One Problem... Quote: The RFL " Halifax RLFC submitted an application with insufficient detail in their marketing, media or commercial plans. The club business plan was inadequate, figures presented by the club as the budget and performance forecasts for the 2012-14 Licence period were speculative and the club did not provide sufficient information for KPMG to complete their assessment procedures. Whilst the club has an excellent community program, a good facility and has recently strengthened its Board and player performance system, the club fell below the standards expected of a Super League club. '" www.therfl.co.uk/licensing/super_league If the Bulls collapse it is more likely to be the first step to a 12 team League i.e. a 13 team league

One Problem... Quote: The RFL " Halifax RLFC submitted an application with insufficient detail in their marketing, media or commercial plans. The club business plan was inadequate, figures presented by the club as the budget and performance forecasts for the 2012-14 Licence period were speculative and the club did not provide sufficient information for KPMG to complete their assessment procedures. Whilst the club has an excellent community program, a good facility and has recently strengthened its Board and player performance system, the club fell below the standards expected of a Super League club. '" www.therfl.co.uk/licensing/super_league If the Bulls collapse it is more likely to be the first step to a 12 team League i.e. a 13 team league

No chance they'll cut the Bulls. Just think, they might even move the Magic Weekend to Odsal!

KPMG obviously did their homework didnt they? honestly they must be e at what they do and its not a very good advert for their business.

Bradford Bulls - Grade B


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.


That's not even "speculative", it's a pack of lies which the RFL and KPMG swallowed hook, line and sinker.

Wasn't there some "threat" at the begining of the season about clubs not keeping their promises to the RFL, which was finance/ground related and Halifax were supposed to have been put on 3 months notice ?
At the time it was thought to be aimed at Wakefield or Cas, but now................

It depends on the remit they were given (which in turn is related to how much they were paid). I find it unlikely that their remit required a detail investigation of the representations made to them. Usually they'll have some sort of language in a report explaining that certain assessments have relied on the information provided. It's for someone else to decide (if anyone can be ar$ed) if they were given duff information, willfully, negligently or otherwise. If it turned out that they had been deliberately lied to by someone, what will the sanction be against that individual (or individuals) ? Probably not a lot. Unless there was outright provable fraud, they'll be able to hide behind phrases like "well, it was my honest opinion that crowds would double and sponsors would flock in...just because I got that wrong, doesn't mean I'm a fraud", etc. etc. And technically, they might be right. Hopeless business planning isn't the same as fraud.

This is one of the dangers when you bring in auditors - yes, it has to happen...BUT you need to really careful that you don't think an audit alone constitutes sufficient due diligence. What's really needed is people on the ground with enough knowledge of the game to give things a real 'sniff test' to decide if the plans are hopeless dreaming (or even deliberate BS) or founded in reality. Ticking a list of boxes can sometimes miss very obvious problems.

the first 3 years of the license was to settle in now thats past the rfl have said they will be more strict on the rulings and will be able to demote and promote teams when these are broken

As much as Im not really keen for Fax to go back in to SL it does just appear that we could have just told a pack of lies and been in with a shout but instead we were careful in our estimations and got punished for it. Our careful planning results in us turning a profit while a team that promised the earth has gone belly up. More questions need asking of the RFL in all of this.

Whilst SL is run by the present incumbants i would prefer us to steer well clear of it.

What, while it's run by the chairmen of the member clubs you want nothing to do with it?

Take the opportunity to do 2 x 10's for 2013

These are the clubs that have "life" membership of SL - no matter what they do. These are the clubs that could write their license application on used toilet paper:

Bradford
Catalan Dragons
Hull
Leeds
St Helens
Warrington
Wigan




These are the clubs that have "semi-life" membership, so long as someone is there ploughing the money in:

Huddersfield
London Broncos
Widnes


These are the clubs that will always be touted as the ones to be kicked out when the going gets tough. So long as Championship clubs remain in their current state, they should be safe:

Castleford
Hull K R
Salford
Wakefield

Give it up. There are people on here who just don't want to accept the facts and would rather just blame the RFL for everything.