Seen as all finances were checked by 'experts' and reported back in detail to the RFL prior to the licence decision, they surely must have seen big holes and potential disaster?

Whats your opinion?

So you're suggesting the RFL were aware of impending disaster and decided to give them a licence ?

Wouldn't that undermine their own licensing process ?

I was under the impression KPMG reviewed the business plans, not the RFL? Have I made that up? Wouldn't be the first time.

I think "you could not make it up" pretty well sums up this whole sorry disaster!

I would say no because they were given a licence, but at the same time yes because we got one. (Although we fortunately have someone willing to bankroll us and our 2000 fans)
Lets face it. the Super League wouldn't be the same without Bradford.

Of course they did, hells bells, they were about to give the Crusaders a licence until the ‘Dear John’ letter dropped though the letter box at Red Hall.

The RFL lent Bradford £700k at the beginning of 2011.

How prophetic

I was under the impressions circumstances had changed, particularly around an overdraft.
Plans, forecasts and expectations are just that, and no guarantee.

What? Calm, reasoned and sensible? Begone you vile devil! Leave this place and never return!

This may be so, but they report back to the RFL, who then make decisions based on the information given.
There still appears to be a few pieces of the jigsaw missing. Everyone empty their pockets.

If the KPMG report on Bradford said that the finances and forecasts that the club had made were OK, then the RFL would have accepted that. Bear in mind that as far as the licencing process is concerned we're looking back a year or more and a lot can change in that sort of time frame, whatever business you're in.

Theres a post on here which suggests the rfl loaned bradford £700k over 14months ago