces some challenges. These include the local economic environment, poor recent on-field performance and an ageing facility. The application acknowledges these challenges; however the club believes that its business plan for the next three years will move it to a position of sustainability with good prospects for further growth. The club has invested heavily in its youth performance programme in recent years, and it is expected that the club will soon start to reap the rewards of this investment with improved performances and increased numbers of quality club-trained players.

Am I right in thinking the initial £700k was secured against nothing, and only when the RFL realised they were unlikely to see that again another £500k was 'payed' on top of the previous loan to prevent predatory developers getting their hands on the 'iconic' Odsal.