Whats the point allowing all our players to speak to other clubs? Sure allow the OOC players to, but why the contracted players? Doesn't this short term takeover mean at least those players are going to be getting paid for the immediate short term future? And the RFL, the players, and fans know that if the Bulls were to go bust, those players that did remain contracted to Bulls would find new clubs and quotas/caps would be relaxed to accommodate them at short notice. So if the doors are being left open for Bulls to remain in SL one way or another, why is it being left open with the chance that Bulls may have to completely rebuild a full SL squad in quick time? It's bang out of order.

i am pretty sure you have posted on here with information from your sources. you are not the only poster with contacts.

Shame to see you refer to sugar daddies. Hood used to do it all the time in a very disparaging way. A cheap shot at people willing to put money into the game.

lets not stop at Davy and Mcmanus. Hughes Wilkinson, Moran, lenaghan, hudgell, caddick and Glover are a few more.

i know SOC put money in at the start and the wolves directed money to bullbuilder and not the club. these shows of support are not the same thing as supporting the bulls to have a SL club in 2013.

Any more self-inflicted than Salford's failure to make the Barton move work? Or to sack Karl Harrison?

Clear nonsense. If ABC had come in and paid off all the debts and bought th club lock stock, then we would have continued on, and been in SL for the foreseeable. You know this, so why make up stuff? The Bulls' ongoing status as a SL club - so far as the RFL is concerned - will NOT BE CONSIDERED unless and until there is a buyer, and that buyer puts all their cards and details on the RFL table. To say that whatever bid came in, the decision has already been made to reject it, is, with respect, conspiracy nonsense.


I have said a few times that the procedures and timescales make me believe personally the SL boat has already sailed, though in the unlikley event of a big money bidder doing the business very quickly you never know. But your remark is another [inon sequitur[/i. SLE/RFL - put it whichever way you will - are not "encouraging" players to find other clubs, they seem to me to simply be being fair, since you (presumably) understand why the new owners SLE(E)Ltd cannot and will not sign or re-sign a single player? If not, read my earlier posts where I've explained it.




Interesting straw man, where did I or anyone claim that either of them made such a statement?

Haved I hit a raw nerve somewhere...?



I do NOT use the term "sugar daddies" in any disparaging way. It is merely a fact of life that at least ten (you forgot Pearson and O'Connor, but probably unfairly included Caddick now) of the SL clubs have been reliant on the largesse of their wealthy owner/investor in recent times.

And referring to others as friends is not the same as saying they would necesarily support the Bulls continuing tenure in SL. I would expect it would depend very much on the circumstances.

Which is why I keep saying that unless someone takes on the club pretty well "as is" - maybe with some allowance given to the damage that has been done as a result of the administration, and what would be involved to repair that - I cannot see the club remaining in SL, or surviving.

And I repeat the question - IF those things result in Salford's financial demise then can we expect SLE to bail us out?

And to answer your question - just look at Karl Harrison's record before the sacking - started well and went rapidly downhill, the Barton move I agree, the lack of marketing effort to attempt to galvanise the Greater Manchester public has been pitiful - but I would stress pitiful rather than downright incompetant - who did the due diligence on the Harris deal?, who examined the potetential effect of the sale of the lease?, who did the cash flow forecast on the season ticket pricing?

And I repeat - why the hell are you asking us?

That is a question you should address to the 13 SL chairmen or representatives who we are told unanimously approved teh decision.

And had they not taken that decsion, they would have been faced with the Bulls exiting SL stage left at very short order, and the structure and integrity of the competition for this year being wrecked.

I don't think Bulls have been bailed out. They'll likely finish the season now but beyond that... ?

Leaving aside the fact that in no sense have the Bulls been "bailed out", obviously not, as unlike us, you're a little club, which they would be glad to see the back of.

=#FFFFFF(Actually that is not my view, but I put it to try to match the dumbness of this question inexplicably posed by you to Bradford fans on an internet forum. How the fockers would we know?)

I think I posted something along the same lines earlier.

From being uplifted by the announcement I'm back, only a small bit above where I was before. The one good thing is that it gets rid of the shareholder problem and, so we're told, that should encourage a buyer. Which is fair enough, I guess but how do you get investment from someone who just wants to invest and not buy and run the business if you haven't got a management structure in place, or a management which has said it is only here short term?

The one thing for certain is that the RFL have got their wish for us to end the season. I hope I'm wrong but the RFL move on the players has the hallmarks of having got what they wanted and then clearing the decks for div2.

Not sure why the RFL, who own the Odsal lease, would want us in Div. 2 - where for one thing no way could we afford to play from Odsal. Unless they want to eat their iconic words and do a deal with the Council to sell the place off, which would leave them with more egg on their face than a man with a very big face covered in egg.

indeed the SL boat may well have truely sailed. Agreed. Little wonder the SL clubs did not want such a flawed organisation in SL in 2013. And given that the RFL share your view of the future they will encourage players to find other clubs. Which is where I started.

Try not to guess the emotional responses of other posters, you appear to have little talent for it.

I said Hood used 'sugar daddies' in a disparaging way. It tends to be used negatively.

Thanks for Pearson and O'Connor. I am so glad we are nolonger fixating on McManus and Davy.

could expect average gates of around 3/4,000 , that would allow them to pay a reduced rental to the RFL , drop to Championship 1 , and it all then falls apart

But the logistics of it mean exactly that. At the end of the month the (best of) the players will be gone (and I don't blame them) along with the already (technically) gone coaching staff, whilst we can sign no-one (not that many would come, I know) so where is our SL team and coaching staff to come from?

Even with a new owner there will only be the sick, lame and lazy left to recruit after everyone else has signed the ones they want. Yeah OK , maybe I exaggerate a bit but we'd be in exactly the sort of position that the RFL stopped P&R and started licensing to avoid; teams coming into SL without being able to recruit properly and then getting stuffed every week.

Jeez, there's no-one hopes I'm wrong more than me but I can't see beyond us being lined up for division 2.

Exactly. The extent to which the wrong end of the stick has be grabbed seems to be killing any meaningful discussion.

Bradford would/will have a bit more time with, effectively, a different administrator. And if a buyer can't be found, the prospect (hopefully) of a softer landing.

I think a fine line is being walked pretty well, frankly.

Without new ownership, I think that is pretty much inevitable.

I'm not going to sugar-coat it, but it is something to start from - debt-free and with some basic infrastructure in place.

Spot on , you had what was it , 6/7 weeks to find a new owner ? , game over now , the RFL will be actively seeking your replacements in the remaining weeks till the end of the season , expect Mick potter and the aussies to be wearing Olympic Bleau next year

Firstly I can see no further point in BullBuilder meeting Blake Solly again> There is no power of negotiation. It is a done deal already, our fate is decided??

Can someone explain how BB had talks with BS, when apparently the consortiums involved do not appear to have had the opportunity to begin proper negotiations.With so much at stake, Blake Solly is saying what you wish to hear. There is no way they are going to find a new buyer in October, what will there be to BUY?
No ground, no coaching staff, no players because they will have secured their futures elsewhere (no one can blame them for that) Championship Rugby(if lucky)semi professional players, no TV rights or exposure for the foreseeable future. And £72000 per year rental that is unaffordable, With any outstanding debts levied by the RFL as their remaining payments from our Super League status, when they owned us as a club.

BULLBUILDER THINK AGAIN> We know everything you do is for the best possible reason, but we are fighting an intransigent opponent, who has already removed three possible lifelines to our future.

Why would anyone - other than those with closed minds or agendas - not want to listen, when someone in a position to have something to say talks?

Solly spoke to us because we asked him.

Speaking for myself, if he WAS to be saying what people wish to hear, is that any different to what many of the other players in this sorry saga have been doing over recent months? Who ELSE would you not wish the public to hear? And why? Maybe you should credit the fans with enough intelligence to form their own views, rather than be told who they can and cannot listen to, and who they can and cannot speak to?

And again speaking for myself, I think we'll carry on talking with anyone who wishes to talk to us, if you don't mind?

In a post ref: the meeting with Blake Solly, where in many opinions the questions were, not asked of Blake Solly by BullBuilder, is backed up by the above statement.
My feelings are that BullBuilder should do a proper interview by the use of a question by: the named representative from Bull Builder, followed by the response by Blake Solly.
If as supporters we agree that BB representative speak for us: We are entitled to ask them to ask the questions we wish to hear asked.
As a member of BB I would prefer that Blake Solly were aware of all the fans fears...After all we have a greater investment in our club, than the SL staff...they are transient(ie they move on to different employment if the prospects are better) whereas we are permanent in our support for Bradford Bulls.

I think the action of BullBuilder in speaking to BS was the right thing to do, even if he is just like the others and only saying what he wants us to hear.

My only thoughts are that we know nothing of what they are going to do as owners. Will they take an active role in running the club and take on the responsibilities of a board, for their short period in charge? I ask because the next month (and previous one, come to that) or so is a critical time if we are to have a club next season. They have mentioned about our players being allowed to leave, which is only right and proper, but they have said nothing about players coming in, new contracts for coaching staff etc. If SLE/RFL want to sell the club as a going concern (with just the possibility of continuing in SL) they need to have a 'running ' company to sell and without coaches and players for the coming season it won't be a 'running' business. They can't sell it on as a going concern without doing some basic housekeeping.

Much as I fully appreciate they probably - even certainly - would prefer not to have to be too involved with the nitty gritty, [isomeone[/i needs to be. Without some active involvement it leaves the RFL in the position of a builder buying a house to sell, but instead of doing a quick paint job he rips out the fixtures and fittings and tries to sell the house for the same money, as fit for purpose. If they truly want to leave open the possibility of SL next season they should be honest, or if anyone feels that is unfair, more open, about their intentions.

If there is to be any chance of continuing as we are we need a quick sale, that is for sure, as without a more active involvement there will be little left to sell in terms of taking up the SL membership.

The RFL/SLE bid if successful will have done one thing only, ensure that the Bulls see out the season and stop running up any further payments to the Administrator. As for next season they can't contract players or staff as that would be a massive conflict of interests that the SL club owners/chairmen have most likely agreed cannot happen. Imo if no-one comes forward in the near future with an offer to fund the Bulls going forward and some commitment to honour the historic debt then the Bulls will be in a lower league next year.

Yes, we reached this conclusion a few days ago

From what I've read on here and in the T and A he appears to offered some explanation of the reasons the SL license has been revoked but made no mention of the RFL's position on the lease.

On the SL license are we now to assume there is some kind of 'financial fair play system' in place?

Did he have any explanation or comment to offer on how a SL club appears to have recieved £1.5 million from the RFL, 500K from supporters, the entire season ticket income plus whatever we got from Andy Lynch alongside compiling what we're now being told is £1.5 million in debts over a period which included a Super League licensing process?