All those fans that gave 500k in pledges must be feeling like they’ve been mugged. To me it all looked dodgy, a slick market campaign (endorsed by the RFL) to raise the first lot of money without any real transparency. The whole thing was based on emotional black mail. It makes wonder how many of them fans that pledged the 500k would of done so knowing the second amount was well over a Million? Another 500k seems sort of achievable, but £1m plus, they wouldn’t have been able to market that so successfully. I find it really hard to believe that they didn’t know of this extra half Million plus debt, it not like a multi national company with a turn over off billions, were these amounts can get lost in the system. Bradford Bulls are a relatively small company that turn over a few million a year, I can’t see how you can miss a massive amount like that.

The thing stinks, and that’s before we get on the way the RFL have acted in all this.

I think they changed the rules just after Crusaders went into admin.

what did we get was it 4 or 6 points ?

We got 4, but I suspect that’s because Crusaders had already been given 4. I think at the time they did say it was the scale of the debt that decided what points you get deducted.

The RFL can take some of the blame, because of their insistence that clubs have so many "members", thus making teams like Bulls offer memberships at silly prices.

We shouldn't be too smug. Although our crowds are up, because of the leap in cheap season tickets, we might be making less through the gate than last year. As a business model, it probably works in our scenario, so that we can take a big crowd to a new ground, but we have had to follow a similar business strategy to the Bulls (apart from we don't spend a full salary cap!!).

Will one of the problems be that those who run the club will probably want to run it after administration? Surely it will look like a scam if company A owned by Joe Bloggs goes into admin to get rid of debts, and then company B steps in to run the same business and is still owned by Joe Bloggs?

I maintain that this was always the plan; the 'pledge' was just a way of removing the incumbent Directors personal guarantees and paving the way for them to go quietly.

They'll now go into admin, wipe out any remaining liabilities, and resurface the following day as a newco, which in all likelihood, has already been formed.

I can't think of anyone who comes out of this situation covered in glory, apart from the loyal and decent fans who put their hands in their pockets because they hoped they were being told the truth.

You may be right Bren, but if they went into admin and then the new people came forward, they could set out in their conditions that the previous BoD be removed prior to their "takeover".
However, with new people in place, they wouldn't then have been in a position to ask for pledges.
IMO, the pledge thing was to show thet the current BoD was doing "everything" to save the club.

You have to feel sorry for the fans, they did their all trying to raise the monies and probably some gave more than they could afford to save their beloved club. The monies would have been given blindly with no knowledge of the true financial picture. They would have been far better giving to their supporters Trust who could have amassed the funds and asked to see the true financial situation prior to handing over the monies. This is what the Supporters Trusts are there for : to help safeguard the club for the fans of today and the future.

Absolutely spot on Feline, the fans appear to have been misled, when the dust settles on this one there will be some serious finger pointing.

The situation with the Bradford Bulls and Greece in the Euro gives me a sense of deja vu from just over a decade go. The Queen Mum and Thora Hird; you never knew which one was about to go first.

Sorry.

They also have a very complicated share ownership situation, with several warring factions owning decent chunks of shares; administration will conveniently resolve that issue, enabling the new BoD to take full control.

Yes, which makes you wonder why the didn't go into admin a few months ago, instead they went for the 500k pledge thing which will cause some bad feeling from the fans, should they then go into admin.
Some of this doesn't add up to a simple guy like me but, I guess it will all come out in the wash.

Isn't the Bulls predicament exactly the same as Wakey 12 months ago allbeit on a slightly higher scale of debt ?
Wakey had bills to pay or face Admin, Wakey rallied round the fans to make pledges to keep them going (which didn't go to plan), then went into administration and were deducted the 4 points.

Haven't Wakefield produced a model of how to survive and come out better from administration ? If you have - Bulls might just be looking at that very model.

Key difference being they already had a supporters trust set up which could've collected the pledges and used that to invest a significant amount of money into a newco and get them a position on the board. Instead that money bailed out the people who got the club into this messed now they're £100 lighter with no say in how any future club is run.

Its the fans who have probs dug deep into the pocket thinking it would save the club I feel for.

There is a well informed Bulls fan on their board that's saying the club avoided paying VAT on season tickets because they thought that by calling them "memberships" they weren't applicable for VAT and this has been going on for 2 years.

How daft is that ?

If true, I certainly hope it’s not something Trinity have replicated since calling their season tickets ‘memberships’.

TBF its the RFL who have been pushing this whole membership lark, maybe they thought they had exploited a tax loophole and encouraged clubs to pursue it? If so yet more wise words from Red Hall for the Bulls.

It really does make you wonder in regards he licencing procedure,if the RFL did a thorough job reviewing the Bulls finances and found no problems then the Bulls must have hidden their debts and heads must roll,on the flip side, if the RFL did find the debts and still gave a B licence then heads shold roll at the RFL!

To be fair to the rfl the accounts were looked at by an independent 3rd party. If however they have given wrong info by not doing their job right, they should be taken to task

There's no suggestion from the Bulls poster that any club other than Bradford declined to pay VAT on their 'memberships,' and certainly no mention of WTW.

His allegation has subsequently been refuted by the way, by a rather articulate chap who managed to include the words 'mendacious' and 'calumny' in his post; I don't know who he is, but I like the cut of his gib!

maybe they can merge with bramley buffaloes

None of us know exactly what the RFL were told, however KPMG are certainly a most reputable company and one could reasonably expect them to ascertain accurate accounts information.
Bearing in mind the previous loan and subsequent purchase of the lease on the ground, it is a fair assumption that the RFL knew the Bulls financial position.

They could consider a ground share with Cas ?

He's called Peter (apparently), and his refutal has subsequently been rebutted.