Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:28 pm  

roger daly wrote:

After weeks of trying to work it out I'm now convinced you are Stuart Duffy

Can't be. He's not slated the fans for not going to games

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:30 pm  

martinwildbull wrote:

FA your two alternatives are subsets of one alternative, which is that membership continues. This has to be seen in the light of the second alternative, that nobody wants to apply for membership and so membership discontinues. clearly when membership had not been continued then the phrase "membership shall be deemed to have subsisted as if it had not ceased to be a member at all" cannot apply. My interpretation of continuing is in that context.

you still refer to owners, when there is only club, controlling person and membership. Obviously I stand to be corrected, but in the bits relevant to this discussion I cannot find any reference to owner. and this has to be the case, surely you have heard the term shadow director, someone who controls a company if they were a director, whether or not they are appointed or have shares in the company.

OKB controlled the club as members of the RFL etc that club were penalised for an insolvency event. a new controlling person was found, (eventually as you say) who applied to the RFL for membership of the same club to the RFL etc. That was continuing membership, and so the club was allowed to appeal the penalty as if the club had never had its membership withdrawn. No owners, no shares, just membership (or not). Which is why the member club gets deducted points, not the controlling person.

You need to look at the definition of ‘club’ in the RFL articles of association which is the holding company holding the RFL share that entitles it to RFL membership. The member, owner and the club here are interchangeable BUT the member owner, club and the team on the field are not.

OKB held the RFL share and membership, they were the ‘club’(i.e member/owner) this was then sold to BB2014 who were granted some sort of temporary share and such they became ‘the club’ however they never completed that purchase so it seems that the share and assets went back to OKBulls and as such they became ‘the club’ again. Marc Green then purchased the assets of OKB from the administrator, and applied to the RFL for an RFL share, when he was granted this BBNL became ‘the club’ and OKB and BB2014 were liquidated.

So whilst the stadium, players, kit, name, badge, brand etc all stayed the same, a new company BBNL was granted the share and became a new member.

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:33 pm  

roger daly wrote:

After weeks of trying to work it out I'm now convinced you are Stuart Duffy

Could be the rfl angle - either Solly/Rimmer or their secretary

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:10 pm  

Roger I am but one of you.
But without the rose tinted.
On a happier note I did say somewhere I thought it would be good if the Bulls won the cup this year.

Two games from Wembley of course that is possible.
Anything is on the day.
Supporters need to be there in their bucketful.

Even if Marc Green IS a Leeds fan I think he will know whats needed.
So will Ferres.

What is not needed is a shedload of overpaid players that finish 8th 9th or 10th every year that take the club by virtue of the ridiculous salaries given, to the point of no longer existing.
Freedom of Speech does not make me Stuart Duffey.
Any more than it makes me "The Man From Uncle" or Peter Brady.
Now you see it now you don't.

That's how close the Bulls were.
Twice in 17 months

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:22 pm  

I'm guessing you have been involved with the Bulls in an official capacity at some point, I have known one or two people involved in an official capacity over the years. I have had a couple of guesses about your real identity in the last few weeks,one name I have not mentioned is Paul Medley

Are you Paul Medley?

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:28 pm  

The only official capacity I have served is as a paying customer.
Like you I know people.
People who were powerless but despairing at what was going on.
Nothing more than that.
It will please me no end to see the end of this nearly 400 page script and that the Bulls are operated solvently.
That the fans and club take the punishment for OK"s stupidity,the Bulls finish 3rd bottom.win the cup and rebuild slowly and solvently.

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:30 pm  

I shall keep guessing pal,I will get there eventually

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:59 pm  

Have you read this document folks the RFL policy review www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29087/rfl ... umentation‎ 11 Oct 2013 - Makes all the stuff we have been talking about somewhat irrelevant to our future. One thing stands out from the poster who says the Bulls paid up to the salary cap which is £1.825 million. Maybe OK paid a lot of that in investment, if of course we believe him...doubtful in my opinion..the review is worth a read as we will be able to not understand the new structures for the League after we have finished???? I didn't so I must be Mr Thicko from Thicko land>

Have you read this document folks the RFL policy review www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29087/rfl ... umentation‎ 11 Oct 2013 - Makes all the stuff we have been talking about somewhat irrelevant to our future. One thing stands out from the poster who says the Bulls paid up to the salary cap which is £1.825 million. Maybe OK paid a lot of that in investment, if of course we believe him...doubtful in my opinion..the review is worth a read as we will be able to not understand the new structures for the League after we have finished???? I didn't so I must be Mr Thicko from Thicko land>

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:49 pm  

Rarebreed wrote: Have you read this document folks the RFL policy review http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29 ... umentation‎ 11 Oct 2013 - Makes all the stuff we have been talking about somewhat irrelevant to our future. One thing stands out from the poster who says the Bulls paid up to the salary cap which is £1.825 million. Maybe OK paid a lot of that in investment, if of course we believe him...doubtful in my opinion..the review is worth a read as we will be able to not understand the new structures for the League after we have finished???? I didn't so I must be Mr Thicko from Thicko land> Good news there for Wakefield and London, the minimum stadium requirements (that neither team currently meet) are being binned.

Rarebreed wrote: Have you read this document folks the RFL policy review http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29 ... umentation‎ 11 Oct 2013 - Makes all the stuff we have been talking about somewhat irrelevant to our future. One thing stands out from the poster who says the Bulls paid up to the salary cap which is £1.825 million. Maybe OK paid a lot of that in investment, if of course we believe him...doubtful in my opinion..the review is worth a read as we will be able to not understand the new structures for the League after we have finished???? I didn't so I must be Mr Thicko from Thicko land> Good news there for Wakefield and London, the minimum stadium requirements (that neither team currently meet) are being binned.

Re: Ownership and twists : Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:54 pm  

Oh good that means wakefield no longer have to come out with that rubbish above moving into a new ground. Since they beat Fetherstone in that NFP final and insisted they were moving into a new ground they've had nearly as many fantasy land building projects as us.