Its just a promise. Dont think its legally binding. And I certainly havent handed over my bank details. So it remains to be seen how quickly the money will be paid

Wow. So, someone could have pledged £200 on their pay day - got caught up in a tide of emotion and in three days time might have blown their pay day and change their mind?

We have experience of pledging. Would hope the BoD would be factoring in 'spoof' pledges from mickey-takers

I thought it was originally that the second 500k was 4-6 weeks after the first. Now I keep seeing that its by the end of the month? When is it needed for??

Ryan Duckett mentioned 6 weeks to raise the second 500k on Sky sports news today.

Well, I'd imagine that the timescale for the 2nd 500k is dependant on how well the club is able to rearrange it's other financial commitments.

Technically, it would be down to the various case law around offer and acceptance based on conditions. I personally think it would be classed as a promise to pay if they meet the conditions set in the pledge which is to raise £500k. I don't think it would be straight forward but it's pretty clear on the website etc you are pledging your money which is expected to be paid and I think that would aid bulls in viewing it as legally binding.

There's nothing complicated here. There is no contract, as for this, you need "consideration". As in, I pay you £3, in consideration of which you give me a pint of bitter.

I have pledged and so will pay if asked. But I have received no consideration from the Bulls so I have no legal liability to pay if I chose not to.

Offer, acceptance and CONSIDERATION for a contract, Liane? The consideration does not have to be "adequate", there just has to be some. If the latter is unclear, or there is none, then it has to be under deed. Not sure what the consideration in contractual terms would be, although in more general terms "still having a team to watch" might cut it? Would not want to bet the house on it though.

If it ever came to legal action, then it could well be that on balance of probabilities everyone pledging was well aware they would be expected to pay - so it could be legally binding providing a consideration could be demonstrated (hard?). But if it ever gets to that situation, we are stuffed anyway.

ps - 'Vark got in before I wrote this, and he is much better qualified to comment than me. Is it totally clear there is no consideration at all?

Regardless of what happens after Easter Bradford Bulls will continue to be a part of Super League.
That is all.

Yup.

Can any one tell me the last time this lot of Directors produced a set of accounts to explain the situation that we are in?

We seem as fans to be told nothing----yet are being asked for every thing ----its so miss managed its a joke we were told that they had to have this 500k that had to be in place by Friday or the doors would be closed now we have a stay of sentance now till sometime this week, we then need to raise an extra 500k by then end of April or is it mid May .

The 500k must be to pay the tax man so what s left to pay the wages etc. If the directors intend on finding the 500k i will bet its not from their own pockets it must be from a sale of players, their our only assets.

This way paying the short term debt gives them time to sell players and try and get their own money out before we go to the wall.

We need to see and be be told the exact situation i will not be handing over my hard earned cash on a promise of a long term plan only known by the directors.

I don't think Bradford would want to go anywhere near a courtroom again!

Hood has taken a lot of stick over the last 2 weeks, but i feel a little sorry for the guy.

The way the club has managed to raise nearly £500,000 in 2 weeks is a phenomenal achievement. Both the club and fans have contributed greatly to this and really worked together. The fact that Bullbuilder had a chance to meet the BOD and ask pressing questions, shows that the club are not really hiding anything from the fans, the fans just need to ask.

It's no surprise that we are still [ipaying[/i for previous mistakes. Many mistakes were made and it wasn't going to go away overnight.

I'm taking a huge positive that the Financial figures for the past year show the Bulls as actually making a profit, and that is with 10,000 fans only paying a small fee for their membership.

Next year, we may see season tickets double in price. If results keep coming, and the team still looks like a team, we should keep most of the 10,000 ticket holders.

I just feel, that if we come out of this 'quest' with success, the club should be in a great position to move forward. The BOD should at least receive credit for being able to achieve this.

Paper notes £50,000 extra was made on tickets and £13,500 was donated into buckets.

A massive well done to everyone who was able to be there and those who had spare change and chose to donate

Going back to the Hood quotes. If there has to be a potential sale of players to settle the books, then I for one, would be totally brassed off.

If your reading this Peter, we got to 500k to prevent this from happening. Now its your turn.

thats equivilent to 2500 adults at £20 is that right?

The attendance of 20800 was allegedly 4800 above what had been budgeted for (we were told anything above 16k goes into the pot) - a bit of simple maths means that the average income from each of those extra fans was therefore just under £10.42 each.

Sorry but many sports clubs have had to sell their crown jewels to pay the bills for ever and a day, its just the way it is. Why should Bradford be any different? Yes its painful, and obvisiously not what anyone would want to have to do but if its that or go belly up then it has to be done.

That, imo, is the one unarguable truth of all of this.

I stand corrected but the info from these boards is gthat Bulls season ticket holders were going to pay on the door as oposed to using tickets and the 16000 gate is the first I have heard sorry.

Many did, in fact I paid three times altogether on Friday night, if you include the season ticket. Truth is though that many wouldn't have been able to afford to pay again (think of a family with four members, for instance), much as they probably would have liked to. There was never any decision by the club to make everyone pay on the gate, and it wouldn't have been legal anyway, so it was far from clear cut as to how much income came from the game.

I hope the club are not relying on getting a club as a consideration! It confuses me and is why I probably should be reading my purchasing and supply law text book and not reading posts!

The very first thing I ever learnt, on day one, when studying mercantile law as part of the first year for my qualification, was that offer+acceptance+consideration=contract*

Then we moved onto snails in bottles and smelly smokeballs and 1930's car parks...

It'll be engraved on my mind to the very end of time, I fear.

* unless applied to several former Bulls players

The carbolic smoke company. We spent far too much time studying that in contract law at uni