Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Thu Dec 26, 2013 5:17 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

If I do not own a business, and am not employed by the business, then on whose authority do I sack staff? .

That one's easy.

A company's owners (ie. The shareholder(s)) appoint (as they are legally required to do) one or more directors to run it for them.

The owner can act as director himself and/or appoint anybody else he wishes as a director.

Agreed it's all very unclear - eg who is/are the directors of OK Bulls today? If there are none, Mr Khan better appoint at least one sharpish.to avoid being in legal default.

The ideal solution is for Bradford Bulls to start again with a new owner (Supporters' Trust?) play at Horsfall and work their way back up from the Championship. This time not spending any more money than they have.

Don't hold your breath though. The only way for the owner the get a big proportion of his loans back from Sky money is to appoint new directors with the aim of keeping the Bulls in Super League. I'd suggest the chances of that being successful as being about 60-40 against at best.

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Thu Dec 26, 2013 5:26 pm  

Wooden Stand wrote:

That one's easy.

A company's owners (ie. The shareholder(s)) appoint (as they are legally required to do) one or more directors to run it for them.

The owner can act as director himself and/or appoint anybody else he wishes as a director.

But it isn't easy, though. It doesn't explain the basis on which a person would come in, devote huge amounts of time and effort, and (seemingly) spend significant amounts of their own money, unless they did so with nothing legal in place whatsoever as to their ownership of the shares. I find that scenario extremely implausible.

Wooden Stand wrote:

Agreed it's all very unclear - eg who is/are the directors of OK Bulls today? If there are none, Mr Khan better appoint at least one sharpish.to avoid being in legal default.

Indeed

Wooden Stand wrote:

The ideal solution is for Bradford Bulls to start again with a new owner (Supporters' Trust?)

Yes, because there are certainly queues of people with the skill, will and time to start up and run a club from the ground upwards from scratch, for nothing. Only perhaps you could point me in the direction of the queues as for some reason I can't find them. Oh, and they couldn't start again as Bradford Bulls as that trading name is seemingly owned by someone else.

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:28 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

ONE explanation of the comments from the OK camp would be that it is OK's position that the equitable ownership of the club has indeed been transferred to the "new owners" since if he is not suing to enforce a payment which he thinks is legally due and payable, then what else can he be suing for? That is, there was either a legally binding deal to sell the club, or there wasn't.
.

From what little we know I would think it is a breach of contract situation, ie Moore & Whitcut signed terms of sale committing to buy the shares on a specific date at a specific price. They have not provided funds to complete the purchase by the contracted date and would therefore be in breach of contract. If it was a share purchase by individuals then no doubt they'd have signed the agreement on a personal guarantee basis hence why OK is suing them. Their failure to fulfil the contract would put them in breach of contract and able to be sued.

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Fri Dec 27, 2013 7:40 am  

Derwent wrote:

From what little we know I would think it is a breach of contract situation, ie Moore & Whitcut signed terms of sale committing to buy the shares on a specific date at a specific price. They have not provided funds to complete the purchase by the contracted date and would therefore be in breach of contract. If it was a share purchase by individuals then no doubt they'd have signed the agreement on a personal guarantee basis hence why OK is suing them. Their failure to fulfil the contract would put them in breach of contract and able to be sued.

That's certainly a possibility, but would that contract be null and void if things where hidden at the time of the sale, such as undisclosed loans to the previous owner? Or is it a case of buyer beware?

Whilst it is of no use to the Bulls. The lessons that the Bulls are teaching other SL clubs are valuable. ie if you can get fans to try and bail out the club, put the money into buying a portion of the club and don't hand it over. I can only look back and think if administration had occurred and the fans offered their £0.5 million as capital would the club have been run differently? Yes maybe a few league places lower due to less being spent, but solvent and looking to the future.

I know it's pointless to reminisce, but hey!

Just a thought, would a new club need to start elsewhere. The RFL own the ground, so surely they could allow 2 RL clubs to play there? Also whilst the Bradford Bulls name is taken, does anyone have dibs on Northern??? Also would they need to start outside of SL as the rules for entry into SL is arbitrary and dependent upon the clubs voting for it???

But it would be something for the Bulls fans on mass to transfer to a new club entirely. You don't want to split the fan base as it's the one asset worth something at Bradford. The fan base in a way is the only asset worth anything.

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Fri Dec 27, 2013 7:48 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

That's certainly a possibility, but would that contract be null and void if things where hidden at the time of the sale, such as undisclosed loans to the previous owner? Or is it a case of buyer beware?

Whilst it is of no use to the Bulls. The lessons that the Bulls are teaching other SL clubs are valuable. ie if you can get fans to try and bail out the club, put the money into buying a portion of the club and don't hand it over. I can only look back and think if administration had occurred and the fans offered their £0.5 million as capital would the club have been run differently? Yes maybe a few league places lower due to less being spent, but solvent and looking to the future.

I know it's pointless to reminisce, but hey!

Just a thought, would a new club need to start elsewhere. The RFL own the ground, so surely they could allow 2 RL clubs to play there? Also whilst the Bradford Bulls name is taken, does anyone have dibs on Northern??? Also would they need to start outside of SL as the rules for entry into SL is arbitrary and dependent upon the clubs voting for it???

But it would be something for the Bulls fans on mass to transfer to a new club entirely. You don't want to split the fan base as it's the one asset worth something at Bradford. The fan base in a way is the only asset worth anything.

It's a none starter. The length of time it would take to set up the trust - given the legal undertakings required - and then setting up a bank account for it would have meant the club would have been liquidated long before it happened.

It was talked about at the time but it would only work in setting up a brand new club or taking over one that was solvent.

The pledge meant there was cash in the club to keep it going a little but longer. Ultimately it did help save the club although it wasn't what the donations from us were intended for.

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Fri Dec 27, 2013 7:54 am  

Also I've just thought that season tickets already sold are a kind of asset, as you have a captive fan base. They may not be worth anything as money has already been spent, but any new club would need to honor these tickets surely? Or lose thousands of fans.

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:30 am  

Wooden Stand wrote: That one's easy. A company's owners (ie. The shareholder(s)) appoint (as they are legally required to do) one or more directors to run it for them. The owner can act as director himself and/or appoint anybody else he wishes as a director. Agreed it's all very unclear - eg who is/are the directors of OK Bulls today? If there are none, Mr Khan better appoint at least one sharpish.to avoid being in legal default. The ideal solution is for Bradford Bulls to start again with a new owner (Supporters' Trust?) play at Horsfall and work their way back up from the Championship. This time not spending any more money than they have. Don't hold your breath though. The only way for the owner the get a big proportion of his loans back from Sky money is to appoint new directors with the aim of keeping the Bulls in Super League. I'd suggest the chances of that being successful as being about 60-40 against at best. Could be worth a visit for anyone interested in setting up a Trust http://philcaplan.wordpress.com/2013/12 ... by-league/

Wooden Stand wrote: That one's easy. A company's owners (ie. The shareholder(s)) appoint (as they are legally required to do) one or more directors to run it for them. The owner can act as director himself and/or appoint anybody else he wishes as a director. Agreed it's all very unclear - eg who is/are the directors of OK Bulls today? If there are none, Mr Khan better appoint at least one sharpish.to avoid being in legal default. The ideal solution is for Bradford Bulls to start again with a new owner (Supporters' Trust?) play at Horsfall and work their way back up from the Championship. This time not spending any more money than they have. Don't hold your breath though. The only way for the owner the get a big proportion of his loans back from Sky money is to appoint new directors with the aim of keeping the Bulls in Super League. I'd suggest the chances of that being successful as being about 60-40 against at best. Could be worth a visit for anyone interested in setting up a Trust http://philcaplan.wordpress.com/2013/12 ... by-league/

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:35 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

That's certainly a possibility, but would that contract be null and void if things where hidden at the time of the sale, such as undisclosed loans to the previous owner? Or is it a case of buyer beware?

Isn't it more a case of "buyer make sure you have a competent solicitor"?

The way this saga has been reported it seems rather like someone buying a dilapidated house without carrying out a proper survey. They then move in and start spending money on renovations, only to find that the problems are much worse than they thought and the house is about to fall down. And the previous owner has somehow managed to attach a mortgage to the property. But the good news for them is that they haven't actually paid for the house and the previous owner has held onto the title deeds so they think they can back out.

You would normally expect solicitors to stop much of that from happening (although not the bit about not carrying out the survey). Given the Bulls widely reported financial problems, you would assume that any sensible buyer wouldn't go near the club without watertight legal agreements. And the people involved all seem to be savvy individuals which makes this farce seem so inexplicable.

I don't think the Bulls could survive a protracted legal dispute. This sort of dispute must be the kiss of death for potential sponsors. It must have killed off any hope of selling more season tickets. And I very much doubt that any of the parties involved will want to put any more money into the club to cover any cashflow problems.

[Bullseye]

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Fri Dec 27, 2013 10:04 am  

Makes you wonder how long we can continue to pay salaries.

Re: Moore, Calvert and Watt step down : Fri Dec 27, 2013 10:29 am  

Which is why it is important to get good attendances at the friendly games.