[Bullseye]

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:45 am  

pie.warrior wrote:

it looks like the RFL want a fair price for the lease but also want cast iron guarantees that Rugby will be played at Odsal as long as there is a team to play there. Evidence that the team will be invested in and that the ground will be improved, this all comes at a cost and does not return a profit for the owner unless the site is developed for commercial purposes. The RFL's biggest fear in giving up the lease is that promises made to secure the Bulls future may lead to the stadium never being upgraded/rebuilt because the developer suddenly finds legal loopholes as per Wakefield's new stadium....It's a difficult position for the RFL and the new prospective owner......

Indeed.

It'll be an interesting meeting. I hope the new bidder is up to scratch and I hope the RFL is open to negotiation.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:47 am  

Or they refuse to sell, the Bulls go down the crapper and the RFL are left with a giant,empty stadium.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:49 am  

Bullseye wrote:

There’s always lots of accusations flying around at times like this, usually to do with the last owner and the administrator. I remember the accusations thrown at Khan and Whitcu*t and at Gargoyle in the admin before that.

I don’t recall any of them ever amounting to anything so doubt they will this time either.

khan took the administrator to court and won

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:51 am  

RickyF1 wrote: Where do you get £4m from, just out of thin air???? Well RickyF1, if the conservative estimate of the value of the site is £10m (it's actually more than that but I'll keep it low for arguments sake) then would you expect the RFL to just accept what they paid? If you have any friends who work in land registry or who does a little research (crazy idea eh?), but just for you here's a little pointer; https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _FINAL.pdf

RickyF1 wrote: Where do you get £4m from, just out of thin air???? Well RickyF1, if the conservative estimate of the value of the site is £10m (it's actually more than that but I'll keep it low for arguments sake) then would you expect the RFL to just accept what they paid? If you have any friends who work in land registry or who does a little research (crazy idea eh?), but just for you here's a little pointer; https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _FINAL.pdf

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:54 am  

el red wrote: Well RickyF1, if the conservative estimate of the value of the site is £10m (it's actually more than that but I'll keep it low for arguments sake) then would you expect the RFL to just accept what they paid? If you have any friends who work in land registry or who does a little research (crazy idea eh?), but just for you here's a little pointer; https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _FINAL.pdf The RFL own the lease, not the land. No matter how much they got it for, they want rugby to be played on it right? So they have to make concessions to that end. Of course if they are going to give up the 'running a sport' business and start dealing real estate, I would be good with that.....

el red wrote: Well RickyF1, if the conservative estimate of the value of the site is £10m (it's actually more than that but I'll keep it low for arguments sake) then would you expect the RFL to just accept what they paid? If you have any friends who work in land registry or who does a little research (crazy idea eh?), but just for you here's a little pointer; https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _FINAL.pdf The RFL own the lease, not the land. No matter how much they got it for, they want rugby to be played on it right? So they have to make concessions to that end. Of course if they are going to give up the 'running a sport' business and start dealing real estate, I would be good with that.....

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:55 am  

Fr13daY wrote:

The RFL own the lease, not the land.

No matter how much they got it for, they want rugby to be played on it right? So they have to make concessions to that end.

Of course if they are going to give up the 'running a sport' business and start dealing real estate, I would be good with that.....

Couldn't of put it better myself

[Bullseye]

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:58 am  

Surely not wrote:

khan took the administrator to court and won

So he did! Forget I spoke!

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:02 pm  

Agree the RFL own the lease but the end game for any bidder is getting the land eventually and the RFL know this. Also the lease as I understand it only states that the site has to be used for rugby and that doesn't have to mean playing. If the RFL built their new HQ there it would still classify as being used for rugby.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:06 pm  

Still no Bradford Bulls website, how are we going to find out?

[Bullseye]

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:07 pm  

el red wrote:

that doesn't have to mean playing. If the RFL built their new HQ there it would still classify as being used for rugby.

That's a bit of a leap of logic. I'm not sure I agree with that conclusion.