and funding is fully in place as well eh Gronk?

So if thats the case why hasn't the building taken place yet?

Your posts re: the stadiums really smack of desperation of late.

There are a lot of reasons for the smaller clubs to be annoyed if a newco would get to stay in SL but I'd imagine Widnes would vote for Bradford to stay in as the owner gave you guys £10k.

Any purchase of the club would be via a newco, rather than the current co as otherwise the debts would remain to be paid.

Isn't Coco the Fullback a Wakey fan?

Unless a realistic CVA was agreed...

Oh yes I agree I`m sure Widnes would vote for Bradford to stay in.
Now let me see , if I vote against Bradford it will be like chucking £10,000 of my hard earned cash away.
If I vote against eeping them in, I get an extra share of the Sky money £100,000 , possibly more after next liscensing as they will likely drop teams down to 12 or 10 and I will have eliminated a possible rivel for a Super League spot.
Well as I am a businessman ....Well it`s a tough call isn`t it.

Who is to say that Sky would keep the same funding with 12 teams!!!

Cas have had full planning permission for many years now, so to state that they are further advanced towards their new stadium is plain daft !

Well no,to be fair we don`t know that but the way most of the top Super League clubs have been banging on for some time about reducing the teams in the league they must be quietly confident that is so.Otherwise why would they want it would they?

as long as sky get their 2 games a week, the GF series and pick of CC games they don't care and with less teams the "theory" is by some, that teams will be closer matched due to better talent being spread across fewer teams. Hence leading to closer more exciting games........

You may be correct but if Sky have contracted x amount for 14 teams for x years and the RFL change to 12 teams that may be a change in contract and why should Sky pay for a reduced league, remember loss of teams would probably mean los of Sky Sports subscription from the fans that have just had their teams removed from SL!! May be

And therein lies the rub - for neutrals or general sports fans watching OK - but how many fans of a club now watch at home on Sky? The numbers involved wont be a fraction of Sky's total subscribers but for a club to loose a 1000 fans to the armchair or the pub that's a big deal and maybe more than the money they get from Sky?

Apparently 'League Express' editor Matyn Sadler has said that a condition of the new Sky contract is a 14 club SL. If that's right, given that Sky's paid well over the odds for the new soccer contract and are probably looking to save a few bob, it might not be a good idea to annoy them.

Well actually Wrencat I think you'll find that Cas got full planning last year. Please get you're facts right before spouting rubbish.

Indeed. So with full planning permission and full funding why hasn't it been built yet??

Sorry old lad, the story on your ground is like one of the new video games where you pick your own last chapter.
If you look on Wiki, then work started in 2008 ?, so please forgive my lack of "knowledge", it is difficult to keep pace with this one !

Sadler is wrong. Minimum of 12. Funding the same whether 12, 13 or 14. fewer clubs then bigger sky distributions.

I like Wakey v Cas slagging matches in threads I really do, but perhaps on a Bradford forum in a thread about Bradford we could give it a rest? Ta

Cas are still in front in the stadium marathon. However, they are now crawling with lead feet whereas Wakefield are now lacing up their new trainers ready for the sprint.

Unbelievable that The RL have final say choose what the clubs vote. It should be up to the clubs and their decision is final

If Bulls exit admin correctly they will remain in SL just like other cubs who have been in admin have done.

If they are liquidated and form a newco, the just like Rangers in Scotland all history of that club has gone and the new club has to start again.

Rangers have been voted out of the of the Scottish premier league by a vote of 10 - 2. one of those 2 clubs being rangers themselves and the other refusing to vote.

Its daft to even start assuming who the 5 RL clubs maybe because all will have their own reasons. Losing Rangers from the SPL could kill some teams but they still voted against. Celtic and Rangers are one of the biggest rivalries in the world but Celtic still voted against.

The rest of the Scottish football league are now going to decide which Division rangers will start in next season the 1st or the 3rd with the 3rd looking most likely.

The RL wont do themselves any favours if they go against the vote of the clubs, but as usual they'll probably do what they like.

In my opinion if Bradford are liquidated and form a Newco they should be demoted. Not because I think Fev should replace them but because its wrong to over spend be managed badly and get away with it.

I have read in this thread that fax made 20k profit , not sure if the OP had gotten mixed up but I know for certain Featherstone have made 20K profit. In a league where most teams bring between 50-100 away fans, its a fantastic achievement. Why should teams like Fev and Fax struggle to make a profit and develop youngsters while super league clubs spend money they haven't got buying crap aussies.

I'm curious about the difference then between liquidation and administration because both represent exactly that.

Doesn't it depend on what Sky vote?

Basically

When in administration an administrator is appointed to run the club until a buyer / further investment can be found or until the club can no longer operate. If its the latter then it will be liquidated and cease to exist.

Obviously if a buyer is found and they can agree a deal with all the creditors the Bull would exit admin still as Bradford Bulls. if the are liquidated then Bradford bulls in its present form would no longer exist and a brand new company would need to be formed.

I understand the difference between them. My point is that if demotion to a lower league is punishment for failure then why not do it for admin? Liquidation is admin plus a failure to attract a buyer within the necessary timescale. The club has already failed if it's got to the point of admin.

because the RL has already set that president by not demoting other teams who have entered admin, but choosing to dock points.

also if a team is liquidated then the new company is no longer that original team. therefor they should apply to join the league like any other new team would have to do

Well durgh!!

I believe the point that vbfg was [itrying[/i to make was that administration and liquidation both occur due to poor management and overspending. But you said that if we escape administration 'the right way' then we should stay in SL, but if we are liquidated, we shouldn't. So care to return to the drawing board and try again with the old 'having an opinion' thing?

Anyway, speaking of liquidation, haven't you got a flood to clean up?