Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:17 pm  

paulwalker71 wrote:

This is new information. No business plan, no identity of directors and no proof of funding....

Hmmmm

Funny old world, eh?

I suspect there will be plenty more yet to come out.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:19 pm  

Because `C` will probably not want to be named at this stage.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:22 pm  

paulwalker71 wrote:

This is new information. No business plan, no identity of directors and no proof of funding....

Hmmmm

I'm just glad the RFL have actually stated what the problems with this bid are, though no doubt some will still think it should be just waved through and isn't being because the RFL want us out.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:22 pm  

MicktheGled wrote:

While it is true that the Super League clubs have broken into groups with differing opinions, on what should or shouldn't happen to the Bradford Bulls Super League license.

It's my belief that their chosen stance should be confidential and not released into the public domain.

Interesting. The supporters clubs in Scotland were handing in petitions basically telling their chairmen how they wanted the Rangers vote to go. Not been any sign of that here yet then?

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:23 pm  

paulwalker71 wrote:

This is new information. No business plan, no identity of directors and no proof of funding....

Hmmmm

Is it the old board? Or the old, old board.

They were both like that, too.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:42 pm  

Regarding the licence - All the RFL have to do is follow their own operating guidelines on what to do in an administration event (Franchise licence review) and determine the final sanction in a timely (it's now been 5 weeks) manner.

On the Odsal lease - I was under the impression there was a buy-back clause in the new lease that Bradford took on from the RFL. Has administration voided this clause?

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:52 pm  

just what exactly have the rfl been considering then?

How can it take this long to reject an offer that has 2 conditions you wont accept. How can we even reconsider the 2nd one if it doesnt list major shareholders or have proof of where the funds will come from?? That should be the 1st question, and if its not answered reject it right away.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:53 pm  

Highlander wrote:

Regarding the licence - All the RFL have to do is follow their own operating guidelines on what to do in an administration event (Franchise licence review) and determine the final sanction in a timely (it's now been 5 weeks) manner.

suppose the review would take into account as to whether creditors were to be paid and being as no business plan has been included in the offer the RFL can't conduct that review

On the Odsal lease - I was under the impression there was a buy-back clause in the new lease that Bradford took on from the RFL. Has administration voided this clause?

Bradford Bulls may have a buy back clause but if the offer is to form a "newco" then they are a new entity and won't have the option of the clause

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 2:00 pm  

pie.warrior wrote:

suppose the review would take into account as to whether creditors were to be paid and being as no business plan has been included in the offer the RFL can't conduct that review

They managed to announce the 6point penalty part of the sanction without knowing how much creditors were going to be paid.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Wed Aug 01, 2012 2:05 pm  

Asim wrote:

I'm just glad the RFL have actually stated what the problems with this bid are, though no doubt some will still think it should be just waved through and isn't being because the RFL want us out.

Agree! I am slowly losing all hope