Last-ditch offer aims to secure club and sell it on later in year

Super League chief executive Nigel Wood Super League chief executive Nigel Wood

The dramatic attempt by the Super League to buy the Bradford Bulls was made because the club was in the “last chance saloon”, the new bidders said last night.

Yesterday Super League (Europe) Ltd made the shock announcement that it had tabled an offer to purchase the club from the administrators on behalf of the Super League clubs.

The bold bid was formally submitted to the administrator Brendan Guilfoyle on Wednesday night.

Super League chief executive Nigel Wood and the Super League clubs said that they wanted to secure the short-term future of the club and have guaranteed that it will stay in the Super League until the end of the season in October.

As part of the plan, the SLE hopes to sell the club on to buyers with the club’s interests at heart at a later date.

But the offer has led to MPs and rival bidders questioning whether there is a conflict of interest.

Mr Wood said that the the offer represented the best solution to a problem that threatened the survival of one of rugby league’s most celebrated clubs and which remained the source of considerable uncertainty and disquiet across the whole sport.

He said: “This saga has gone on for far too long and we are of the view that direct positive action is required to safeguard the future of Bradford Bulls.

“The club has been in administration for five weeks now and during that time not one offer without strings attached has been submitted to the administrator.

“This situation is clearly unacceptable and raises the tangible prospect that we could lose one of our most famous clubs, which would be a tragedy of significant proportions, not just to the sport and the city of Bradford but to the remaining staff, players and volunteers who all deserve some stability after the turmoil of recent events.”

A spokesman for the Rugby Football League (RFL), which is a shareholder in SLE, along with the 14 Super League clubs, said that the idea had been discussed at length for weeks and it decided to step in on Wednesday after no other acceptable offer had been found.

“This was seen as the last chance saloon,” the spokesman said.

“The clubs have watched and waited for a buyer. Our intention is not to buy it as a long-term proposition but to buy it to provide security and stability in the short term.

“The offer provides stability and assurance for them.”

Bradford Council leader David Green said: “Clearly this is an interesting development. I haven’t seen any details of the bid, but my priority would be to see a sustainable offer made for the club that would secure its future and the future of the Super League in Bradford for years to come.”

Asked if he was concerned about a potential conflict of interest, Coun Green replied: “That’s a fear, but before we can make any comment we would have to see the details. If the Super League is putting together a bid we would need to speak to them to see how we can support them.

“I can understand why people would be concerned about a potential conflict, but the devil will always be in the detail.”

The spokesman also confirmed the RFL had not received a written formal offer from Bradford restaurateur Omar Khan regarding the club.

It has also turned down the two conditional offers from the ABC Consortium, comprised of a group of Asian businessmen in Bradford.

Asked whether he was confident a buyer would eventually be found for the club, the spokesman said: “The Bulls have got such a rich history and real heritage and have so much rich potential for the future.

“I am absolutely confident people out there would want to be part of the success story in the future.”

On conflict of interest concerns, he added: “There is no intention from Super League clubs to own the Bulls as a long-term proposition.

“We want to take it out of administration and offer a safety net of new ownership and we are taking steps to find new owners who can take the club forward independently.”

Mr Guilfoyle said that he was considering the offer.

“It was totally unexpected and is completely unprecedented, but a brilliant development,” he said.

“If the deal goes ahead then the Bradford Bulls will become the first club ever to be owned by the Super League clubs themselves.

“The administrators are considering the offer and will be working closely with SLE and the RFL to reach a speedy conclusion. SLE and the RFL would continue to run the club as a going concern.”

A source close to the ABC Consortium, whose two conditional bids were rejected by the RFL, said that he found the Super League deal a bit “strange” and believed it to be a conflict of interest. He said that he felt the RFL had not been interested in talking to the ABC Consortium about its offer.

e-mail: dolores.cowburn@telegraphandargus.co.uk

Comments(33)

flashdonut says...
7:30am Fri 3 Aug 12

Conflict of interest. What a load of tripe. SL is stronger with The Bulls. How is keeping The Bulls alive a conflict?

scandanavian's love child52 says...
7:36am Fri 3 Aug 12

Of course its a conflict of interest and cannot happen in other sports, if the FA had bailed out portsmouth how would that look to the rest of the league. This is a short term measure till end of the season and if no buyer its still bye bye.

scandanavian's love child52 says...
7:55am Fri 3 Aug 12

Where are my forum mates this lovely sunny morning, numby, viking aka lord lucan, raisemeup, p enis, sheffeaglebull, and the rest, I feel we have got off on the wrong foot so am willing to be nice going forward but only in the short term you understand, being owned will be nothing new to you guys as I owned you on a regular basis so no more insults from me honest :-P

bingleymoor says...
8:13am Fri 3 Aug 12

So the shambles continues to the end of October. Of course there is a clash of interest here, the main one being SLE/RFL who are clearly looking after themselves and Sky monies now in the hope that a buyer comes along who will accept Championship rugby at Odsal on a part time basis. If we were where we are today 3 months ago the Bulls would be gone now as it looks like they will come November.

_Size3_ says...
8:22am Fri 3 Aug 12

And what do SLE/RFL call 'short term'? Does the 'short term' boundaries change when no buyer is found? At what point would a decision be made that short term is now long term and would they be willing to allow the club to fold then? I think not - just looks like a Ken Bates-style angle of attack (although without the verrocity).

flashdonut says...
8:27am Fri 3 Aug 12

scandanavian's love child52 wrote:
Of course its a conflict of interest and cannot happen in other sports, if the FA had bailed out portsmouth how would that look to the rest of the league. This is a short term measure till end of the season and if no buyer its still bye bye.
We shall start slowly. First, find out what 'conflict' means.

Wally Lewis says...
8:34am Fri 3 Aug 12

Jack Tordoff will deal directly with SLE as he will not deal with BG who rejected his offer of £1 plus liability for all debt.
JCT600 will then take on all debts and pay them to keep us in super league. With Jack owning tthe club 100%, If We pay all the creditors we get to keep the superleague licence. If we sack off all the debts were in the championship in 2013. It needs to be sorted sooner rather than later before we loose all our players who havnt already signed for other clubs.

yangyeight says...
8:34am Fri 3 Aug 12

bingleymoor wrote:
So the shambles continues to the end of October. Of course there is a clash of interest here, the main one being SLE/RFL who are clearly looking after themselves and Sky monies now in the hope that a buyer comes along who will accept Championship rugby at Odsal on a part time basis. If we were where we are today 3 months ago the Bulls would be gone now as it looks like they will come November.
just be grateful the club is still here.
if either of the 2 shady bids had succeeded i'm not sure it would be here LONG TERM.
wonder if the asian business men are the ones who run illegal markets?!!
before i get the usual attacks its a joke based on the fact they wont name hemselves or show any business plans!! sounds shady to me.
and i quote;
A source close to the ABC Consortium, whose two conditional bids were rejected by the RFL, said that he found the Super League deal a bit “strange” and believed it to be a conflict of interest. He said that he felt the RFL had not been interested in talking to the ABC Consortium about its offer.
why would they not be interested if its a good deal?

scandanavian's love child52 says...
8:36am Fri 3 Aug 12

Nice akbars advert at the top :-)

yangyeight says...
8:37am Fri 3 Aug 12

Wally Lewis wrote:
Jack Tordoff will deal directly with SLE as he will not deal with BG who rejected his offer of £1 plus liability for all debt.
JCT600 will then take on all debts and pay them to keep us in super league. With Jack owning tthe club 100%, If We pay all the creditors we get to keep the superleague licence. If we sack off all the debts were in the championship in 2013. It needs to be sorted sooner rather than later before we loose all our players who havnt already signed for other clubs.
are you a relative of his or summat?
£1 plus take on debts?
get fu-cked vulture!!

scandanavian's love child52 says...
9:01am Fri 3 Aug 12

Flashdonut as I am being nice in the short term read the article again and then google what a conflict of interest means unless one of my new best friends on here would like to enlighten you.

Wally Lewis says...
9:06am Fri 3 Aug 12

£1 to buy a club... Then pay out £1.5million to all the creditors... AND then fund the club going forward IN superleague... How can you say he's a Vulture.
.
Its a minimum £3million investment and write off of personal welth if he does do it from him to keep the Bulls going. And safe gaurds the future.
.
I am not trelated to him but i do work at JCT600 and keep my eyes & ears open. He tried to approach the administrator who dismissed him wiothout even talking to him.

scandanavian's love child52 says...
9:09am Fri 3 Aug 12

Well said JT

Thee Voice of Reason says...
9:29am Fri 3 Aug 12

Seeing as though Councillor Green was readily availible to comment on the Bulls yesterday at short notice, did the T&A ask him about the illegal bazzar where the owner says in the other story (which we can't comment on) that they will open tomorrow and that they appear to be outside of the law and the request to shut them down doesn't apply to them in his eyes.

Unfortunately you reap what you sow and two arson attacks in a week suggest that people unfortantely are taking matters into their own hands due to the inactivity on the council on the matter.

Sorry this is going a little off topic but it's strange to see the council leader talking about something that doesn't really fall under his control but be silent on something that does.

flashdonut says...
9:39am Fri 3 Aug 12

scandanavian's love child52 wrote:
Flashdonut as I am being nice in the short term read the article again and then google what a conflict of interest means unless one of my new best friends on here would like to enlighten you.
Slower then.
.
What. Does. Conflict. Mean.

monobrow man says...
10:06am Fri 3 Aug 12

There is no conflict, it was unanimously voted for by all 13 super league members, rather the a conflict of interests it seems to be in there best interest.

scandanavian's love child52 says...
10:11am Fri 3 Aug 12

You do understand that all the players have been told they can look for other clubs for next year. Dont shoot the messenger I am the good guy.

flashdonut says...
10:59am Fri 3 Aug 12

scandanavian's love child52 wrote:
You do understand that all the players have been told they can look for other clubs for next year. Dont shoot the messenger I am the good guy.
Thanks. That drivel proves conclusively you have no idea what conflict means. You have obviously chosen to ignore it. Well done on attempting to prove your faulty gene's. You have done a grand job.
.
So, to sum up. You are slighty less witted than a half-wit, and there's no conflict of interest.

scandanavian's love child52 says...
12:43pm Fri 3 Aug 12

Oh go on then I will reply. A conflict of interest is when an organisation has multiple interests that could lead to corruption. Conflict in its own right is totally different. Thanks for your understanding x

GC BD4 says...
12:46pm Fri 3 Aug 12

yangyeight wrote:
Wally Lewis wrote:
Jack Tordoff will deal directly with SLE as he will not deal with BG who rejected his offer of £1 plus liability for all debt.
JCT600 will then take on all debts and pay them to keep us in super league. With Jack owning tthe club 100%, If We pay all the creditors we get to keep the superleague licence. If we sack off all the debts were in the championship in 2013. It needs to be sorted sooner rather than later before we loose all our players who havnt already signed for other clubs.
are you a relative of his or summat?
£1 plus take on debts?
get fu-cked vulture!!
YANGYEIGHT -remember back, when Ken Bates
( Leeds Utd) bought Chelsea for £1.00 and took on their debts ( or are you an 8 year old who knows nothing). DHOO !

bobby98007 says...
1:03pm Fri 3 Aug 12

monobrow man wrote:
There is no conflict, it was unanimously voted for by all 13 super league members, rather the a conflict of interests it seems to be in there best interest.
There was no conflict within the Super League if all 13 teams voted in favour of this.

Where the conflict of interest occurs is that the people who distribute the Super League licences own the Bulls.

So it would seem Bulls are guarenteed their licence because of their unique link to the Super Leage AND the fact that the Super League need to keep Bulls a viable investment option in 12 months time.

If they are going to hand the licence to the Bulls regardless of the rules of the Franchise System then why couldnt they do it for the ABC consortium, Tordoff or anyone else? Is it to line their own pockets?

This is unfair on the other teams, and compromises the entire Franchise System as well as the sport in general.

A dangerous precedent is being set here, short or long term the Super League will be expected to do this for all clubs that hit financial disaster.

I know absolutely nothing about Rugby, but if you have eyes, you can see the issues here.

scandanavian's love child52 says...
1:09pm Fri 3 Aug 12

Good post and a breath of fresh air sir. You will however be deemed a troll.

flashdonut says...
1:17pm Fri 3 Aug 12

scandanavian's love child52 wrote:
Oh go on then I will reply. A conflict of interest is when an organisation has multiple interests that could lead to corruption. Conflict in its own right is totally different. Thanks for your understanding x
What muliple interests? A strong SL includes a strong Bulls. There's no multiple interest. It is a strong and media attractive competition. Having The Bulls in over Dewsbury or Keefley is better for teh competition.

bobby98007 says...
1:24pm Fri 3 Aug 12

flashdonut wrote:
scandanavian's love child52 wrote:
Oh go on then I will reply. A conflict of interest is when an organisation has multiple interests that could lead to corruption. Conflict in its own right is totally different. Thanks for your understanding x
What muliple interests? A strong SL includes a strong Bulls. There's no multiple interest. It is a strong and media attractive competition. Having The Bulls in over Dewsbury or Keefley is better for teh competition.
Super League will have more interest in the health of the Bulls than they will of any other club in the league, because they have invested money into it. Therefore there is a conflict of interest.

Yes you are correct that the Bulls are a bigger brand than Dewbury and does make the Bulls stronger.

But the Bulls success is more important to the Super League than say the Rhino's, because they have a "possible" financial reward at the end of it. Can you see why this could cause a problem?

scandanavian's love child52 says...
1:26pm Fri 3 Aug 12

That maybe so but the conflict of interest is now who is strongest team its about governing body and member clubs owning one club, its a good job it is short term as the accusations that would come in challenge cup rounds if a shock happened.

bobby98007 says...
1:28pm Fri 3 Aug 12

Apologies, that should read "Yes you are correct that the Bulls are a bigger brand than Dewsbury and it does make the Super League stronger."

scandanavian's love child52 says...
1:31pm Fri 3 Aug 12

Dont apologise it still wont sink in with some bobby, I have just been speaking to a bulls fan and his 1st words were " what a joke that deal is "

bobby98007 says...
1:32pm Fri 3 Aug 12

scandanavian's love child52 wrote:
That maybe so but the conflict of interest is now who is strongest team its about governing body and member clubs owning one club, its a good job it is short term as the accusations that would come in challenge cup rounds if a shock happened.
Exactly, so it should be, the Super League owns all the clubs, or none at all. This keeps it fair accross the board. But with them owning the Bulls, they will favour the Bulls.

Its not so bad for Bulls fans. But put yourselves in Leeds shoes, or a club in the lower league trying to get a Super League licence, and you would be upset.

Bacon Bantam says...
1:33pm Fri 3 Aug 12

If you supported the Cougars, you wouldn't have to go though this soap opera.

A proper team doing the best on the budget they can afford, rather than spending money they can't hoping for a bail out.

flashdonut says...
2:57pm Fri 3 Aug 12

Bacon Bantam wrote:
If you supported the Cougars, you wouldn't have to go though this soap opera.

A proper team doing the best on the budget they can afford, rather than spending money they can't hoping for a bail out.
I would also be a six fingered, three eyed, banjo playing hill billy that eats hedgehogs and bats. I would think the earth was flat and cower every time there was a full moon.
.
And probably married to my cousin.
.
But I am not. I am Bulls. Thankfully.

Bacon Bantam says...
3:33pm Fri 3 Aug 12

flashdonut wrote:
Bacon Bantam wrote: If you supported the Cougars, you wouldn't have to go though this soap opera. A proper team doing the best on the budget they can afford, rather than spending money they can't hoping for a bail out.
I would also be a six fingered, three eyed, banjo playing hill billy that eats hedgehogs and bats. I would think the earth was flat and cower every time there was a full moon. . And probably married to my cousin. . But I am not. I am Bulls. Thankfully.
There maybe may cousin marriages in the area but not from the Cougar fans.

monobrow man says...
4:11pm Fri 3 Aug 12

flashdonut wrote:
Bacon Bantam wrote:
If you supported the Cougars, you wouldn't have to go though this soap opera.

A proper team doing the best on the budget they can afford, rather than spending money they can't hoping for a bail out.
I would also be a six fingered, three eyed, banjo playing hill billy that eats hedgehogs and bats. I would think the earth was flat and cower every time there was a full moon.
.
And probably married to my cousin.
.
But I am not. I am Bulls. Thankfully.
You forgot jobless, alcoholic and addicted to heroin

yangyeight says...
6:43pm Fri 3 Aug 12

GC BD4 wrote:
yangyeight wrote:
Wally Lewis wrote:
Jack Tordoff will deal directly with SLE as he will not deal with BG who rejected his offer of £1 plus liability for all debt.
JCT600 will then take on all debts and pay them to keep us in super league. With Jack owning tthe club 100%, If We pay all the creditors we get to keep the superleague licence. If we sack off all the debts were in the championship in 2013. It needs to be sorted sooner rather than later before we loose all our players who havnt already signed for other clubs.
are you a relative of his or summat?
£1 plus take on debts?
get fu-cked vulture!!
YANGYEIGHT -remember back, when Ken Bates
( Leeds Utd) bought Chelsea for £1.00 and took on their debts ( or are you an 8 year old who knows nothing). DHOO !
yes i do and he's a vulture too!!
and by the way he ruined them, got matthew harding then abramovich to bail him out!!
not doing to well for leeds either,
hardly a good example to quote!!

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree