Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:16 am  

Adey, I posted this previously - you might have missed it amongst the millions of others you have admirably being responding to - I was at a club in the mid-80s that went belly up (I guess it was admininstration) but none of the players left. We just carried on as if nothing happened. What is to stop the bUlls players doing this (apart from lucrative offers elsewhere)?

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:29 am  

tigertot wrote:

Adey, I posted this previously - you might have missed it amongst the millions of others you have admirably being responding to - I was at a club in the mid-80s that went belly up (I guess it was admininstration) but none of the players left. We just carried on as if nothing happened. What is to stop the bUlls players doing this (apart from lucrative offers elsewhere)?

1 - the administrator making them redundant, lacking the cash flow to keep paying them.

2 - offers of better security elsewhere (as happened with Ben Jeffries and his return to Odsal because at the time he said Bulls could offer him better security...)

I think the big difference between then and now is that these guys are full-time and getting paid a load more than in your day, so the dynamics are very different to then?

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:31 am  

tigertot wrote:

Adey, I posted this previously - you might have missed it amongst the millions of others you have admirably being responding to - I was at a club in the mid-80s that went belly up (I guess it was admininstration) but none of the players left. We just carried on as if nothing happened. What is to stop the bUlls players doing this (apart from lucrative offers elsewhere)?

My guess is that a lot will depend on the attitude of the RFL. If they see the pre-pack admin that Adey describes as being in place, or some other realistic attempt to rescue the club around the corner, I suspect that they would warn off predators from within RL, in order to get a viable team playing at their stadium - and thereby to protect their investment. Of course, they could do nothing about offers from outside the game (RU?), other than in some form to guarantee the players' income in the short term.

Conversely, if the RFL were to see Bradford as a lost cause, I suspect that they would offer Salary Cap exemptions in order to protect our players and find them further employment in the game as soon as possible.

Purely supposition on my part, of course.

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:32 am  

I agree.

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:47 am  

Adeybull wrote:

I think the big difference between then and now is that these guys are full-time and getting paid a load more than in your day, so the dynamics are very different to then?

Yes, a Wednesday night game at Barrow meant half a day off work, getting about £12 losing pay. Home at 3 in the morning. Kids today.

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:51 am  

Adeybull wrote:

Yes. Or of other clubs miraculously finding cap space and coming in for the best players.

Didn't Peter Hood say yesterday that its the norm to keep 10% cap space free for the unexpected?

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:53 am  

Cibaman wrote:

Didn't Peter Hood say yesterday that its the norm to keep 10% cap space free for the unexpected?

Must be true then...

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:55 am  

Adeybull wrote:

As I keep saying, a prepack administration could well ensure the survival of the core of the team, and our SL franchise. A well-funded prepack, led by genuine RL fan/s which had the (non-financial) backing of the RFL could actually resolve a load of the current problems especially with the stareholdings stasis (as Maislebugs has consistently argued). Personally, I'd be gutted if the club defaulted on its tax liabilities, since its an issue I've always felt strongly about (not paying over monies that you deducted from employees and collected from customers, that were never yours in the first place) and I would face a serious moral dilemma - but that would be my problem. And of course we'd have to endure the contempt of many many fans of other clubs - collective broad shoulders would be a must. But a very very quick exit from administration could well work, IMO. As I keep saying. A very quick one,.

But my big big worry is over what would happen if there is no prepack in place (and if there IS one being planned, they are keeping it very very secret) and the administration period became protracted. The vultures, especially those who we already see seem to have one of those special elastic salary caps, would probably have a field day and I dread to think how far we would have fallen before salvation came, if at all. If this was most other RL towns in the country, I'd say we'd have a good chance of new investors ("investors" is an oxymoron of course where RL clubs are concerned!), but its not; its Bradford. The only city with a puddle in the middle and a hole in the heart.

So the dilemma facing the sceptics and waverers is, IMO, whether to hold out and hope and pray for a very quick exit from a subsequent administration (like, sort of, overnight) or to take steps now to try and stave off administration by backing the pledge campaign.

Spoilt for choice, aren't we?

The administrator at Wakefield did not sell the players straight away. My (limited) understanding is the administrator makes an assessment of the business as a potential going concern (in the Bulls case, the turnover, the contrcats it holds with Sky, sponsors etc) and try to find a buyer for the company. Normally what would happen is they would sack everyone who was cheap to sack and had no 'sell on' contractual value and try to hold as much value in the company as possible for as long as possible.
This obviously requires cash but what's emerging from the Bulls is that the club are only borderline insolvent. Craven speaks of owing the bank 150k and the tax bill 'looming'. The accounts show wages at approx 200k per month.

Does anyone know what the tax bill is or whether it's even arrived? Apparently we need a £1million but there's certainly not been a winding up order which if I remember, Wakey had two. Do we have other debts? It's all very odd.

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:14 am  

I've already given some indications of what the tax "bills" are - three different sorts, in fact (VAT, PAYE, retrospective PAYE etc on image rights etc).

I don't know any of the actual numbers (and if I did, unless authorised I would not post on here - this is commercially-sensitive info) other than an idea of one. But I can make some guesses and deductions. As I said before, I understand the PAYE is a month or so late (due presumably to what has already happened) but the other taxes are not yet due - but fall due in the coming next verty few weeks. I also understand (not from the club) that HMRC are now so sick and tired of sports clubs using them (us - the taxpayer) as a bank, and then falling over (Rangers was the last straw, I gather) that they are now extremely robust in threatening winding up if taxes are only a little overdue. The club told me that HMRC seems to have become much more aggressive in pursuit of overdue liabilities recently, which backs that up.

I think it will be a bit more than "borderline" if they don't plug the holes left by repaying the RFL and the bank (I suspect that amount quoted will continue to reduce, but have no specific numbers), since the cash position was tight before. Once you go under, liabilities crystallise and assets evaporate, as any insolvency practitioner will tell you. And as I can vouch for from my own experience both working for IPs and dealing with failed customers (as well as once being the FD of a small plc that came perilously close on its own account). Sadly, its a field I have quite a bit of experience in

As for the future income streams, most will be voidable in the event of insolvency. The administrator would need a clear idea pretty quickly of what income he could rely on. SPonsorship? Unlikely. Sky and RFL money? In the hands of the RFL (see Craven's artiocle in the YP today). Gates? Who knows. And so on. Bulls have considerably larger income from commercial sources than Wakey, as I understood it, so are much more vulnerable to loss of immediateb incopme in an insolvency.

To me, the only thing that is odd is why there is not more of the RFL lease settlement money left. Otherwise, it does pretty reasonably stack up as to why we are where we are. But its my field, don't forget. The club really IMO should have been more forthcoming in layman's language regarding some of the specifics. Craven's piece in the YP today goes a little of the way towards that IMO.

Re: Steve Parkin : Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:29 am  

I know from experience they can be extremely aggressive but the club are saying friday could be our last match but there's no winding up order.