Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:05 pm  

paulwalker71 wrote:

Of course it can

Its true that Richard Lewis did indeed say that SL licenses could be revoked during the licence period, and the RFL now have that decision to make. Indeed, they need to make it within the next week, as the consortium looking to take over the Bulls will need to know that BEFORE they commit.

I fully expect the RFL to meet before July 27th and make exactly that decision, together with the expected points deduction. Then the consortium can make an informed choice. I assume they'll pull the plug if the SL license is revoked, but frankly I don't expect that to happen

Must admit I dont understand the process for coming out of Administration. If the 27th is the deadline for the investors, BG and the RFL to make their decisions, at what point could HRMC scupper everything as they did with Rangers?

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:10 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

Must admit I dont understand the process for coming out of Administration. If the 27th is the deadline for the investors, BG and the RFL to make their decisions, at what point could HRMC scupper everything as they did with Rangers?

Any arrangement would also need HMRC to go along with it, as majority creditor.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:11 pm  

Get sum o yer laikers flogged n do it the reyt way !!

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:14 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Any arrangement would also need HMRC to go along with it, as majority creditor.

If, as believed, they, by default, reject anything other than full payment of liabilities then can anyone see any deal being approved?

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:14 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Ah. "Increasing" is "dropping" on your planet. OK, I'm sure all the clubs will draw over 10K when London come to town.

I think that is more to do with your current predicament than anything else.

[Bulliac]

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:19 pm  

Cassandra wrote:

Kabadi anyone.

Don't hold your breath.........

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:23 pm  

childofthenorthern wrote:

If, as believed, they, by default, reject anything other than full payment of liabilities then can anyone see any deal being approved?

No. But Guilfoyle will have a couple of extra weeks worth of fees.

[Bulliac]

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:26 pm  

redtillimdead wrote:

It's a blood y outrage. I'm sorry but you should be allowed to fold, I am fed up of our pathetic ruling body falling over backwards to help some clubs whilst others are left to die!

Lessons will only be learnt should Bradford Bulls be left to fall down, then at least the shock wave from the resulting crash maybe acted upon.

The money dished out to you is from the other clubs pockets, they put it there and they will lose it.

We wouldn't be losing anything too good anyway, dropping crowds, a decaying ground and a bashed up boardroom all spell disaster in the not to distant future if not imminently.

The only people I feel for are the fans, the ones that turn up every week and cheer on their club.

Sorry but to me this is a sham. To me you should RIP.

If there are enough true fans than the club will rebuild and find its place again.

Dear Mr Tillimded - please close the door on your way out.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:30 pm  

MP wrote: I think that is more to do with your current predicament than anything else. Last year Bradford Vs Quins drew a crowd of 12,354. http://superleague.co.uk/match_report/5999

MP wrote: I think that is more to do with your current predicament than anything else. Last year Bradford Vs Quins drew a crowd of 12,354. http://superleague.co.uk/match_report/5999

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:42 pm  

childofthenorthern wrote:

In which case what's the point of having a licence for 3 years if it can be removed at any time?

I understood Wakefield's potential investors were asking about the future licencing process, i.e the 3 year licence period we are currently in, which at the time they entered admin was a few months in the future. If that is the case then clearly the RFL couldn't say they would have given a licence but in the Bull's case the question is one of continuing with our existing licence.
Given that it looks like we just got lucking with the timing of going bust which is insane

I'm with you on that. "Can our franchise continue" is different to "can we have a franchise in June".