[Bulliac]

Re: Ownership and twists : Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:04 am  

Sounds like the rumour I heard in the pub [from a City fan..] that Mr Lawn at city was in cahoots with our Mr Lamb and Chris Caisley to take us to VP, has gone down in flames then??

Re: The two administrators : Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:42 am  

Pumpetypump wrote:

I'm entirely ignorant so please be gentle but is his function not to simultaneously pay creditors AND seek to enable a successor company to proceed?

His sole duty is to maximise the return for creditors. If selling the club on can bring in funds to help him do this - he will, but in the current circumstances the amount mentioned on another thread as BB2014's offer was I think £200k and that was when we appeared to be in a better position - but this is a sum which about runs the club for a month - so he's not going to carrying on for long if the losses continue to mount.

Re: The two administrators : Sun Mar 02, 2014 12:23 pm  

My question is. If a new buyer comes in and pays more creditors as per the RL rules can we get some of the 6 points back e.g 2 to make it 4 points deducted!

Re: Ownership and twists : Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:33 pm  

I got round to reading the administrators letter that I was sent 3weeks ago.

The interesting bit is " The transaction was a sale of the business and assets of the company, executed by way of a legal agreement on 31/1/14. This also included the transfer of all staff and players under TUPE.

As part of the agreement and to meet the requirements of the RFL, the purchasers are to make an offer to all trade creditors in the sum of 100p in the £."

So BB2014 were paying trade creditors in full, at the instructions of the RFL. No wonder the administrator thought they were the best option for creditors.

So again, the Rfl have changed something/gone back on something that the administrator thought was agreed.

Is that what will be in tomorrow's paper?

Re: Ownership and twists : Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:41 pm  

Highlander wrote:

As part of the agreement and to meet the requirements of the RFL, the purchasers are to make an offer to all trade creditors in the sum of 100p in the £."

So BB2014 were paying trade creditors in full, at the instructions of the RFL.

Trade creditors does not include HMRC I assume?

As always with these things, the devil is in the detail

Re: Ownership and twists : Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:51 pm  

Just been told Jay Willey has put her bid in

Re: Ownership and twists : Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:54 pm  

roger daly wrote:

Just been told Jay Willey has put her bid in

What was it?. A tub of foundation and some free lip gloss?.

Re: Ownership and twists : Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:59 pm  

Highlander wrote:

I got round to reading the administrators letter that I was sent 3weeks ago.

The interesting bit is " The transaction was a sale of the business and assets of the company, executed by way of a legal agreement on 31/1/14. This also included the transfer of all staff and players under TUPE.

As part of the agreement and to meet the requirements of the RFL, the purchasers are to make an offer to all trade creditors in the sum of 100p in the £."

So BB2014 were paying trade creditors in full, at the instructions of the RFL. No wonder the administrator thought they were the best option for creditors.

So again, the Rfl have changed something/gone back on something that the administrator thought was agreed.

Is that what will be in tomorrow's paper?

Was the purchasers going to pay the trade creditors out of there own money or was it going to come out of the loan/advance of £500k from the rfl ?

Re: Ownership and twists : Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:00 pm  

Jay Willey and the park ave guy, is it Bob Blackburn.Can do without her and her ego trip

Re: Ownership and twists : Sun Mar 02, 2014 6:23 pm  

Did Jay give it to Rimmer direct?