Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:04 pm  

sanjunien wrote:

can't agree with that - the journos are in a no win situation - the whole Bradford case is almost 'sub judice', the press can build up hopes or help put the kybosh on everything - they have a responsability to give the facts, not speculate so I would prefer they kept their distance and respect the terms of engagement and speak when they have hard facts to work with

please ignore this post if you are a Sun reader...

It's not sub judice at all.

If, say, Sainsbury's were about to go out of business and had the administrators in, do you not think that the FT and the business pages would be forensically examining what went wrong for them, even though this could prejudice any potential investment in them, being "bad for the game" in threatening jobs and business? Do you think they wouldn't be looking in great detail into any secret loan/leaseback deals that had just been done, or the relationship of the administators to previous directors, the sustainability of the business going forward, the precise position of HMRC?

Do you also think that if news came through that a consortium was interested in buying them, they would hardly print a word about them or examine their motives for the business going forward, even if it was a consortium of Russian financiers who may or may not keep the stores open or may close the supermarkets and redevelop the land as Casinos?

Any actual journalist would not be "keeping their distance". They would have to, as you say, stick to facts, but it's their job to find out the facts. This doesn't happen in the in-game bubble of the trade press, so let's not be confusing it with journalism. They've had the biggest story in their field in decades explode under their noses and they've been completely incapable (or unwilling) of dealing with it.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:10 pm  

I'm sorry to have thread-drifted and wish Bulls fans luck in getting out of this, by the way.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:18 pm  

Seen this yet, people?

Seen this yet, people?

[Bullseye]

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:25 pm  

Mmm. Well I guess the RFL will take a view on what's on offer. Have we time for further protracted negotiations? Is the administrator presenting the RFL with an offer they can't refuse to use Don Corleone's phrase?

They could refuse it out of hand, which leaves the club heading for liquidators or perhaps could negotiate, leaving little time left.

Despite references in the past to elastic deadlines I don't see this running for much longer. I can't see the club continuing in administration until the end of the season. It will either go to liquidation, mid season. Or the takeover will go through and we'll see the season out. Whether 2013 sees us in SL is to be decided but I can't see the buyers doing a deal if we're not.

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:30 pm  

craigizzard wrote:

It's not sub judice at all.

If, say, Sainsbury's were about to go out of business and had the administrators in, do you not think that the FT and the business pages would be forensically examining what went wrong for them, even though this could prejudice any potential investment in them, being "bad for the game" in threatening jobs and business? Do you think they wouldn't be looking in great detail into any secret loan/leaseback deals that had just been done, or the relationship of the administators to previous directors, the sustainability of the business going forward, the precise position of HMRC?

Do you also think that if news came through that a consortium was interested in buying them, they would hardly print a word about them or examine their motives for the business going forward, even if it was a consortium of Russian financiers who may or may not keep the stores open or may close the supermarkets and redevelop the land as Casinos?

Any actual journalist would not be "keeping their distance". They would have to, as you say, stick to facts, but it's their job to find out the facts. This doesn't happen in the in-game bubble of the trade press, so let's not be confusing it with journalism. They've had the biggest story in their field in decades explode under their noses and they've been completely incapable (or unwilling) of dealing with it.

This!!!!

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:06 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

Excellent gesture by Warry, but could it mean that they believe that the club is a lost cause?

Even if it is, then at least the money goes to the hardship fund rather straight into Guilfoyle's pocket

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:09 pm  

At last all party's are agreeing on something!

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:42 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

Mmm. Well I guess the RFL will take a view on what's on offer. Have we time for further protracted negotiations? Is the administrator presenting the RFL with an offer they can't refuse to use Don Corleone's phrase?

They could refuse it out of hand, which leaves the club heading for liquidators or perhaps could negotiate, leaving little time left.

Despite references in the past to elastic deadlines I don't see this running for much longer. I can't see the club continuing in administration until the end of the season. It will either go to liquidation, mid season. Or the takeover will go through and we'll see the season out. Whether 2013 sees us in SL is to be decided but I can't see the buyers doing a deal if we're not.

Still no reference at all to the creditors, particularly HMRC. Does that mean that: a) the proposal is for a liquidation followed by a Newco; or b) if the RFL do accept the proposal, only then will Gilfoyle seek approval of the creditors; or c) he's already had negotiations with HMRC?

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:45 pm  

Am I right that the RFL has said they won't accept a conditional offer.
If so and if Friday is D-Day then is this an attempt by ABC to force the RFL to accept an offer they otherwise wouldn't have accepted simply because there isn't time to renegotiate?

Re: Latest state of play posts only : Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:49 pm  

Isn't the only real issue whether the RFL will agree to sell Odsal? Everything else is surmountable. Agreements with creditors, precedents with us and Crusaders that you will continue with your franchise if you come out of administration rather than liquidation. But will they relinquish all control of the Odsal to the consortium, none of whom seem to have any history with the Bulls or rugby league and which includes property developers? Isn't that the whole and complete crux of the matter?