Sure you can get credit insurance, but the insurers only write limits on companies with a reasonable credit score, and OK Bulls would never have fallen into this category. I think loans to outfits like the Bulls are high return but high risk variety - like payday loans.

Any loan company will have any loan it makes under written

Read what Northernrelic says again, and this time try to understand it. the key phrase is "insurers only write limits on companies with a reasonable credit score".

Otherwise the premium demanded by the insurers would be more than the debt.

The other key fact is that for security he got a debenture over the assets etc of etc, which perhaps means that Green couldnt get the loan insured. If he had got insurance it would have been the insurers putting us into admin not Green.

No, not trolling. Just wondering whether he's a gambler, and was gambling on getting his money back from before he owned the club and then staying in Super League, and is wringing out every last chance out of his gamble. If he stays true to his word if/when you go down and rebuilds, etc, every credit to the bloke. Or will he cut and run once the gamble is run and lost? Who knows?

But given that he could do other things with the money than pursue endless legal avenues, like invest in the team, it is hard not to wonder whether it is Super League or bust?

Hindsight will tell us eventually.

Can see what you saying, but even if we get all 6 back we'd still be down. So I can't see him wasting money on a court case, that wouldn't really have an effect on our survival chances, especially if he plans to sell us if we're no longer an SL club.

He has publicly stated, and sworn down the cameras that he will not run for the hills if we're relegated. I know after all the clubs been through we should take that with a pinch of salt, but if he planned to sell us if we're relegated, why would he keep banging on about how he's not going to run for the hills. He could just keep quiet.

Personally I like Green. Moore and Co were very vocal, although I think they did make a lot of cuts for the good of the club, they threatened action against everyone and nothing really came of it. Khan was full of big ideas and nothing to back it with. Whitcut is corrupt (putting it nicely) and Hood and Caisley caused this whole sorry mess in first place.

Green seems a business man first and foremost and doesn't seem like someone who makes wild statements or judgments. Time will tell, but hopefully like Wakefield, after what seems like a lifetime of incompetent owners, things maybe settling down and we can finally rebuild.

So what do people think of Derwents post earlier?

Excepting that his statement implied he was miffed at them for refusing to make the report known to him/us (the supporters) or the club. Or did I misread it>

Wont Marc green have a copy of the proceedings?

That's not what I was implying at all. There has been criticism of the RFL for saying they will not publish the written judgement as it contains sensitive information after initially promising to do so. The assumption seems to be that it is the RFL that is trying to suppress something. I'm just saying that it's entirely possible that the sensitive information may relate to the club and/or people connected with or formerly connected with the club. The bottom line is if the club wanted it to be published then they could make their copy available.

Unless there's a secrecy clause

Yes that's also a possibility. All I am saying is that there are several possibilities as to why the judgement hasn't been made public, it's not necessarily down to the RFL trying to hide something as some conspiracy theorists would like to believe.

You can't suggest that there is any fault to lay at the Bulls door, That's not allowed!

Here we go,who left the door open

Where did I suggest that was the case ?

Derwent just ignore him,we do

Regardless of which party is withholding the report, the lack of transparency is the main problem.

Which has been a problem ever since the RFL secretly loaned the Bulls £700k coming up for 3yrs ago now and set the tone for all the decisions made thereafter.

A pretty accurate summation.

Derwent is basically right, but there is no "secrecy clause" as it is not an agreement, it is a detailed "judgment" or more accurately a reasoned explanation of the Independent Panel's decision.

Neither club, RFL nor IP are a public body and don't need to make it public but neither do i think the RFL could stop the Bulls doing so if they wished to release it. They couldn't for example, be told by RFL "We will only send you the written decision if you promise to keep it under your hat" - the appellant is (obviously) 100% entitled to the decision, and the IP is not a court of law. So I assume that for whatever reason the Bulls don't think it is advantageous for the decision to be in the public domain for now.

BTW the RFL have not gone back on any promise to make public. They carefully chose their words at the time, saying only that the decision would be "handed down" - which is not the same as saying it would be released to the public.

Or the Bulls shambolic mis-management that preceded the loan might have set the tone.

Not really. The Bulls secret shambolic mis-management set the tone for the Bulls lack of transparency. Interspersed with breaks for an administrator to issue public reports...

The RFL's lack of transparency started with the secret loan. They weren't tied to keeping stuff secret until someone decided to advance a huge blinking loan, irritating all the SL chairmen at the same time and putting themselves on the PR back foot from that point.

Can anybody add to the extract of Marc Greens answers to the fans questions in the matchday mag that was previewed on the bulls website?

“As we head into the final third of the season, I am all too aware of some of the underlying questions which are plaguing everyone. Why are the club spending money on this high court claim instead of investing it in the club and rebuilding? Why are we not preparing for next year in the Championship and accepting the writing on the wall? What is this big plan our new chairman wants everyone to buy into?
“The answers are as follows: To date, not a single penny of club money has been spent on the appeal process or the proposed High Court battle. A huge amount of work is being completed behind the scenes, preparing for either eventuality, and I can assure you of positive announcements in the coming weeks which will endorse this...”
To read the rest of Mr Green's views – and much, much more – grab a copy of today's official Matchday Magazine

The positive announcements should hopefully include players that are staying and some additions, preferably including four seasoned props

Well I'm glad they didn't include the whole article by email like they have in recent weeks. I'm a regular reader of the match day programme and I usually buy it to read the coaches and chairmans comments. Not particularly impressed recently to pay £3 for articles that I have already read by email.

I would expect some news on the financials too. Something like who's going to be sponsoring us.

How long does the Provident deal run? I can't imagine them pulling out just because we're no longer in SL, particularly with them being a local firm as well. That said, all the shirt advertising loses value when we are no longer on tv, so I'd guess we are more likely to see even lower profile [and value stuff than we've been used to over the last few years. Oh for the days when we were backed by the biggest computer manufacturer in the world..

Sponsors like good news for PR purposes, and lets face it compared to this season theres going to be a bit more good news coming out of the club next season if Greens cryptic comments amount to anything of a squad. The size of the deal may be more the discussion point.