We tried to warn them:



[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/georgeriley/2012/03/rugby_league_rallies_round_wou.html@winitycats reply[/url

Don't mean to go off topic but someone has posted that Leigh, Fev, and Fax have better grounds than Bulls, Wakey and Cas! Leigh at a push, but Fax and Rovers ground are similar if not worse!

You wouldn't, I'm referring to fairy stories, not the real world.

I seem to remember reading that anyone who went into admin would lose their license automatically, I'm not sure if it was a suggestion or fact though

All those fans that gave 500k in pledges must be feeling like they’ve been mugged. To me it all looked dodgy, a slick market campaign (endorsed by the RFL) to raise the first lot of money without any real transparency. The whole thing was based on emotional black mail. It makes wonder how many of them fans that pledged the 500k would of done so knowing the second amount was well over a Million? Another 500k seems sort of achievable, but £1m plus, they wouldn’t have been able to market that so successfully. I find it really hard to believe that they didn’t know of this extra half Million plus debt, it not like a multi national company with a turn over off billions, were these amounts can get lost in the system. Bradford Bulls are a relatively small company that turn over a few million a year, I can’t see how you can miss a massive amount like that.



The thing stinks, and that’s before we get on the way the RFL have acted in all this.

I think they changed the rules just after Crusaders went into admin.

what did we get was it 4 or 6 points ?

We got 4, but I suspect that’s because Crusaders had already been given 4. I think at the time they did say it was the scale of the debt that decided what points you get deducted.

The RFL can take some of the blame, because of their insistence that clubs have so many "members", thus making teams like Bulls offer memberships at silly prices.



We shouldn't be too smug. Although our crowds are up, because of the leap in cheap season tickets, we might be making less through the gate than last year. As a business model, it probably works in our scenario, so that we can take a big crowd to a new ground, but we have had to follow a similar business strategy to the Bulls (apart from we don't spend a full salary cap!!).



Will one of the problems be that those who run the club will probably want to run it after administration? Surely it will look like a scam if company A owned by Joe Bloggs goes into admin to get rid of debts, and then company B steps in to run the same business and is still owned by Joe Bloggs?

I maintain that this was always the plan; the 'pledge' was just a way of removing the incumbent Directors personal guarantees and paving the way for them to go quietly.



They'll now go into admin, wipe out any remaining liabilities, and resurface the following day as a newco, which in all likelihood, has already been formed.



I can't think of anyone who comes out of this situation covered in glory, apart from the loyal and decent fans who put their hands in their pockets because they hoped they were being told the truth.

You may be right Bren, but if they went into admin and then the new people came forward, they could set out in their conditions that the previous BoD be removed prior to their "takeover".

However, with new people in place, they wouldn't then have been in a position to ask for pledges.

IMO, the pledge thing was to show thet the current BoD was doing "everything" to save the club.

You have to feel sorry for the fans, they did their all trying to raise the monies and probably some gave more than they could afford to save their beloved club. The monies would have been given blindly with no knowledge of the true financial picture. They would have been far better giving to their supporters Trust who could have amassed the funds and asked to see the true financial situation prior to handing over the monies. This is what the Supporters Trusts are there for : to help safeguard the club for the fans of today and the future.