Everyone I converse with just cannot understand, how Trinity on the verge of administration had to restructure etc ,yet the Bulls actually in administration, can talk about keeping squad together and even bringing players in.
Baffled.

obviously we got the wrong Administrators in at Wakey just our luck

. Bradford have had 2 different administrators and managed to keep their players apart from two who decided enough is enough and jumped ship.

Yes - at times. But I can only tell you what I am told / can find out - RHP is part of the management and has continued to tell the world how they were all sorted; how they were 'ring-fencing' the squad and then BANG!

He has been tripping around the truth - and yes, it bothers me when my club is on the line too!

I have to say, he was on the SL show sounding extremely positive - but I would imagine there was nothing he could really divulge so had to give vague, generic answers.

If you watch it back, as I have done (casue I'm sad) he doesn't really answer what Tanya asks him, almost as if the BOD have given him a card and said "say this, only this, and nothing but this".

I think RHP is a great asset of the game and he is a jewel in their fairly wonky crown right now IMO. His experience may be lacking but I'm sure he is doing the best he can for the club.

The "ring fence" sham was just to buy time I think. Any potential investors will see them as a more appealing business venture if they have their major assets (i.e. players) intact

Unless it is a direct instruction from The RFL, I don't see how the administrator could ring fence their assets if someone offered the right money.
Crikey, the administrators couldn't wait to sell our players off and they didn't get anywhere near market price.
One issue that has not had a mention up to now but, where is the administrator getting his income from, baring in mind there is no ST revenue and heavily reduced numbers turning up to watch, it is likely that The RFL are funding them ??, which begs the question as to just how long they can, or will continue.
First of all they had 28 days (now expired) but someone with very deep pockets is going to have to come along real soon.

Wrenny, I was suggesting that the club released the "ring-fence" sham as a smoke screen to keep clubs away from approaching the administrator for as long as possible, rather than the administrator released that statement.

Like a false deterrent that might buy them time to find new investment.

Can the investors use players as leverage? Offering them round? or do clubs have to formally approach the administrators directly?

Also, I thought OK Bulls were liquidated, so does the club even exist right now? (sounds silly but a genuine question)

Not quite. The administrator is acting on behalf of the creditors and his job is to get the best deal for them. All club incomes go to him and he decides if and when to pay any bills eg wages. His primary concern is to ensure that his costs are covered hence when we were in admin he sold player after player to meet his own costs. All season ticket monies will have been spent as will have the sponsorships and RFL money to date so he will only have the gate receipts and the RFL monthly funding to cover costs so the longer Bulls go without a definite buyer the harder it becomes to maintain the business as a going concern.

The fate of the Bulls is entirely at the administrator's discretion and the most surprising thing is that they got through the last administration relatively unscathed when if the administrator had been doing a proper job he would have liquidated more assets to pay creditors. His actions were disingenius at best and probably unlawful.

I understand all that you have said but, I just don't see how the Bulls can be generating sufficient income to cover their wage bill let alone any other costs.
There is no "fat" from ST sales or "Xmas trade" which most clubs may have at the beginning of the season.
They will have some sponsorship revenue, gate receipts and matchday sales, which on falling crowd numbers, will leave a shortfall.
Who is picking up this tab ?

The administrator did sell some of our players to cover his costs but no Bulls players were sold to cover the costs of the Bulls admin last time.

I've a very vague recollection that the administrator was being paid at the time so didn't necasserily need to sell players to pay his/their wages.

I'm pleasantly surprised that the RFL did their job and rightfully punished the Bulls with a 6 point deduction.

Fortunately for the Bulls, such an action has led to Moore & Co pulling out of purchasing them. They blamed the points deduction but in actual fact they simply do not have the cash to support the Bulls which was evidenced in the RFL press release explaining the debacle.

It was also quite clear that 'working with creditors', actually implied, we won't pay anyone unless we have no alternative but to and hence the points deduction being six and not four.

That said, 6 points isn't that much and I'm glad we can get back to talking about rugby. We should have expected to finish above them anyway but now is not the time to relax, we need to push on and ensure we're not caught up in a relegation battle