People with strong opinions are often classed as irritants. Reading the article , Hudgell’s main target is Hetherington not Chalmers .
The most impressive case I’ve heard against the Super League “ power grab” was made by Carl Hall ( Doncaster CEO on Back Chat a few weeks ago. His argument was based on the belief that you start building a structure from the foundations ( grassroots ) not the roof ( Super League). Quietly effective.
Hudgell’s appearance on Backchat was far less convincing - to me he seemed distant and not prepared to engage in debate. As Paul Walker comments:
“He seemed to have the attitude that he was a member of the elite”
Perhaps that’s why Hudgell concentrated on Gary H - a peer rather than an underling.
Going back to Chalmers
He has turned round our club. Not only by recruiting a good coach and protecting the Academy structure but seemingly running the business side pretty well. There have been blemishes such as the occasional outburst but all in all he’s done a good job, especially given that the joint owner Graham Lowe cannot travel and is not able to share the day to day running of the club.

As you have mentioned Graham Lowe, he has actually sold his 50% of the club and is no longer involved with the Bulls. No clue who it was sold too.

https://opencorporates.com/companies/nz/1388503 All information available here.

https://opencorporates.com/companies/nz/1388503 All information available here.

Overall he's doing a tremendous job considering where we were when he took over. As others have said, they have been issues along the way with his outbursts. Hudgell did make me laugh abouy him swallowing a business speak book though.

Regarding the structure, he's been appointed as one of the front man to stand up for L1/Championship clubs, hence his clashes in the media with SL chairmen (although i don't think he's said anything as confrontational as what the fev, fax, Batley or Hunslet chairman said) but for obvious reasons we're the club that will rile others up. Personally i'd rather us just be quiet and just get on with our rebuilding, but obviously Chalmers feels they are greater stakes in regards to the structure, hence taking his fight to SL. He's getting a lot of stick for his role in the structure, but IMO he's doing it as he genuinely believes it could damage the sport as a whole. If he was just looking at hselfishly it would impact the Bulls, he would probably join the SL teams in calls to reduce championship funding as Bradford would be one of the few would could survive due to their fanbase. We'd be much weaker, but probably the strongest in the second tier. Look how strong the championship is now due to the funding.

I personally don't like the 8s, Widnes could finish bottom for the second year in a row and not get relegated. They could get 3 bites at the cherry (finish bottom of regular season, weakest SL team in M8s, then MPG and still survive) and i don't think for a minute 4 sl clubs are in danger of going down. so i agree with sl chairman that it needs changing, im dead against them having more power though. The SL chairman still voted through the Stobart deal, scrapping reserves, dual-reg. Lenegan mentioing loop fixtures returning should be setting the alarm bells off.

Anyway all chairman (and i include my own in this) need to stop the mud slinging in the media, get around a table and thrash out the differences.

To Chalmers by the looks of it. The new shareholder is FOURFOURONE Investments, of which Chalmers is listed as one of 2 shareholders.

I would argue that opinion is divided there. Most fans believe he has done a tremendous job. There is another load of fans (including myself) who no longer attend games and just follow casually, because of some of the decisions made by the chairman.

On the face of things, people are happy because it seems stable, which is what fans have been craving for years. Whether it's stable behind the scenes or whether people are just happy to bury heads in the sand as long as they don't see the terms "winding up petition" again, time will tell. None of us really know the answer to that, only those privy to the books (and I don't include mouthpieces who make out they're privy to that info to get attention).

It’s a good job super duper league wasn’t a closed shop when it started or the likes of Hudgell wouldn’t be anywhere near it.

He’d just be another “irritant”.

Wait... what???

When did that happen?

4th of April. New share holder is FOURFOURONE INVESTMENTS LIMITED( 5593625 ), which has 1 director (Danielle Emma CHRISTOFFERSEN) but for which Chalmers is joint shareholder.

Just looks to me like Chalmers buying out Lowes share.

There's a Danielle Christofferson who is an an Associate of Meredith Connell, a law firm in Auckland and Wellington after some years working in Oz. Could they be one and the same?

Her stated experience on the firm's website includes:

[i"Acting for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment in relation to the sale of properties forfeited or restrained under the Criminal Proceedings (Recovery) Act 2009 =#FF0000and in relation to the sale of properties pursuant to the Insolvency Act 2006, and advising on associated property issues."[/i

Hope there's not another multi hundred page thread coming up!

That’s the same person, but they appear to be business partners.

100 shares (100.00%)

Andrew David Kenneth CHALMERS
C/- Meredith Connell, Level 5, 4 Graham Street, Auckland, 1010 , New Zealand

Danielle Emma CHRISTOFFERSEN
C/- Meredith Connell, Level 5, 4 Graham Street, Auckland, 1010 , New Zealand


And her expertise and experience covers far more than recoveries. [urlhttps://www.mc.co.nz/our-people/danielle-christoffersen[/url

We can only hope.




Super League was a breakaway organisation, only fully reintegrating with the RFL in 2002. I wonder how far in that direction we’re heading again.

Between 1998 and 2000 it was a closed shop, meaning it took Huddersfield four goes to get relegated. Some Hull fans are still angry that the Premiership clubs wouldn’t accept them when their Sharks incarnation sunk, and as we were one of those Premiership clubs, and... well let’s just say that period of RL history is still discussed from time to time on our boards.

lgk;bjtdlkhtnbio[djobpe[jot=boe

If anyone other than named people are bankrolling the Bulls, I don't think it would take many guesses. If someone's in the background, I would put good money on the name rhyming with Goulash.

Let’s ignore the fact that yours is a newly created account for now, and assume you are something other than a troll...

Danielle being his wife would make sense, I did wonder if that was the case.

As to the question of bankrolling; I read the statement and my first impression was he was eluding to the RFL secretly bankrolling the bulls. On second read not sure if he was but convinced he was intending to create rumours and murmurs to try discredit Chalmers. His rant about Chalmers struck me as more petty and misguided than anything Chalmers has come out with.

So on the finance front, is anyone other than Chalmers bankrolling us? I have no idea. However; given we have crowds to rival some super league clubs, but a largely part time squad, isn’t it possible we are actually living within our means?

My personal suspicion is that Koukash is somehow involved, but I have no evidence at all of this. As a silent partner, I would happily welcome him.

[i"Let’s ignore the fact that yours is a newly created account for now, and assume you are something other than a troll.[/i.."

Newly created last year hun. Some people like to observe.

x

And your post at the time was your first ever post (under this account). Doesn’t really matter when the troll accounts were created, just when they were first used

And where did u learn your manners hun. What a welcome. Was warned by some friends. Before posting again should i ask for your permission Stevo. ?.

Let me apologise to the regulars for feeding the troll.

Why are we so worried or in need to find out who is funding the club, 18 months ago there was no Bradford Bulls, as a supporter your paying for the privlage to watch them not to investigate where monies are coming from to run the club, that is down to the owner/owners to deal with, so shut this subject down and continue to support them, I’m sure that is all the club wants from you

RL clubs are entertainment businesses, comparable in some ways to a cinema, for example.

However, imo, their owners are also custodians of important civic institutions, in a way that I don’t think those of cinemas (or a bowling alley etc.) are. Maybe cinemas were once, tbf. I think fans are stakeholders as much as customers, and owners should be a little more accountable than is the case for a normal business. Generally, I think they are. It’s probably good business, if nothing else, to have good communication, and a sense of togetherness.

Given Bradford’s recent history, i’m not surprised it’s an area of curiosity.

The thing is Mr. Chalmers, there is no doubt that the club just want you to hand over your money and not ask questions. That's been quite clear from day one.

Unfortunately intelligent people who care about the club will rarely do that. They may hand over their money because of their feelings, but they'll want to know if someone is being unscrupulous. Especially considering recent history.

Well said Rover and Chops. I hope you huns wont be accused of being trolls and put in front of Stevo's self elected firing squad.

I really can't believe you are being serious with that viewpoint

Given the recent history of the club, with repeated owners constantly telling us that everything was fine and then taking the club into Admin weeks later, and then discovering a litany of lies and deceit - what on earth do you expect?



I'm with Hamster Chops. The long-suffering fans who have been pumping money into this club since long before Andrew Chalmers arrived on his white horse should be afforded some upfront honesty. And the part-owner divesting himself of his 50% share on the q.t and none of even hearing a peep about it qualifies as just the sort of stuff that we've have a bellyful of these past few years.