As Slugger pointed out we know we paid over the odds, he had us over a barrel but we knew that.



We clearly needed the ground to move this latest plan forward and he knew that.



The real question is why Box advised us not to buy it from the BOI when he must of known what was going to happen. It defies logic that he didn’t know that NM would collapse and that we should most definitely have purchased it at 600 k.



Who knows it could be the club whose sniffed something out and made the complaint! I have no idea if that’s the case by the way just pondering.



We all know some very dodgy stuff has happened and it started the moment Yorkcourt became involved, coincidence? I couldn’t say.

May be wrong, but I thought it was Sir RMW that advised the Club not to buy the ground off the BoI.

And is it true Sir MRS was some thing to do with Yorkcourt shares or something

I believe that Vasty is right and it WAS Box who advised the club not to bid.

I still can't understand why, no matter who advised us not to buy, we didn't bid. Its just not logical.

The only reason I would really understand is if for some reason we were not capable of raising the funds at that time.

I suppose if you are a club that is traditionally strapped for cash and someone says, "don't worry, son, put your six hundred thousand away, it's all in hand, but stay out of it so as not to muddy the waters", you'll do as advised.



Until it turns out that the water was really muddy ...

While not knowing all the ins and outs of the negotiations in question did the advisor act in a professional capacity

If so did he declare any other interests and was the advice professionally delivered in the best interest of Wakefield Trinity.

Could the rugby club realistically make a claim against the adviser.

Would love to know why SRW advised us not to bid as it would push up the price.

We didn't bid and the price went through the roof.

Seems very strange that we did not put in a single bid around the £600k mark to test the water.

I don't know if it was a sealed bid auction, open auction, or just a standard sale procedure, but if one of the parties purports to be acting on your behalf and you put in a bid of your own, you end up bidding against yourself.

Not really, not if someone’s offering you an alternative that they have no intention of actually providing. Come on PT even you’ve heard of lying?



In fairness I agree I would have bought it but I’ve been getting lied to by Box since I first met him in 2006! MC a new boy by comparison with no connection to the previous attempts to get a deal. I bet he would now.



Not wanting to spend another mans cash but if he’d bought it himself he’d not have lost on the deal.

Can’t see a problem for us, don’t see how it can slow thplanning process. Like a previous poster mentioned may even turn out to be a good thing.

I get that someone can lie. That's the point.

Why would you make a business decision on just someone's word.



And I can't even guess what reason was suggested for letting someone else buy it. They were never going to sell it to you for the same price.

It's not hindsight. Clearly there must be something else to it but from the info in public domain its a mistake.

......Full of Crude Oil more like....