Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:19 pm  

Bully_Boxer wrote:

:D

Well given we've heard nothing on the bidder or their potential plans, I'm all ears to how you've come to that assumption? Unless you've just returned to stir some poop? I'd say the latter is most likely on previous form.

You are 100% wrong but I can understand your touchiness. It was a genuine question seeing as the link is waste disposal and constant mentions of Odsal and landfill. As a RL fan I am as concerned as anyone to your future.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:21 pm  

Surely with it being a case of crossing t's and dotting i's, it's one bid that's been rejected from Chalmers etc and that the other one is pretty good and should be signed off today?

Doesn't make sense given the earlier updates given by respected journalists like Sadler etc as well as the updates from Frank?

Hopefully this is just one of those cases of people jumping to conclusions and the admin has rejected one bid but accepted the other?

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:21 pm  

DemonUK wrote:

OK from what i am reading about who this alleged bidder is, would it be unfair to assume that saving the Bulls may not be the primary reason for their bid.

I'm assuming you're suggesting he sees Odsal as the perfect site to build a new factory/plant.(which it.probably is to be fair)

Theres a number of reasons why he wouldnt be able to.

Number 1 he would own the lease not the the land.

2. The council seem very keen to keep the Bulls at Odsal. Theres a diabetes crisis in this city and a strong Bulls with good community links could help counter that in a small way.

3. A load of new houses have been built all around odsal. Pretty sure they would have something to say about it.

Looking at the Leo website they do a lot of community work in Bradford, maybe he wants to give something back. Who knows.

Anyways all this rumour, counter rumour sounds like it could come to an end in a couple of hours.

Im nervous.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:24 pm  

el red wrote:

The preferred bidder is the Leo Group, why you couldn't comment publicly is beyond me. We all use pseudo names on here to protect our identity. You can't comment because you don't know for sure if your info is correct. I'm sure you are well meaning as I think the majority of posters are.

At least the staff should know more by 1.30pm today. Then the rest of us will have to await the 'breaking news'.

To be fair El Red Franks been a very reliable source. With there been NDA i think i'd do exactly the same in not giving out the name of the group on a public forum.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:25 pm  

Paul124897 wrote:

Surely with it being a case of crossing t's and dotting i's, it's one bid that's been rejected from Chalmers etc and that the other one is pretty good and should be signed off today?

Doesn't make sense given the earlier updates given by respected journalists like Sadler etc as well as the updates from Frank?

Hopefully this is just one of those cases of people jumping to conclusions and the admin has rejected one bid but accepted the other?

As I mentioned earlier, after the rfl accepted bid X, the extra time has been the deliberations with MG. he is playing hard ball.
No one wants liquidation due to the ramifications of it, so green has people by the plums if you excuse the example.
Other people are in the frame but were moved aside due to not entertaining MG, but someone clearly was happy to pay potentially part of his debt.
If things are still up in the air, with no other options, the other bid(s) will have to be revisited if MG really wants his money back.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:26 pm  

Mick (I know...) has just tweeted their is a meeting at 1pm with statement after...

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:26 pm  

I believe there needs to be a top to bottom investigation into how EVERY club in the RFL run their business. The RFL could then look to share best practice as these types of situations do nobody any good let alone the sport as a whole. I know people will complain and say 'why should we share info' but I firmly believe the sport cannot afford to lose great clubs like Bradford. The RFL also need to look into their own practices as some of this lies firmly in the 'could have been avoided' file.

I may support a different club but some of my strongest childhood memories revolve around going to great traditional clubs with my late mother, Odsal being one of them.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:28 pm  

Damien Irvine us still tweeting about it too, mentioning that all bidders are still subject to NDAs.

[Bullseye]

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:28 pm  

Duckman wrote:

Mick (I know...) has just tweeted their is a meeting at 1pm with statement after...

Been reading on here as he?

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:28 pm  

That will teach me for going out for a walk. I've had 12 pages to catch up on...