[Bullseye]

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:33 am  

tigertot wrote:

How is it asset stripping? What are the RFL making out of holding the head lease? They would be better off saying to Bradford, here have it back, you pay the bills.

The Bulls DO pay the bills that's the problem.

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:42 am  

Bullseye wrote:

The Bulls DO pay the bills that's the problem.

We may not have been paying the actual bills but in the end we do pay the price.

I am starting to think it would nice to see every player say no to the new contracts and not be able to get a team for HKR or a few games after that. We will never find out what has gone on and who was making the decisions as it could be embarrassing for the RFL.

The backlash that concerns me more than that is supporters turning their backs on the new club and there are less than 2000 at home games where half of them had their tickets given. We would struggle to see the season out if that happened.
I hope I am looking on the downside.
Fingers crossed that these two big RL names are in it purely to get back into the game and re-build a "big" club that is now on its knees. We now desperately need details to stop all of our guessing and speculating.

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:57 am  

Bullseye wrote:

The Bulls DO pay the bills that's the problem.

What do the RFL get out of that?

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:58 am  

tigertot wrote:

How is it asset stripping? What are the RFL making out of holding the head lease? They would be better off saying to Bradford, here have it back, you pay the bills.

£70k/year, major say in the use of the land, incumbent club paying for the upkeep/bills in an antiquated stadium etc, a cynic would also put forward it gives them full and complete control over ownership any Bradford club (as witnessed during this debacle and Marc Green), land to build their rumoured pie in the sky national academy and head quarters now they've disposed of red hall...

But say it quietly as it was a complete act of favouritism.

[Bullseye]

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:31 am  

tigertot wrote:

What do the RFL get out of that?

£72k a year rent but the club also pay for the upkeep of the stadium which can run into 10s of thousands per year.

[Bulliac]

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:37 am  

Nothus wrote:

Let's not forget how they ended up with the lease. That, in my opinion, is completely the fault of our incompetent owners at the time. I wouldn't really call it asset stripping when it was offered to them as part repayment of a loan we couldn't repay

Don't think that's totally true, tbh.

Yes, they were pretty inept, that's clear, but I think Peter Hood really thought he was just selling the lease and was expecting top receive the £1.5m [or whatever] to go towards the tax and vat bill which he really should have been putting money aside for. Whatever his thoughts about the loan that was owed to the RFL I believe he was fully expecting them to cough up the whole £1.5m from the lease and it knocked his 'financial planning' [or lack of] sideways when they deducted the outstanding amount.

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:43 am  

Bulliac wrote:

Don't think that's totally true, tbh.

Yes, they were pretty inept, that's clear, but I think Peter Hood really thought he was just selling the lease and was expecting top receive the £1.5m [or whatever] to go towards the tax and vat bill which he really should have been putting money aside for. Whatever his thoughts about the loan that was owed to the RFL I believe he was fully expecting them to cough up the whole £1.5m from the lease and it knocked his 'financial planning' [or lack of] sideways when they deducted the outstanding amount.

Knocked his financial planning even more when bank took rest of money for lease to clear clubs overdraft that was secured against the lease.

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:56 am  

Scarey71 wrote:

£70k/year, major say in the use of the land, incumbent club paying for the upkeep/bills in an antiquated stadium etc, a cynic would also put forward it gives them full and complete control over ownership any Bradford club (as witnessed during this debacle and Marc Green), land to build their rumoured pie in the sky national academy and head quarters now they've disposed of red hall...

RFL pay a rent to Bradford Council as landlords. What do you expect? You have no idea what influence they have on the use of the land, which is restricted by legal agreements & planning permissions. They have influence over the ownership of all clubs. Bradford have shown they cannot be trusted to run a steady ship; only a fool would suggest they not be involved in the next arrangement. But you think the RFL should just give it Bradford Bulls, despite you also accusing them of favouritism.
I would think you have no knowledge of any discussions about an academy or HQ. They will both come at significant cost, including significant ongoing rent to a skint local authority.

Scarey71 wrote:

But say it quietly as it was a complete act of favouritism.

Make your mind up. It was either favouritism or opportunism, which? That green-eyed monster is slowly devouring your crumb of a brain.

[Bullseye]

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 12:08 pm  

Think the rent to the Council is significantly lower than £72k tigertot. It was when the club had the lease.

Re: Phoenix from the flames? : Tue Jan 17, 2017 12:11 pm  

tigertot wrote:

RFL pay a rent to Bradford Council as landlords..

They do, if you count one peppercorn as rent, and if they ever send the peppercorns across, which I doubt.