Specifically inn starbugs example (and in this case) we didn't know what the defect was.

The precedent has been set a number of times that administration costs the equivalent of three wins, unless efforts are made to repay creditors. Ignorance of that is no excuse.

The amount Marc Green buys the club for is distributed between the administrator and the creditors. If as you say, the 6 point deduction depresses the purchase price, Marc Green pays less and there is less to be shared amongst the creditors. If said purchase price wasn't depressed by the penalty Marc green would pay more and the creditors would get more.

That 6 point deduction would ensure the creditors got less than if it didn't exist.

Wakefield in 2001 got points back from a salary cap infringement because they went in to admin, hull kr were in admin for years before a Cva was agreed and not punished. The precedent is sketchy at best

Sold as seen , means exactly that, once you drive away its yours, it might last years, or it might not get you home, thats why you got it cheap

As to why are we running our game that way? , look who's running it?

Ah, so there shouldn't be a points deduction for going into administration because it punishes creditors? I don't ever think I've ever seen such desperate logic.

Or perhaps you can have a lower deduction if you repay some, to improve the standing of rugby league clubs in the wider business community and with HMRC?

So is Marc Green going to repay any creditors or not? It's a simple question. If not, 6 points. If so, reduce it proportionally.

He's not being punished, he bought a business on the cheap that had a 6 point penalty which came with it.

Because Rugby League and the Bradford Bulls don't exist in a bubble and rely both in the past, present and future on local and small businesses, he's now being incentivised to mitigate that 6 points down to 4 by paying some of the businesses that have suffered as a result of the Bradford Bulls being a farce.

At the moment he seems to be choosing to ignore those local small businesses and instead he's crying foul over the points deduction which he knew all about when he bought the club on the cheap.

As I said before, he wants all the benefits of buying a Club on the cheap from the Administrator and he also wants to have the benefits which would have been associated had he bought the Club pre Administration.

So because he choose not to repay them, you want the to get less, as a benefit to Marc Green, that the. RFL can then punish him for? And that doing so INCREASES our standing with those creditors?

I'm not questioning the rules, as part of their admission as a new member the RFL can hand out conditions as they see fit. I'm questioning if it is the right thing to do and if we as a game benefit from it?

Correct, thats why I said " a noisy engine ' ,it could be your big ends ready to terminally finish your engine, or a rattling fan belt

You pay your money and take your chance, as Marc Green did

Go into admin and take 6 points which might relegate you, or it might not

I believe his argument will be the delay in the RFL ratifying the new structure ,ie yes I knew the point deduction might mean finishing bottom 2 ,but you hadnt confirmed that would definatley be relegation at that point

These are the decisions and actions of a leadership team protecting their powerbase, not one making long-term decisions for the good of the game.

After the performance against the Cats, is part of the appeal that they can actually play the game? LOL

Smokey your argument is getting more and more absurd as this thread goes on

The price was depressed because it was a failed business in Administration not because it had a 6 point deduction.
Any business bought out of Administration is done so for a much reduced price than said business as a going concern.

#desperatelyseekingexcuses

If even half of what is rumoured about the actions of the RFL and watt/moore/Calvert is true they will get them all back.
I think his argument will be because of circumstances outside of his control administration was unavoidable and because of circumstances during the actual administration his takeover was his only option to protect his investment.

Personally I don't think they will get any back, precisely because all the arguments we have seen from those in favour are wrong and the punishment was one handed to Mar Green for taking over a struggling club, covered by the RFL''s catch all of conditions of admission. If they do get any back, it will either be a 2 point 'shush money' or them all.

how much do you think OK was going to get on the open market and why didn't he sell it that way then? Why has he conned himself out of money?

Is it because OKbulls have 0 value because no-one wanted to buy them? There is no cheaper price than nothing.

He'd have got nothing because HMRC were about to wind the Bradford Bulls up!
That doesn't alter what I said though, a business bought out of Administration has less value than the same business bought as a going concern. I'm not going to get into a stupid argument that a business with zero value can't be even more devalued by Administration.

The main point is that the price was not depressed by the 6 point penalty

Yes, we as a game benefit, because it acts as an incentive to:
1. Not to use administration as a way of clearing debts and ensuring that the team on the park is one the club can actually afford;
2. For new owners to maintain the trust of the local business community by buying clubs with debts attached so that the debts are repaid.

Your argument is utterly illogical and desperate. The fact that he chooses not to mitigate the points penalty is his choice. It's his business decision: does he pay money to mitigate the points penalty, or does he keep the money in the business to rebuild the club, even though he is stuck with the deduction?

It sounds like he wants the best of both worlds.

He's not being punished, he bought a business on the cheap that had a 6 point penalty which came with it.

Because Rugby League and the Bradford Bulls don't exist in a bubble and rely both in the past, present and future on local and small businesses, he's now being incentivised to mitigate that 6 points down to 4 by paying some of the businesses that have suffered as a result of the Bradford Bulls being a farce.

At the moment he seems to be choosing to ignore those local small businesses and instead he's crying foul over the points deduction which he knew all about when he bought the club on the cheap.

As I said before, he wants all the benefits of buying a Club on the cheap from the Administrator and he also wants to have the benefits which would have been associated had he bought the Club pre Administration.

Yes, I've been telling you this for years, now all of a sudden you agree



RFL = second hand car dealership

RFL leadership = second hand car salsemen

Is this something you have knowledge on, because I've not seen any information released, or just something you're assuming?

So increasing the chance of relegation and a big drop in revenue, sponsorship, and attendance does not affect the price. Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Richard Lewis is a vastly superior administrator to Nigel Wood, one was a man prepared to be dynamic and put his head above the parapet, one is desperately scuttling back just claiming it's not my fault guv.

no which is why I said "he seems".

based on the 6 points not being reduced to 4 as with previous cases where creditors have been paid and also on the lack of any statement suggesting that some creditors have been paid, making it a fair and logical assumption.

I'm of the opinion that if Mr Khan chose to run the Bulls by running up debt to him, then that's his choice and any loss to himself is down to his actions. Any other creditors (HMRC, Bradford Council, suppliers) haven't made that choice.
I'm agree he doesn't deserve being vilified for making mistakes.

So you agree, he bought ' sold as seen ' knowing full well the consequences, now he wants a warranty?