Yeah but 42,000 from East Stirling

I suspect a lot will depend on the 'vibes' coming out of the place in the pre-season and, of course, having a competitive side in whatever division we finish up in. Hopefully we can get away from the old attitude of looking back to what once was and just accept things for what they are and look to the future?

Sounds like we might hear something this week anyway - let's hope it's good news, though I expect it won't be totally good..

There are still many hurdles to overcome but Eamonn McManus' clear support for our survival in Super League (see separate thread begun by af) has cheered me up. Quite rightly he insists the new owner has to be fit for purpose but it is good to know that at least one of the power brokers in the game is firmly in favour of our continued SL existence and that it would be folly for the League (and bad business for the clubs) to kick us out.

George Galloway has just tweeted that he is in Dubai for 'an important Bradford-related matter'. MOTWYW. (Follows on from his hideous comments on rape today btw)

Too busy making I'll advised Internet video's. Showing his ignorance on the rape laws of the country. Came across as a very big love muscle!

I mentioned the fake sheiks a while backbut was shot down by an idiot

He's probably trying to help get funding for LUFC after their takeover collapsed

Would think it's more likely he's trying to get them involved in buying out westfield and sorting out city rather than anything bulls related. Apart from his cameo at Leeds pledge game he hasn't shown any particular interest in our problems but he has been very vocal about Westfield mess.

So how many of the three bids will get a complete information package ie business plan, proof of funding etc. in by today's deadline?

I guess they all will, in some form or another. Though I'm not sure how the SLE move will be presented (or even if it matters as it's 'in house') as they would seem, understandably, to be wanting to be a catalyst to enable else to come in and run things, rather than do it themselves.

I'm not sure how the bidders will present their cases though; putting in a single plan (ie for SL) would probably cause the RFL to consider it 'conditional', whereas I can't really see them being able to put in three separate detailed business plans. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

The only bit the administrator should be interested in is how much of the debt is repaid as he should looking for the best deal for the creditors. Its complicated in a way by the rfl involvement. In a way they should only get involved once the administrator has accepted a bid. Then they should do their fit and proper tests. My guess is they will string it out further. If you make the play offs then they will have to string it out a bit longer than planned.

In a 'normal' administration that might be the case, but with a rugby club where the only real asset is the SL licence the RFL have great power and in effect are kingmaker. [iIf[/i they deny the licence to the administrator's choice then the value of the company is trashed as far as the administrator is concerned and he'll get little more than nothing - and that might be an overestimate. However you look at it, it's in his best interests (and the creditors) to keep the RFL onside.

Well BCFC have pulled out saying if other bids fail come back to us! I think the SLE bid would have to fall over before that would happen! www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... ver_Bulls/

Well BCFC have pulled out saying if other bids fail come back to us! I think the SLE bid would have to fall over before that would happen! www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... ver_Bulls/

Other interesting bit in todays paper is in Lulia article. Only the 17 out of contract players have been given permission to talk to other clubs by the RFL NOT the players under contract for next year. Whilst I'd imagine the latter groups agents will have deals lined up in case we don't exist as a SL club next, it does suggest that RFL will expect those players to continue as bradford players if we do retain our license. Technically we could be lodging a complaint against certain other clubs for making illegal approaches to under contract players, although under current circumstances doubt we'd go down that route.

Quote ="Blotto"Well BCFC have pulled out saying if other bids fail come back to us! I think the SLE bid would have to fall over before that would happen! www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... ver_Bulls/'" I'm not sure what the logic would be for any potential buyer to bid against SLE. Why not let SLE buy the club, sort out the finances and then buy the club off of them?

Quote ="Blotto"Well BCFC have pulled out saying if other bids fail come back to us! I think the SLE bid would have to fall over before that would happen! www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... ver_Bulls/'" I'm not sure what the logic would be for any potential buyer to bid against SLE. Why not let SLE buy the club, sort out the finances and then buy the club off of them?

To get it cheaper I'd guess. If SLE buy the club and sort the finances then the cost of doing that will be reflected in the price they accept from anyone subsequently buying the club. They arent going to sell the club on at a loss. SLE buying club only makes sense if they have a buyer lined up who won't deal with administrator for whatever reason.

Cibaman, exactly.

Surely that has been the purpose all along? To make sure it is the RFL decides who gets to own the Bulls and on what terms, not the administrator? With the SLE bid there as the fallback if necessary, or to provide an interim ownership between administrator and eventual new owner? And thereby putting an end to any of the conspiracy theories regarding who the administrator may or may not have been in bed with? That seemed the logical explanation for the RFL's actions to me?

So if the RFL DO now let someone other than themselves (sorry, SLE) take the club over, by extension we must presumably assume that by the intervention of the SLE bid they will have been able to ensure that the bid is indeed from owners and on terms that the RFL is happy with?

Hopefully this mornings SLE meeting in brighouse will make it clear if SL will have 13 or 14 clubs in 2013 and take a view on the remaining bids for the Bulls.

It wont be to sort the Clubs finances out if they are the preferred bid, it will be to sell on to an investor with a long term plan to make the Club a solvent and going concern and the finances to do so! Rumours still abound that there are a couple of potentials waiting to deal direct with the SLE to buy the Club!

I've said before that taking the other bids (other than SLE) at face value I can't see any of them being in a position to sort out the finances, ie pay off enough of the debt to ensure we remain in SL, so I hope those rumours turn out to be true. The problem with the SLE solution is that time is slipping by and even if we are 'saved' by keeping the licence we aren't going to have a chance of recruiting before the season starts. It needs resolving quickly, and yesterday will do.

Interesting tweet from Martin Sadler today

"@MartynSadler: So far this season there have been five Super League matches with crowds of over 18,000. One club involved in 3 of them. But which one?"

I bet no one can guess......lol

Pretty clear Martyn is helping to make the case for why would anyone with half a commercial brain cell eject us.

2 x Leeds 1 x Wigan btw.

Completely agree - he later makes reference to the meeting held today by the RFL, discussing the future of Bradford

Was a SLE meeting. Focus was Bulls and SL team numbers in 2013. Would expect M. Sadler to know the outcome of that meeting given his position in the game.

I have just seen this posted on Witter, its our 2013 Squad at the preseason training camp, Brighton.