Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 7:00 pm  

Duckman wrote:

For the next 500k, if there is no buyer or at least significant investment and no more take up from the fans then its administration. But do we have a buyer waiting like wakey did? If we do then ok, I can see where we might go, if there is no such buyer its bye bye, which is why we can't just welcome administration, we don't know if anyone will bring us out of it.

I share your fear.

Duckman

Wakefield had two interested parties Parkin and Glover it got touch and go for either until AG took the plunge whats not coming through for the Bulls at the moment is any overt interest.
It looks a proper mess from where I am looking in

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 7:05 pm  

REDWHITEANDBLUE wrote:

Duckman

Wakefield had two interested parties Parkin and Glover it got touch and go for either until AG took the plunge whats not coming through for the Bulls at the moment is any overt interest.
It looks a proper mess from where I am looking in

yep, thats (one of) the difference between the wakey and bulls cases. And it looks a proper mess from the inside looking out too don't worry.

Parkin has been mentioned, but he was dismissed out of hand less than a year ago, no idea if that has any credance.

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:52 pm  

Duckman wrote:

yep, thats (one of) the difference between the wakey and bulls cases. And it looks a proper mess from the inside looking out too don't worry.

Parkin has been mentioned, but he was dismissed out of hand less than a year ago, no idea if that has any credance.

Thinking long term, if "Bradford Bulls" are actually wound up and cease to exist, is the future that gloomy? If I am being too simplistic, say so, but if that does happen, the RFL will be the owners of a very large stadium in Bradford, in the middle of which is a big piece of grass with rugby posts at each end. They bought it so that an iconic stadium wouldn't be lost, and so I assume that they want rugby league to be played on it. The lease with Bradford Bulls would be null and void, because they wouldn't exist anymore, but what would stop a new company agreeing a lease with the RFL, called "Northern Spirit" or something and applying for membership of the rugby football league? Doesn't the buying of the ground mean that rugby league will be played on it, and is why the RFL bought it, as otherwise the winding up of the Bulls would be seen by the original lease-owners as an ability to sell the land to someone else?

The other Super League clubs could agree, I assume, to allow the new company, under the new lease with the RFL, to take the place of the Bulls in the top flight?

I'm just thinking of the potential possibilities. Your situation is much different to Wakey's, because the Bank of Ireland would have sold the ground and so there would have been nowhere for a new club to play. It seems nailed on that whatever happens to the current club, there will be a rugby league club playing out of the Odsal, as the RFL own it.

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:06 pm  

Ten of us have just returned from a meeting with the board. It lasted over two and a half hours. That they should be prepared to give up a whole evening to seek to address the concerns and answer the questions of supporters ought maybe to tell you something.

I can only speak for myself (although I would not expect any differing opinions from those present), and for my part I am totally convinced of:

- The gravity of the situation

- the club's approach to the fans being the only viable option left to the club if it is to avoid administration.

- that the club will go into administration if insufficient fans support the pledge, and the outcome of that would at best be severe and at worst oblivion.

- the board has not communicated well. But it has told it how it is.

I have no hesitation now whatsoever in supporting the pledge. Because I understand the consequences if we do not.

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:12 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Ten of us have just returned from a meeting with the board. It lasted over two and a half hours. That they should be prepared to give up a whole evening to seek to address the concerns and answer the questions of supporters out maybe to tell you something.

I can only speak for myself (although I would not expect any differing opinions from those present), and for my part I am totally convinced of:

- The gravity of the situation

- the club's approach to the fans being the only viable option left to the club if it is to avoid administration.

- that the club will go into administration if insufficient fans support the pledge, and the outcome of that would at best be severe and at worst oblivion.

- the board has not communicated well. But it has told it how it is.

The bit in bold is the part that I fear some fans are still not believing. I have seen and heard comments from suggesting that it isn't really going to happen.

I just hope we aren't all on here in a few weeks time saying 'if I'd realised this would happen to my club, I'd have pledged'. By then it will be too late I'm afraid.

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:16 pm  

Indeed.

If the pledge take-up is insufficient, I would expect the club to petition the High Court for an administration order within days.

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:30 pm  

The pledge has to be successful. After the conversations at length we (BullBuilder) have just had with messers Hood, Bennett and Duckett, it's pretty clear that we must reach the target.

There are quite a few issues in regards to the cashflow that can be overcome if the pledge is achieved, however, not doing so will, in all honesty, result in administration, which could finish the club off.

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:49 pm  

vbfg wrote:

The good cop / bad cop act is annoying me, and I'm disposed to give what I can. Are those waiting to be convinced really going to buy this?

Finally sum one else has picked this up. I know this isn't the boards doing but the mixed messages are getting real tiresome.

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:17 pm  

mat wrote:

any sort of new share issue is more time consuming to arrange than initial two weeks club had to work with. they have to issue prospectus's etc. I'd imagine thats reason they didnt go down that route for initial pledge but are maybe considering it for the 2nd amount?.

Don't worry overmuch about any second amount. That will probably take care of itself if the pledge take-up is sufficient (and especially if it is more than sufficient).

The club had a handful of days to explore the options and decide on what to do (there was only one option).

A share issue is out of the question while you have 80% of the shares in the hands of non-board members. You would anyway have to convert to a plc and then issue a prospectus - neither of which the club could realistically do anyway as things stand.

Re: Peter Hood says Bulls on brink of going bust. : Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:25 pm  

vbfg wrote:

The good cop / bad cop act is annoying me, and I'm disposed to give what I can. Are those waiting to be convinced really going to buy this?

You are not actually reading what they said, you know. But the messages were far from as clear as they could have been, for sure.

One was talking specifically about investors in the shares of the company. The other was referring to investors in much wider terms. That could include sponsors and other stakeholders.

I think they have a far clearer understanding now of how their unintentional failure to use straightforward language and to provide more background has been seriously counterproductive; and has contributed to sending unintentional mixed messages.