Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:19 am  

mat wrote:

apparently marc green has announced we've agreed terms with the council and are at legal stages of buying odsal. Club will own ground by end of year.

That may well be the case for acquiring the freehold however, the RFL want to protect Rugby League at Odsal, so good luck to Marc Green in trying to convince the governing body that his intentions (when attempting to purchase the lease) are of benefit to the Bradford Bulls.

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:41 am  

Peter Hood wrote:

That may well be the case for acquiring the freehold however, the RFL want to protect Rugby League at Odsal, so good luck to Marc Green in trying to convince the governing body that his intentions (when attempting to purchase the lease) are of benefit to the Bradford Bulls.

Anybody that thinks that the RFL wanted to protect Rugby at Odsal is quite deluded.. that being the case they would have accepted the ABC's consortium bid and a lot of the trouble the Club has seen from then could have been avoided. Omar Khan came into our Club when there was only hours left to save it from extinction. As far as I'm aware we didn't even have a bank account as we had no collatural. (In the real Peter Hood's words " the RFL reneged on the £350 odd thousand pound loan promised to us. If required we can find the article.

[Bulliac]

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 10:10 am  

Blotto wrote:

I don't think that's correct, as I understood it the Bulls is a franchise and could use anywhere as a home ground if they wanted to, similar to the NFL franchises, unless that changed with all the administration and buyouts of recent times!

We were told, at a fans' forum, that when the RFL 'bought' the lease, that nothing else had changed, so the club remained responsible for repairs and development. I'd assume the obligation to play the vast majority of games at Odsal until, was it 2018?, remains too. Failure to do so would mean the club would have to repay a chunk of the 'Odsal Settlement', paid to the club by the council C2000, when the 'settlement took effect. I'd assume [dangerous I know..] that any repayment would be on a sliding scale, so maybe not too much to worry about now?

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 10:23 am  

Rarebreed wrote:

Anybody that thinks that the RFL wanted to protect Rugby at Odsal is quite deluded.. that being the case they would have accepted the ABC's consortium bid and a lot of the trouble the Club has seen from then could have been avoided. Omar Khan came into our Club when there was only hours left to save it from extinction. As far as I'm aware we didn't even have a bank account as we had no collatural. (In the real Peter Hood's words " the RFL reneged on the £350 odd thousand pound loan promised to us. If required we can find the article.

That ABC consortium bid was never backed up by a viable business plan. It literally was hot air and promises of investment that may or may not have materialised. Plus with Caisley pulling the strings in the background, the RFL were adamant he wasn't just going to walk back and take control.

Omar Khan's bid (although equally full of the same) had the important factor of council backing and was in a business case sense the bid on the table to accept.

You're quite right about the club having no collatural when the bank pulled the pull. After the good Friday game against Leeds, we had to take over £700,000 in suitcases home and wait till the banks opened Tuesday, before we could directly settle the winding up order with HMRC.

Had we not got over 21,000 to that game and the 5,000 pledges of support, there would not have been a Bradford Bulls team travelling to Widnes on the Monday.

But back to the point about the Odsal lease. The RFL aren't in any immediate haste to sell it to the current administration. Trust me on the notion that they want to ensure Odsal remains the home of the Bradford Bulls.

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 11:07 am  

'We' had to take suitcases full of money home? The royal 'we'? Or are you actually pertaining to be Peter Hood himself

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 2:42 pm  

Nothus wrote:

'We' had to take suitcases full of money home? The royal 'we'? Or are you actually pertaining to be Peter Hood himself

Well £700,000 wasn't going to be left at the club.

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 2:58 pm  

Perhaps if we ask Chris Caisley we will find out what his thoughts were. Thanks for letting us know that the RFL were against an individual who has helped create the whole concept of Super League and ran the most successful club in sport of RL. In their opinion was that a good business decision to see the demise of such a great Club?

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 3:04 pm  

Well if we own the freehold and the RFL the leasehold, then we get into the whole area of ground rent. We could come out ahead on this deak

[Bullseye]

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 3:40 pm  

Now that Peter is on here as a user maybe Chris will join too and give his two penneth?

Re: odsal : Mon Dec 07, 2015 3:50 pm  

Rarebreed wrote:

Perhaps if we ask Chris Caisley we will find out what his thoughts were. Thanks for letting us know that the RFL were against an individual who has helped create the whole concept of Super League and ran the most successful club in sport of RL. In their opinion was that a good business decision to see the demise of such a great Club?

It was Chris Caisley's administration that started the whole demise of this once proud club, but everyone's opinion will depend on whose side they're on.

I'll still stand my original thoughts that the irreversible damage game from the power struggle between Whitcut, Moore and Green.