Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Bradford Bulls takeover complete


  • Please log in to reply
153 replies to this topic

#141 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,144 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 09:35 AM

If it makes you happy to pounce on imprecise wording, then fine.  I doubt most reasoned readers, especially those who are familiar with what I have posted on internet forums these last 15 years, would choose to interpret my statement as you did.  But my earlier clarification should address any such concerns.

Not pouncing on anything, you made a pretty sweeping and out of order for statement, which is surprising from a poster like yourself - your post clarified what you meant, but you weren't prepared to change your quote.

 

Considering you are all about detail and getting facts right, this surprises me immensely.

 

Anyway, that's my final word on it.



#142 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,252 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 09:43 AM

Preferential Creditors

All employees were transferred under TUPE to BB2014 1n accordance w1th the conditional sale agreement. However, due to the non-completion of the sale, the employee's remain employed by OK Bulls Llmited- In Administration. Upon completion of a sale the employees includmg players will be transferred under TUPE and therefore no preferential claims will be made.

I assume the Bulls player that signed for (Hull, was it?) does not remain employed by OK Bulls


St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

 

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.
 
Moderator of the International board


#143 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,252 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 09:49 AM

Not pouncing on anything, you made a pretty sweeping and out of order for statement, which is surprising from a poster like yourself - your post clarified what you meant, but you weren't prepared to change your quote.

 

Considering you are all about detail and getting facts right, this surprises me immensely.

 

Anyway, that's my final word on it.

There appears to have been a misunderstanding, best to draw a line under the whole thing and move on


St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

 

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.
 
Moderator of the International board


#144 Adeybull

Adeybull
  • Coach
  • 493 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 09:50 AM

So if the Bulls currently owe Safeguard £250,000 and rising at a rate of 8% per month (is that 233% APR?) then the Bulls will pay £20,000 interest only to SafeGuard, EACH month.

 

If the Bulls don't pay any of the loan off then by this time next year the debt to Safeguard will be nearer to £600,000 and the Bulls will be paying £45,000 interest per month.

 

Looks like the Bulls need to pay the loan off to the Safeguard Security Group asap to stop lining the pockets of the Safeguard Security group.

 

Unless there's anyone at the Bulls with a vested interest in Safeguard?

 

Do I also understand that as a secured creditor, when central funding arrives, the directors of the Bulls could direct the cash immediately towards the secured creditors, rather than the preferential or the unsecured creditors?

 

Frightening.  Truly frightening.  Unless I'm misunderstanding the situation.

 

I suspect maybe you are?

 

All the creditors are frozen as at the date of the administrator's appointment.  They remain creditors of OK Bulls Ltd. and have to be settled (to the extent funds allow) by the administrator.  They do NOT become creditors of Bradford Bulls Northern Ltd (unless the owner chose to assume the liability...) and so there is no need for any further interest cost to accrue or settlement to be made.

 

Regarding settling OK Bulls creditors, I'm disappointed that the T&A report did not include this bit: "...BB2014 were making an offer for the purchase of the company's assets coupled with an Intended proposal to trade creditors of OK Bulls for repayment over an extended period in order to try and avoid the six point deduction that would be made due on the club entering into Administration."  Leaving aside the vindication of those of us who said there was indeed such an intent (I had been specifically told of the intent, with some details of the specifics, at the time), and who were so derided for saying so in various quarters, I'd love to know just why the RFL seemingly discounted any of this in imposing the six point penalty AND continuing special measures?  Since, if Moore & Co WERE likely to be able to deliver on this intent, surely that would have meant a far better return for the creditors (100%, maybe, over time?) than what the administrator is now saying?  So far, we have had contradictory statements from both sides, each disputing the other's.  I'd like to know the truth of it all, as well as if the eventual bid winner has any plans for settling any creditors?


  • Rob likes this

#145 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,252 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 10:19 AM

Regarding settling OK Bulls creditors, I'm disappointed that the T&A report did not include this bit: "...BB2014 were making an offer for the purchase of the company's assets coupled with an Intended proposal to trade creditors of OK Bulls for repayment over an extended period in order to try and avoid the six point deduction that would be made due on the club entering into Administration."  Leaving aside the vindication of those of us who said there was indeed such an intent (I had been specifically told of the intent, with some details of the specifics, at the time), and who were so derided for saying so in various quarters, I'd love to know just why the RFL seemingly discounted any of this in imposing the six point penalty AND continuing special measures?  Since, if Moore & Co WERE likely to be able to deliver on this intent, surely that would have meant a far better return for the creditors (100%, maybe, over time?) than what the administrator is now saying?  So far, we have had contradictory statements from both sides, each disputing the other's.  I'd like to know the truth of it all, as well as if the eventual bid winner has any plans for settling any creditors?

For me, it seems the RFL handled the sale to OK Bulls fine, even with the reduction in central funds etc, with personal guarantees from OK etc.

 

The recent stuff, I'm not so sure about. I'll need to have another read through at a point where I'm able to concentrate on it a bit better.


St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

 

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.
 
Moderator of the International board


#146 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,144 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 10:26 AM

Have we ever had any official comment from the RFL or SLE around the withheld TV money from the Bulls?

 

If this was an agreement with the RFL and the previous owner, why is this still a factor in any new ownership? What are the RFL trying to achieve with this? I was ok with it at first as it seemed to me that it was forcing a new owner to make a proper commitment to the club, but as things have moved on, it is clear that this is hampering the club.

 

Isn't it time to try and draw a line under it and stop financially hampering the club?



#147 Adeybull

Adeybull
  • Coach
  • 493 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 10:29 AM

I assume the Bulls player that signed for (Hull, was it?) does not remain employed by OK Bulls

 

That's a very good question.  I'm glad you asked that.

 

Because its one that various of us have been wondering about too!  If the player was effectively never TUPEd in the first place, by implication he won't have had an opportunity to decline the TUPE and thereby become a free agent?  And so therefore he broke his contract by walking out, and so significant compensation is due to OK Bulls ltd, for the benefit of the creditors...?  :rtfm:

 

Except, of course, what is done is done, and at the time he had been told he was being TUPEd.  So I doubt anyone would either get anywhere or get any redress by pursuing anything now?  It's all academic now anyway, so leave it and move on, I'd say?



#148 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,252 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 10:52 AM

Have we ever had any official comment from the RFL or SLE around the withheld TV money from the Bulls?

 

If this was an agreement with the RFL and the previous owner, why is this still a factor in any new ownership? What are the RFL trying to achieve with this? I was ok with it at first as it seemed to me that it was forcing a new owner to make a proper commitment to the club, but as things have moved on, it is clear that this is hampering the club.

 

Isn't it time to try and draw a line under it and stop financially hampering the club?

I imagine the issue now is that the money is now gone. And it was supposed to be all done in the first year but the RFL agreed to split over 2 years rather than all in one hit.

 

If it had been done to the original plan, they would be on full TV money now, although they may well have gone to the wall 6 months earlier than they did...


St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

 

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.
 
Moderator of the International board


#149 MrPosh

MrPosh
  • Coach
  • 3,053 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 11:20 AM

So if the Bulls currently owe Safeguard £250,000 and rising at a rate of 8% per month (is that 233% APR?) then the Bulls will pay £20,000 interest only to SafeGuard, EACH month.

 

If the Bulls don't pay any of the loan off then by this time next year the debt to Safeguard will be nearer to £600,000 and the Bulls will be paying £45,000 interest per month.

 

Looks like the Bulls need to pay the loan off to the Safeguard Security Group asap to stop lining the pockets of the Safeguard Security group.

 

Unless there's anyone at the Bulls with a vested interest in Safeguard?

 

Do I also understand that as a secured creditor, when central funding arrives, the directors of the Bulls could direct the cash immediately towards the secured creditors, rather than the preferential or the unsecured creditors?

 

Frightening.  Truly frightening.  Unless I'm misunderstanding the situation.

 

I think you are.

 

Marc Green - the new owner of the club - also owns Safeguard.


People called Romans they go the house

#150 a j cougar

a j cougar
  • Coach
  • 1,645 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 12:02 PM

Hi AJ.  As far as I can determine, the loan is included in the unsecured creditors value, and currently remains outstanding.  It was apparently personally guaranteed by Khan, who I saw reported in an interview a few days ago in the T&A saying that he intended to honour the guarantee and repay the loan.  I am sure we are both not alone in preparing to be very angry indeed if it was to transpire that the loan did not get repaid?  Any and all apoplexy from the good burghers of Keighley would be totally and completely justified IMO, in such an event.

 

The loan was granted very shortly after Khan and Sutcliffe took over the club.  As for who sanctioned it, it was supposedly the requisite council cabinet member/s and/or officials, IIRC from the reports.  Supposedly on commercial terms (I saw evidence last summer of the agreed and intended monthly repayment schedule, and of it being interest-bearing) as some sort of business development loan like the council granted to other businsesses. So it was reported, anyway... There have been any number of allegations that the loan was granted because of the presumed close relationship between Gerry Sutcliffe MP and the ruling labour group on the council, but I really have no idea.  We supporters generally did not become aware even of the existence of this loan until some months after they took over, when IIRC other local politicians understandably started making noises about it.  I was aware of Khan's guarantee some months ago, which was why I was less angry about this than various other things that had happened.

 

Doubtless your own chairman will be approaching the council for a similar loan?  And I'd say dead right too, if he did!

 

 Thanks Adeybull,

 

I certainly think further questions have to be asked re the sanctioning of the loan, and the mechanics of it going through, given the current climate of belt tightening.

 

I feel a letter coming on. I assume we have some sort of ombudsman for BDMC?

 

As for us getting a loan, I won't hold my breath. They have been good enough to let us have planning permission for the ground improvements though, so I suppose we should be grateful :)



#151 Amber Avenger

Amber Avenger
  • Coach
  • 5,665 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 12:15 PM

Have we ever had any official comment from the RFL or SLE around the withheld TV money from the Bulls?

 

If this was an agreement with the RFL and the previous owner, why is this still a factor in any new ownership? What are the RFL trying to achieve with this? I was ok with it at first as it seemed to me that it was forcing a new owner to make a proper commitment to the club, but as things have moved on, it is clear that this is hampering the club.

 

Isn't it time to try and draw a line under it and stop financially hampering the club?

 

I don't think we'll ever get a proper answer to this - if there was any consistency in this, why haven't we had half taken away from us after this 2nd admin? I obviously don't want that, but was the original punishment something that was a precedent to be set to the future? I can pretty much guarantee that no other team will ever get their Sky money taken off them for going into admin again and I'm not saying this in a "woe is me" way, it's just the situation backfired big time that it ended up solving nothing really.


Edited by Amber Avenger, 09 April 2014 - 12:15 PM.

SQL Honours
Play off mini league winner - 2002. Bronze Medalist - 2003. Big Split Group Winner - 2006. Minor Stupidship - 2005, 2006. Cup Silver Medalist - 2008, 2009
CHAMPION - 2005, 2009, 2010

#152 Bulliac

Bulliac
  • Coach
  • 2,616 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 02:59 PM

I don't think we'll ever get a proper answer to this - if there was any consistency in this, why haven't we had half taken away from us after this 2nd admin? I obviously don't want that, but was the original punishment something that was a precedent to be set to the future? I can pretty much guarantee that no other team will ever get their Sky money taken off them for going into admin again and I'm not saying this in a "woe is me" way, it's just the situation backfired big time that it ended up solving nothing really.

That it it ended up, "solving nothing" is probably the understatement of the year Amber. The truly amazing thing is that no-one in authority, apparently, could see the inevitable consequences of taking such a massive amount of money from a club in admin.  I think you're right in saying that we'll not see that particular sanction used again and, despite all the 'serves you right' stuff from some fans, both on here and eslwhere, I would truly hate any other club to go through what we've endured over the last couple of seasons.


No team is an island.........................................

http://www.flickr.co...s/31337109@N03/

#153 Konkrete

Konkrete
  • Coach
  • 1,956 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 06:07 PM

That's a very good question.  I'm glad you asked that.
 
Because its one that various of us have been wondering about too!  If the player was effectively never TUPEd in the first place, by implication he won't have had an opportunity to decline the TUPE and thereby become a free agent?  And so therefore he broke his contract by walking out, and so significant compensation is due to OK Bulls ltd, for the benefit of the creditors...?  :rtfm:
 
Except, of course, what is done is done, and at the time he had been told he was being TUPEd.  So I doubt anyone would either get anywhere or get any redress by pursuing anything now?  It's all academic now anyway, so leave it and move on, I'd say?

Ctrl, Alt, Delete.... I think my brain just flatlined reading that.
Integrity is shown when no-one is looking.

#154 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,252 posts

Posted 10 April 2014 - 08:13 AM

That it it ended up, "solving nothing" is probably the understatement of the year Amber. The truly amazing thing is that no-one in authority, apparently, could see the inevitable consequences of taking such a massive amount of money from a club in admin.  I think you're right in saying that we'll not see that particular sanction used again and, despite all the 'serves you right' stuff from some fans, both on here and eslwhere, I would truly hate any other club to go through what we've endured over the last couple of seasons.

But if OK said that he was willing to cover it, you can see why the RFL thought it would be OK fine


Edited by brooza, 10 April 2014 - 08:13 AM.

St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

 

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.
 
Moderator of the International board





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users