But the licence period isn’t over, I thought we were in the 3rd year?

When it came to light that Bradford were getting reduced monies, the explanation was peddled that it was in fact a sweetener suggested by the Bradford club!

So for the second time in a couple of years it appears Bradford will be keeping the majority of their squad, when it’s obvious they can’t afford it.

What a sorry state of affairs when the original powerhouse of SL is trying to wriggle out of a points deduction, for not being able to afford an average team .

I can't be d in attending to the wealth of ill-informed comment on here, any more than I have time to acknowledge the considerable number of informed and constructive posts. So some quick comments from me then I'll let you all carry on with it.

First and foremost, it is pretty clear this is primarily about getting control of the club off Omar Khan, when it appears he had gone back on his agreement to transfer it. Had I been taking over the club, the first thing I would have done is sought to transfer the whole undertaking to a new vehicle, to quarantine it from whatever nasty might be lurking from the previous administration.

Khan is far and away the biggest creditor, so the biggest loss will fall on him. As I see the 'Vark posted earlier, he has lost every cent he put in. But that is the risk you face as a club owner. The only reason he is a creditor is because he put jack sh it in as share capital. It was virtually all loans, although he sort of forgot to tell the fans that when he was collecting theoir plausits and adulation. So, if he loses his investment, is that a reason by itself to punish the Bulls? Thought not.

Everything seems to point to the new company settling the rugby liabilities of the old company. I am assuming this must include things like HMRC and the loan from the council (although I would imagine the council would proceed against OK first as personal guarantor of the loan, if indeed that he is as has been reported). The employees have all been TUPEd across anyway, and as I understand it the rugby creditors are fairly limited because not many businesses were too keen on advancing the Bulls credit. Wonder why...? SO if all this lot get settled, is that a reason by itself to punish the Bulls? Thought not.

There is a big "IF" in there, of course. Should it transpire that they do not, then as well as me being pretty angry I do not think anyone could convincingly argue against points deduction or worse.

Then there is a strange loan due to a moneylender, which is secured by a debenture. If only part of what I hear about this loan is true, some individuals (not the current lot) may have some very serious personal worries. But I am assuming it will get repaid from whatever Newco paid the administrator for the assets. SO if he gets settled - no matter how distasteful folk may view his line of business - is that a reason by itself to punish the Bulls? Thought not.

Where I suspect there may be a grey area is if there are any liabilities, including any which may or may not have crawled out of the woodwork recently, which are not related to the rugby or are "questionable" I prefer not to comment much on hearsay, let alone repeat it and risk it being actionable. But the more I hear, the more I wonder if the administrator may have an interesting job ahead in investigating the conduct of past and latest directors (as he is obliged to do)? Personally, I would be relaxed about any of these being left with the administrator, but I accept others might well choose not to see any distinction. At least until or unless more facts and truths came out. Now I do not know if there are any such alleged liabilities lurking, so I am only speculating here.

Everything we hear from the new lot suggests they have cut costs - and a LOT of people - and secured additional income streams so that the books should balance for this coming season. I am far more confident that this lot can do it than any previous lot I have dealt with there. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating, of course. I hope, and want to believe, that this will indeed be the case.

I can fully understand how all this must look at first glance to outsiders. And the more so to those that have not been keeping themselves abreast of the rolling tragic comedy that has been the Bulls over the last two years under several different administrations, all of whom seemed to me to be to have more than one reason for being involved in the club. And are not aware of all the informal allegations that are fairly consistently being made. And even more so to those whose knowledge of insolvency is on a par with my expertise in actually playing the game (clue: minimal...).

If the only material loss to genuine creditors is to Omar Khan, I am totally relaxed about it. That's the risk you take when you buy and fund a sports club, and take all the plaudits in the good times. If other real people were to suffer financial loss, then I would most definitely not be.

What I would ask is, can people maybe keep some of their powder dry for a bit, till more of the facts and circumstances come out (it might take a while, mind?) And maybe, just maybe, keep a bity of an open mind rather than rushing in to be judge and jury without hearing the evidence?

Why?

Or, more to the point, if the consequences were "no points deduction because there has been no loss to genuine creditors", and therefore no advantge gained, why would that be a problem?

The initial statement said that the new bulls are going to pay the old bulls' debts. If thats the case then why do they need punishing further?

Really!
You don't remember other clubs fans (including myself) helping to pay your debts and bail you out?
Short memories, some people!

I'm only talking about the financial troubles you were in 18 months ago, I'm not going to mention the 60s when other clubs, Wakefield Trinity in particular, bailed Bradford out.

Is it?

If the current lot have balanced the books for this coming season, as they indicate they have after some pretty ruthless cuts, then they clearly CAN afford it. Wouldn't you say?

Incidentally, do you want me to post the long a list of all the players who the club has NOT kept? There were some pretty big earners on that list too. There are far less of those on the current squad list.

All these issues relate to LAST season, and to the wrangle over ownership. Not to the forthcoming season.

Will Bradford pay back the £750,000 they got for the lease on iconic Odsal!

Let's not talk about fair or parity here because the Bulls have had preferential treatment that no other club has ever come clse to receiving.

Read what he said sunshine. He said other CLUBS. Not individual fans.

The amount from other clubs' fans was of course hugely appreciated at the time. It WAS only a fairly modest part of the total, even then, but of course it all helped. And I for one paid to the likes of Halifax and Leigh when THEY were appealing for funds to keep THEIR clubs alive.

Gestures that really stand out to me were the donation by the Warrington club to the Bullbuilder Hardship fund (and a much smaller one from Huddersfield) which helped pay staff made redundant who carried on working regardless (no debts being paid off there...) and a fantastic donation by Steve O'Connor of Widnes to the pledge campaign earlier.

You will never, ever hear me call the Warrington club now, after that gesture.

Another club you will not hear me call now is Leeds. They made a very big gate receipts donation to the administrator after Caisley's mob put the club i0bto administration. And by all accounts have been pretty supportive thereafter and to this day. That donation helped the club keep playing during the administration - it did not settle any debts.

The only one of those I listed that settled any debts was Steve O'Connor's. Its a shame that wonderful gesture came to naught, but he will always be a hero to Bulls fans for the gesture, as I am sure the poster you quoted would agree.

Eh?

Firstly, it was £1.25m.

Secondly, they pay £78k p.a. rent to the RFL in exchange. Do the maths, that is a pretty good return on investment.

Thirdly, they sold their principal asset for what some like Caisley alleged was below fair value and. I'm sure if the opportunity came to buy back the lease for the same price eventuated, once the club gets its full allocation of Sky monies again and is not £2/3m down to the benefit of all the other clubs, the club would take it.

OK, next?

Course i remember. I was replying to the posters statement about other clubs taking on Bradford debt. No clubs took on our debt. Our chairmen got the begging buckets out and the Bulls faithful and many RL supporters helped out. People VOLUNTARILY put their money in to help save the club. I would do the same for any other club because i love the game. I know a few Bulls fans who helped out Salford before Koukash came in.

It was Omar Khan who the RFL were happy with to take over from the 'other lot' who took the club into administration.
It was the RFL who took the Crusaders from south Wales and handed them over to a chief executive at Wrexham,Paul Retout,who has since been jailed and two owners Moss and Roberts,who the soccer fans warned against.
rlExpansion Clubrl
When Khan 'took ill',and left the Bradford club with the Labour MP,it was on Khan's suggestion that Whitcut took over.
While not really owning the club he was in position for a couple of weeks until the RFL decided Whitcut was not a fit and proper person.
The club was then taken over by the current incumbents who had been brought to the club by Whitcut.
The RFL in the meantime state that their micro-managing of clubs prevents them working on 'commercial opportunities'.rlSTORYrl

If the RFL keep on doing what they've always done they'll always get what they've always had.
Unprofessional judgement and unfair working practices and making the sport a laughing stock while driving away sponsors and commercial opportunities as well as causing parents to persuade their children in other directions.
Clubs going into administration.
During a week when people were having their spirits lifted this happens;again.

I wish Bulls fans would not try to justify the admin scenario. Had they let more players go last time they might not have been in the crap again so soon.

Oh and please don't bleat about the half superleague money as wakefield did not get any for the first 2 years they were in superleague and managed to survive

Is that what you said when Salford were in administration?