Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

hindle xiii

Bulls news thread

159 posts in this topic

Disappointing article for a few things.

Firstly, why focus on any negatives at all at your media launch? What good can come of this.

Secondly, it would seem there was a fair bit of goodwill to his club when they held off signing the players, donated gate takings, and even made an offer to purchase the club to keep them alive. He perhaps shouldn't forget that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After everything the bull fans went through this is really poor form by the new owner.

It's greed from Omar, that's my opinion and I'm sure people will agree.

Bulls have been helped by their own fans, rival fans, ex players donatations, chairperson giving their own cash and then some clubs giving bulls part of the gate....... Sorry but Omar is out of order on this.

I still wish bulls (the ones on here and hope bulligerent returns to the forum) all the best, I just wish Omar kept shut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who supports Omar on this? Having the financial hit of losing the SKY money for this season is bad enough, but for the other clubs to distribute it amongst themselves is another financial kick.

What a way to support a club coming out of financial difficulties. Cut their income and make sure everybody else gets more money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who supports Omar on this? Having the financial hit of losing the SKY money for this season is bad enough, but for the other clubs to distribute it amongst themselves is another financial kick.

What a way to support a club coming out of financial difficulties. Cut their income and make sure everybody else gets more money.

Don't forget, Super League is staring into the financial abyss. Can you blame clubs for taking the extra cash?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who supports Omar on this? Having the financial hit of losing the SKY money for this season is bad enough, but for the other clubs to distribute it amongst themselves is another financial kick.

What a way to support a club coming out of financial difficulties. Cut their income and make sure everybody else gets more money.

Please don't take this the wrong way.... at least you've got a club playing in super league!!!!

Did you think you'd have a club in SL midway through last year??

The SL family helped Bradford in a time of crisis.

Don't forget, Super League is staring into the financial abyss. Can you blame clubs for taking the extra cash?

Great point - I'd like to know which three clubs were happy to share the money.

Question - Is Omar worried he needs more bums on seats / through the turnstyle for the new season??

This is my initial thought - Is he / was he depending on the cash?? does this mean he may need more new sponsors or have to put more of his own wealth into the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He wasn't/isn't depending on the cash because it was announced day one he took over that we weren't getting it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He wasn't/isn't depending on the cash because it was announced day one he took over that we weren't getting it

Do we know why they aren't getting it is it simply a punishment for going into administration. Or is it to repay the money the previous regime had early to make sure they saw out the season. If its the first then the money should of gone to the RFL to invest in the game. If its the second reason I think the other clubs are well within their rights to want that money back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The money they were advanced was the Sky money up to the end of 2012 I think, so as it stands Bradford have had no more money from Sky than any other SL club.

I believe originally the reduction in Sky money was offered as a good will gesture to speed up getting the club out of administration. As such OK knew this was very likely to happen from day one, so it's poor form. Of course, being a press day I don't think he'll have brought it up of his own accord, more a cheeky wag has asked him "how are you coping without the Sky money". Of course, you wouldn't report that, much better to put he's gone off on one by himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who supports Omar on this? Having the financial hit of losing the SKY money for this season is bad enough, but for the other clubs to distribute it amongst themselves is another financial kick.

What a way to support a club coming out of financial difficulties. Cut their income and make sure everybody else gets more money.

Actually on the point above, yes I agree with you - I'd rather see the money spent on promotion of the Super League so that everyone can still benefit.

Interestingly, the article states £1m - I thought it was only half of the money that was being withheld - is this just shoddy journalism?

The point I disagree with is Khan speaking publicly about this to the media - I don't think it helps anyone, and tbh if I was an owner of another club, I'd be pretty annoyed with him publicising this kind of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how he's been greedy, he hasn't said that he wants it, he said it's dissapointing it wasn't used for the wider good of the game and was just split between the other SL clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we know why they aren't getting it is it simply a punishment for going into administration. Or is it to repay the money the previous regime had early to make sure they saw out the season. If its the first then the money should of gone to the RFL to invest in the game. If its the second reason I think the other clubs are well within their rights to want that money back

Pretty impossible to say, to be honest, though I'd suspect it was decided last season, since it was pretty much known beforehand and no doubt was part of the negotiations in getting the other clubs 'on-side' with the deal.

You are repeating the old canard about getting "extra" funding last season; they did not, they just got some Sky payments early, that's not quite the same as getting more than they were due. It's very true that a number of clubs gave donations to the Bulls in the form of free tickets or giving the club all the entry money paid by Bradford fans, and all of us, fans, players and officials are very grateful - it helped to save the club and, along with other efforts, is directly responsible for the club being in SL this coming season. Are you suggesting they are taking it back? quid pro quo?

I've said before that I don't think there is any point in 'fining' the new owners - they are blameless - but, if we are to start at a disadvantage then so be it, but why has half our Sky money gone to the other clubs, putting us at a bigger disadvantage?, why not put the cash into funding youth development, promoting the international game, maybe as part of an RL fund to help badly injured players at all levels - I'm sorry, but I can find a number far more worthy causes than jusxt doling out the money to the other SL clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why not put the cash into funding youth development, promoting the international game, maybe as part of an RL fund to help badly injured players at all levels - I'm sorry, but I can find a number far more worthy causes than jusxt doling out the money to the other SL clubs.

I would suspect that the money has gone to Super League (Europe) rather than the RFL, and Super League (Europe) are only responsible for Super League rather than the International game etc. It was fown to the clubs as a whole to decide what to do with the cash rather than the governing body. And who's to say the clubs won't spend the extra cash on youth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty impossible to say, to be honest, though I'd suspect it was decided last season, since it was pretty much known beforehand and no doubt was part of the negotiations in getting the other clubs 'on-side' with the deal.

You are repeating the old canard about getting "extra" funding last season; they did not, they just got some Sky payments early, that's not quite the same as getting more than they were due. It's very true that a number of clubs gave donations to the Bulls in the form of free tickets or giving the club all the entry money paid by Bradford fans, and all of us, fans, players and officials are very grateful - it helped to save the club and, along with other efforts, is directly responsible for the club being in SL this coming season. Are you suggesting they are taking it back? quid pro quo?

I've said before that I don't think there is any point in 'fining' the new owners - they are blameless - but, if we are to start at a disadvantage then so be it, but why has half our Sky money gone to the other clubs, putting us at a bigger disadvantage?, why not put the cash into funding youth development, promoting the international game, maybe as part of an RL fund to help badly injured players at all levels - I'm sorry, but I can find a number far more worthy causes than jusxt doling out the money to the other SL clubs.

Leeds gave the Bulls administrator a considerable sum from their home game against Bulls. That was to pay players, and Is a gesture I will not forget in a hurry. I think we gained a better idea through all this which clubs were our friends...and which we're not.

Warrington and Hudds gave over £7k and over £3k respectively to the Bullbuilder Hardship fund ( not the club or the administrator, and deliberately so) from sales of away tickets. I was not involved with the Hudds arrangement, but dealt with the Warrington one and found them to be very sympathetic and helpful. The hardship fund made donations to staff working without pay and their families, and those donations made a significant contribution to there still being a club now.

Not sure what other direct contributions there were from other clubs.

I really wish I could see the logic of punishing a totally new company, seriously hamstringing it and raising the bar perilously high for it to have chance of succeeding, for the sins of a previous company and it's warring shareholders. But I admit I cannot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leeds gave the Bulls administrator a considerable sum from their home game against Bulls. That was to pay players, and Is a gesture I will not forget in a hurry. I think we gained a better idea through all this which clubs were our friends...and which we're not.

Warrington and Hudds gave over £7k and over £3k respectively to the Bullbuilder Hardship fund ( not the club or the administrator, and deliberately so) from sales of away tickets. I was not involved with the Hudds arrangement, but dealt with the Warrington one and found them to be very sympathetic and helpful. The hardship fund made donations to staff working without pay and their families, and those donations made a significant contribution to there still being a club now.

Not sure what other direct contributions there were from other clubs.

I really wish I could see the logic of punishing a totally new company, seriously hamstringing it and raising the bar perilously high for it to have chance of succeeding, for the sins of a previous company and it's warring shareholders. But I admit I cannot.

I think teh Widnes club, and Steve O'Connor personally, are worthy of a special mention, IIRC they were one of the first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suspect that the money has gone to Super League (Europe) rather than the RFL, and Super League (Europe) are only responsible for Super League rather than the International game etc. It was fown to the clubs as a whole to decide what to do with the cash rather than the governing body. And who's to say the clubs won't spend the extra cash on youth?

Well, absolutely nothing, of course. They may give the money to the Red Cross or Help for Heroes for all I know. ...and then again :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He wasn't/isn't depending on the cash because it was announced day one he took over that we weren't getting it

thanks AA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think teh Widnes club, and Steve O'Connor personally, are worthy of a special mention, IIRC they were one of the first.

I was referring specifically to donations AFTER the administrators were appointed, since that seemed to me the relevant period for people who were arguing that other clubs had already paid money to "Bradford". Such post-apocalypse contributions went not to "Bradford" as a club, but directly (BBHF - to people sacked by Gargoyle and their families) or indirectly (Leeds - to Gargoyle as there was no other vehicle in place at the time) to remaining and sacked staff.

The earlier contribiutions, to the "Pledge for Survival" campaign, were to the previous club itself, and for ther benefit of the previous management and shareholders. Anyone with an issue over such payments (and there will be many, in view of what subsequently happened following Caisley's intervention, the subsequent ousting of the then-management and the phoney war period while the new directors told us they were examining the books before putting the company into administration) should IMO take that up with the previous board/s. Not not vent their feelings on the new (totally unconnected) company. And, IMO more to the point, with the previous company's major shareholders who, in the main and some especially, will be damned by all eternity for their conduct over this whole sorry.

Amongst the many from outside who bow to no-one over their very generous (if ultimately fruitless) donations to the "Pledge" to try and save the former company, the Leeds club collectively and many of their fans individually at the Easter game, and Mr Steve O'Connor individually (was him, not Widnes) must stand especialy tall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually on the point above, yes I agree with you - I'd rather see the money spent on promotion of the Super League so that everyone can still benefit.

Interestingly, the article states £1m - I thought it was only half of the money that was being withheld - is this just shoddy journalism?

The point I disagree with is Khan speaking publicly about this to the media - I don't think it helps anyone, and tbh if I was an owner of another club, I'd be pretty annoyed with him publicising this kind of thing.

Maybe some of those who voted to keep it for themselves might be? Those who instead wanted it to be used for the purposes OK has indicated might even welcome the disinfecting effect of a bit of sunlight?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was referring specifically to donations AFTER the administrators were appointed, since that seemed to me the relevant period for people who were arguing that other clubs had already paid money to "Bradford". Such post-apocalypse contributions went not to "Bradford" as a club, but directly (BBHF - to people sacked by Gargoyle and their families) or indirectly (Leeds - to Gargoyle as there was no other vehicle in place at the time) to remaining and sacked staff.

The earlier contribiutions, to the "Pledge for Survival" campaign, were to the previous club itself, and for ther benefit of the previous management and shareholders. Anyone with an issue over such payments (and there will be many, in view of what subsequently happened following Caisley's intervention, the subsequent ousting of the then-management and the phoney war period while the new directors told us they were examining the books before putting the company into administration) should IMO take that up with the previous board/s. Not not vent their feelings on the new (totally unconnected) company. And, IMO more to the point, with the previous company's major shareholders who, in the main and some especially, will be damned by all eternity for their conduct over this whole sorry.

Amongst the many from outside who bow to no-one over their very generous (if ultimately fruitless) donations to the "Pledge" to try and save the former company, the Leeds club collectively and many of their fans individually at the Easter game, and Mr Steve O'Connor individually (was him, not Widnes) must stand especialy tall?

Are Bradford a different company now I know they went into administration but I thought they came out of it without going into liquidation. Does that not mean they are the same company with different owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe some of those who voted to keep it for themselves might be? Those who instead wanted it to be used for the purposes OK has indicated might even welcome the disinfecting effect of a bit of sunlight?

Maybe - and it's not a view I agree with, but why would Cas, Salford, Wakefield etc. turn down tens of thousands of funding?

The problem here is that Khan is criticising at least 10 other clubs here, the clubs not wanting to do this were in the minority, and I suspect this was due to having to pay the bills!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who supports Omar on this? Having the financial hit of losing the SKY money for this season is bad enough, but for the other clubs to distribute it amongst themselves is another financial kick.

What a way to support a club coming out of financial difficulties. Cut their income and make sure everybody else gets more money.

OK is of course right in what he is saying. The issue for me is that he's saying it publically.

We've been through all that and we're about looking to the future not being bitter about the past. Let the other clubs have the money. The bounce at the Bulls is fantastic at the moment, it's not necessary to bring this back up. He needs to let it go, publically at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are Bradford a different company now I know they went into administration but I thought they came out of it without going into liquidation. Does that not mean they are the same company with different owners.

Yes. Totally separate company (OK Bulls Ltd). No connection whatsoever with the past.

Bradford Bulls (Holdings) Ltd remains in adminsitration, and will be liquidated in due course. By Gargoyle, who will collect another fee.

A company almost never escapes administration. It will almost always lead to liquidation. What almost always happens is that Newco (in this case OK Bulls Ltd) or another existing company buys the relevant assets off the administrator. Sometimes an existing company buys the DEBT from the debtholders, and gains control of the company in administration that way. In such cases, occasionally the insolvent company is allowed by the debtholder/s to continue, if it is to their advantage. This tends to happen when a dominant supplier with secured debt forces its customer into administration, so it can take it over usually on the cheap. Hardly relevant to RL though, and there was no secured debt anyway.

Unfortunately, very few hacks - let alone RL hacks - understand the insolvency process, so the various media reports tend to be rather imprecise in this field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe - and it's not a view I agree with, but why would Cas, Salford, Wakefield etc. turn down tens of thousands of funding?

The problem here is that Khan is criticising at least 10 other clubs here, the clubs not wanting to do this were in the minority, and I suspect this was due to having to pay the bills!

I have seen the numbers 8 voted for taking the money, 5 voted for use in the game as a whole, quoted by a usually reluable and responsible source. I suspect the 5 (if such they were) will have included Leeds and other more financially-secure clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite honestly, could you blame Salford and Cas for taking the money? They are really struggling financially.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017