Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:36 pm  

Sale of lease was a stroke of genius. Taking an asset not represented on the balance sheet into cash; good piece of strategic thinking. Not forgetting that the deal was struck with RFL with a guarantee to retain £350,000 of a long term loan, which was reneged on at point of signing. Also at same time bank reneged on a written deal to reduce overdraft facility at 10% a month. That equated to a loss of £635,000 in cash more or less overnight. Tell me any club without a sugar daddy that could stand that loss of cash? The pledge monies plus other options on the table (and not just Mr Fraudster) had the potential to help the club's mid term future IMO

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:44 pm  

Incredibullman wrote:

Sale of lease was a stroke of genius. Taking an asset not represented on the balance sheet into cash; good piece of strategic thinking. Not forgetting that the deal was struck with RFL with a guarantee to retain £350,000 of a long term loan, which was reneged on at point of signing. Also at same time bank reneged on a written deal to reduce overdraft facility at 10% a month. That equated to a loss of £635,000 in cash more or less overnight. Tell me any club without a sugar daddy that could stand that loss of cash? The pledge monies plus other options on the table (and not just Mr Fraudster) had the potential to help the club's mid term future IMO

That would mean Sod Hall have found the Bulls to be an embarrasment for whatever reasons and then engineered a scenario that would force the Bulls into administration hmmm

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 2:33 pm  

Incredibullman wrote:

Sale of lease was a stroke of genius. Taking an asset not represented on the balance sheet into cash; good piece of strategic thinking. Not forgetting that the deal was struck with RFL with a guarantee to retain £350,000 of a long term loan, which was reneged on at point of signing. Also at same time bank reneged on a written deal to reduce overdraft facility at 10% a month. That equated to a loss of £635,000 in cash more or less overnight. Tell me any club without a sugar daddy that could stand that loss of cash? The pledge monies plus other options on the table (and not just Mr Fraudster) had the potential to help the club's mid term future IMO

Just so it's clear, what do you mean by the RFL reneging on the deal at the point of signing?

I ask because I'm not sure how you renege on a deal prior to signing the contract which affirms the agreement.

Do you mean the RFL and the Bulls struck a verbal deal and when the contract arrived it didn't contain what the Bulls understood it was going to? If so, why did they sign it?

Isn't it also the case that the club now has to pay rent when it didn't before?

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:06 pm  

Have we gone it to administration yet?

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:11 pm  

I think the ground deal is starting to look at lot like a "commercial" pay day loan, a bit of short term cash a lot of long term pain?

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:30 pm  

M@islebugs wrote:

Just so it's clear, what do you mean by the RFL reneging on the deal at the point of signing?

I ask because I'm not sure how you renege on a deal prior to signing the contract which affirms the agreement.

Do you mean the RFL and the Bulls struck a verbal deal and when the contract arrived it didn't contain what the Bulls understood it was going to? If so, why did they sign it?

Isn't it also the case that the club now has to pay rent when it didn't before?

Maybe it (the signing) all came down to timing. Maybe we needed the cash by a certain date and the RFL left us in a position where we had to sign, get the cash, (that may have been promised elsewhere, such as HMRC) meaning that they pretty much could renegotiate the terms to suit them as ee were over a barrell with our pants down.

This sort of ties into things that have come to light, eg, the RFL calling in its loan unexpectedly.....

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:50 pm  

As I posted many weeks ago, the ground deal with rhe RFL had to happen because Bulls had not made a single repayment on the £ 700,000 loan from the RFL. Rfl loaned Bulls £ 700,000 in Jan / Feb 2011, repayment schedule was agreed and Bulls did not meet a single repayment. The ground sale was a good way for RFL to get the £ 700,000 back and put the balance into the Bulls. RFL were very very understanding to Bulls and were more than helpfull.

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:12 pm  

bellycouldtackle wrote:

As I posted many weeks ago, the ground deal with rhe RFL had to happen because Bulls had not made a single repayment on the £ 700,000 loan from the RFL. Rfl loaned Bulls £ 700,000 in Jan / Feb 2011, repayment schedule was agreed and Bulls did not meet a single repayment. The ground sale was a good way for RFL to get the £ 700,000 back and put the balance into the Bulls. RFL were very very understanding to Bulls and were more than helpfull.

That's interesting. Do you mind me asking how you know this?

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:23 pm  

I appreciate all the previous posts are hearsay based upon some form of inside knowledge. However added together they show what an absolute farce that our club has become. The financial mismanagment makes Enron look good!!!

Re: Administrators appointed #UNCONFIRMED# : Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:13 pm  

Bulls4Champs wrote:

Have we gone it to administration yet?

10am on a Friday before an extended bank holiday with a home game in the middle never struck me as being a sensible time to go into administration