Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Tue Jul 10, 2012 10:20 pm  

RebelRebel wrote:

That's kind of the point I'm trying to make - they don't have valid contracts with any newco, so if they, like all other players, want out, then they're out. They have no value to the newco until they sign newco contracts.

If its a buyout then they will TUPE over and it will class as a continuation of employment. Their contracts will remain valid whether a newco is formed or not. Only if the Bulls are liquidated without a buyer would they become free agents.

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Tue Jul 10, 2012 10:26 pm  

wildycat wrote:

Have you got connection with the Bulls you seem to know every thing and you are very protective...?? just a question..

No link at all, but I don't believe in every anti-RFL conspiracy that comes along either. Someone has to clear up a mess caused by others.

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Wed Jul 11, 2012 5:46 am  

t-r-i-n-i-t-y wrote:

No link at all, but I don't believe in every anti-RFL conspiracy that comes along either. Someone has to clear up a mess caused by others.

it would be nice then for the RFL to explain why the cold shoulder to Wakefield then

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:32 am  

When Wakefield were going through their troubles last year I was fully in support of any help for them I even bought a shirt! The Bradford case does annoy me a little (lot) and I agree with you guys, what support did your team get. Nobody (rfl) bent over backwards did they. What about the championship clubs who are gearing up for a chance to join superleague, they certainly will not be happy. Having said all that I feel for the genuine Bulls fans.

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Wed Jul 11, 2012 9:22 am  

http://www.superleague.co.uk/article/25 ... ssence-for One of the many things that concern me is this mention of the consortium seeking RFL assurance that Bradford would remain in Super League next season. When Parkin and Glover asked for such assurances (admittedly during a franchise application process) the RFL flatly refused to give any such assurance. If the consortium go ahead and buy having obtained such assurance then it will infuriate me more than any other comparison between the two administrations. With good future management I'm sure Bradford can be run as a profitable business with realistically priced tickets/season tickets, commercial outlets and a wage bill consistent with performance on the field. The areas of Odsal ownership and Super League guarantees is a big area of debate. I do recall the RFL offering to pay our wages in February last year so the £200k advance is similar. Sadly our administrator sold players which BG has not done. Odd really when he is strapped for cash.

http://www.superleague.co.uk/article/25 ... ssence-for One of the many things that concern me is this mention of the consortium seeking RFL assurance that Bradford would remain in Super League next season. When Parkin and Glover asked for such assurances (admittedly during a franchise application process) the RFL flatly refused to give any such assurance. If the consortium go ahead and buy having obtained such assurance then it will infuriate me more than any other comparison between the two administrations. With good future management I'm sure Bradford can be run as a profitable business with realistically priced tickets/season tickets, commercial outlets and a wage bill consistent with performance on the field. The areas of Odsal ownership and Super League guarantees is a big area of debate. I do recall the RFL offering to pay our wages in February last year so the £200k advance is similar. Sadly our administrator sold players which BG has not done. Odd really when he is strapped for cash.

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Wed Jul 11, 2012 10:28 am  

If the administrator requires £200000 to pay the players wages for July that equates to £2400000 annual salaries.

Will newco or oldco have to pay the fine for breaching salary cap?

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Wed Jul 11, 2012 10:46 am  

rlfan wrote:

If the administrator requires £200000 to pay the players wages for July that equates to £2400000 annual salaries.

Will newco or oldco have to pay the fine for breaching salary cap?

The salaries are for both playing and admin staff. I don't think admin staff are included in the salary cap so its not a breach.

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Wed Jul 11, 2012 11:54 am  

bren2k wrote:

The talk is of a consortium of Bradford businessmen from the Asian community - good stuff if true.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the administrator in Bradford's case has been paid up front, whereas ours was required to recoup his own fees from the sale of assets i.e players - not sure if I've dreamt that or if it's actually the case.

Either way, the wages are due on Friday and any business man worth his salt wouldn't take on that liability if he didn't have to; it will be interesting to see how that bill is covered.

Assuming this to be correct then who's paid this upfront?

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Wed Jul 11, 2012 11:58 am  

It annoys me how the RFL offered no help to us but in a way I am glad the club has moved forward the Richardsons were dead wood in effect admin is the best thing thats happened to us

Re: O/T.Trinity V Bulls administration? : Wed Jul 11, 2012 12:53 pm  

Sandal Cat wrote:

The salaries are for both playing and admin staff. I don't think admin staff are included in the salary cap so its not a breach.

HHaven't all the admin staff been made redundant?