Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 4:50 pm  

ignoring the "mining town" comment from the moron on the previous page...

I don't think a 4 point deduction would have been a big price to pay for the RFL to save their credibility on this, no matter what club it is.

your team on paper is 99% sure to avoid relegation by 4 points anyway.

I actually feel for you guys, as none of this is "your doing". It's YOUR money that has been mis-managed over the last 4/5 years, and I only hope that this 'decision' does not promote the club continuing in that vein.

Not only that, it'll be yourselves and your club that bare the brunt from naturally unhappy fans at other clubs that were given far less leniant treatment, or see this as favourtism, which on face value (possible explanations aside) it would appear to be.

Either way, all the best for 2014, except against us!!!

See you in a few weeks

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 4:59 pm  

Can we see you on sunday? We need your £15 entry fee!!

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:05 pm  

DAVE@CAS1990 wrote:

...
I don't think a 4 point deduction would have been a big price to pay for the RFL to save their credibility on this, no matter what club it is. ...

Do you think administration should always incur a points penalty? If all creditors, other than the previous owner, were paid would you still support a points deduction?
The RFL's role isn't to protect investors (there are assorted legal bodies to do that) but it does have a role in helping clubs so if this helps the sporting club survive how do you see it's credibility being damaged by this event?

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:21 pm  

childofthenorthern wrote:

Do you think administration should always incur a points penalty? If all creditors, other than the previous owner, were paid would you still support a points deduction?
The RFL's role isn't to protect investors (there are assorted legal bodies to do that) but it does have a role in helping clubs so if this helps the sporting club survive how do you see it's credibility being damaged by this event?

I think it damages their credibility with the rest of Rugby League fans and those who look into our sport from outside. To what degree will vary. Fans of 'unfashionable' Clubs will see a bias in interests when they see their own Club struggle on without input or help. Whether this is right or wrong is up to the individuals and I stand neutral on the affair at the moment, but I can see where others would think otherwise.

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:23 pm  

I Am The Stig wrote:

Exactly when was Bradford Bulls 2014 incorporated?

12/11/13

I Am The Stig wrote:

What will OK's responce be?

You need to ask OK this, but I would expect him to be livid but largely impotent. He may well be concerned too because the administrator has a duty to investigate the conduct of all people who have been directors of an insolvent company (I think in the previous 12 months IIRC). And all creditors are invited, as a matter of routine, to notify the administrator of anything regarding the conduct of directors that he might want to be made aware of. That applies to Gerry too, btw, as well as the other 4 who were directors under OK (including Whitcu*t) and messrs Moore, Watt & Calvert.

I Am The Stig wrote:

What will an RFL statement say? (will there be one?)

You need to ask the RFL this. I would expect they would need to make some statement, regarding the transfer of the licence and licensing the new company to hold it. Presumably this would follow whatever meeting was required internally at which they would agree the necessary decisions.

If the statement is anything other than "licence transferred" I would be very surprised indeed. I HOPE it also states that no points deduction or other sanctions, because of comitment by the club to settle with the genuine creditors of the old company. On this, we will have to wait and see I guess?

I Am The Stig wrote:

What will be the justification for no points reduction if that has already been agreed? As the hastily removed statement indicated.

Whether or not anything has already been agreed or has still to be agreed, if there is no loss to genuine creditors other than the former owner (and maybe any toxic creditors that arose on his watch) then there can be no justification for points deduction since nothing otherwise has changed. Just an owner losing an investment following unacceptable losses. Sh it happens.

I Am The Stig wrote:

...Not expecting you to know the answers BTW. Just my general musings on the subject.

Questions seem perfectly reasonable ones to me.

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:27 pm  

TheButcher wrote:

I think it damages their credibility with the rest of Rugby League fans and those who look into our sport from outside. To what degree will vary. Fans of 'unfashionable' Clubs will see a bias in interests when they see their own Club struggle on without input or help. Whether this is right or wrong is up to the individuals and I stand neutral on the affair at the moment, but I can see where others would think otherwise.

See my answer to this same point in the post immediately above.

If there is no loss to genuine creditors, there is no damage to credibility whatsoever. All that has changed is that an owner has had to write off his investment in a club that made losses and was worthless on paper. Happens all the time.

If there WAS to be loss to genuine creditors, then that would be a different proposition. Until or unless we learn otherwise, I am taking the club statement at face value and interpreting it as saying they will settle with genuine creditors.

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 6:07 pm  

It would be an absolute outrage if Bradford isn't deducted 6 points for going into Administration.

If Bradford get away with this it would be open season for any club to overspend and then go through these re-structuring shenanigans.

There no objective definition of "genuine"creditors and any other sort of creditor.

Part of the punishment of points deduction is because the fans of the club have had the benefit of having players play for them (and secure wins against other clubs who've played within the rules) who they couldn't in hindsight afford. The fans have to have that balance redressed by suffering the points deduction.

If the RFL let Bradford get away with this, the only reason will be the conflict of interest of owning the Odsal lease. After all the fantastic work by the RFL recently, it will be a big shame if they blot their copybook on this one.

Btw, I understand the concept of "pre-pack" but I really hope for his own sake that the Administrator got the best deal. If the upcoming sale of the assets (including a Super League licence) been advertised, would, for example, the Featherstone owner have bid more?

I'd expect the owner of ok bulls to continue the reported legal action to obtain the reported agreed consideration for the shares.

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 6:18 pm  

Wooden Stand wrote:

It would be an absolute outrage if Bradford isn't deducted 6 points for going into Administration.

If Bradford get away with this it would be open season for any club to overspend and then go through these re-structuring shenanigans.

There no objective definition of "genuine"creditors and any other sort of creditor.

Part of the punishment of points deduction is because the fans of the club have had the benefit of having players play for them (and secure wins against other clubs who've played within the rules) who they couldn't in hindsight afford. The fans have to have that balance redressed by suffering the points deduction.

If the RFL let Bradford get away with this, the only reason will be the conflict of interest of owning the Odsal lease. After all the fantastic work by the RFL recently, it will be a big shame if they blot their copybook on this one.

Btw, I understand the concept of "pre-pack" but I really hope for his own sake that the Administrator got the best deal. If the upcoming sale of the assets (including a Super League licence) been advertised, would, for example, the Featherstone owner have bid more?

I'd expect the owner of ok bulls to continue the reported legal action to obtain the reported agreed consideration for the shares.

Rubbish.

If the only financial loss was to be to OK, then the substance of what has happened is that a club owner has had to write off his investment. Until or unless we learn otherwise, that is how I read today's announcement.

Justify your statement please?

And OK can pursue his action against Moore until the cows come home. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the the operating of the club.

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 6:23 pm  

In a nutshell, can somebody tell me if today's administration of OKBLTD means the club is now in administration, and is this and the change of ownership a good thing for the club and all those employed by the club?

I basically have no idea what is going on to be honest.

Re: Ownership of Club Changes : Fri Jan 31, 2014 6:26 pm  

Rubbish indeed, and I would only add that if Wooden Stand thinks the SL licence is an "asset" that can be "sold" then he is more deluded than I thought.