'Deal agreed' in long-running saga of Bradford Bulls ownership

Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Omar Khan Omar Khan

The long-running saga surrounding Bradford Bulls appeared to be drawing towards a resolution last night after the club announced that a deal had been struck in principle over its ownership.

Almost seven hours of painstaking talks took place at the Provident Stadium yesterday between owner Omar Khan and the group bidding to take control of his shares, consisting of director Ian Watt and former chairman Mark Moore, along with Rugby Football League bosses and several teams of legal representatives.

The summit meeting – which saw RFL chief operating officer Ralph Rimmer and director of licensing and standards Blake Solly speak to both parties separately – led to the Bulls issuing a statement shortly before 9pm last night which encouraged hopes of a breakthrough.

The statement said: “Bradford Bulls can tonight confirm that an agreement regarding the club’s ownership has, in principle, been reached.

“A meeting between all parties concerned, including current and former directors, along with representatives of the Rugby Football League, was staged at Odsal earlier today.

“And details of its outcome are to be finalised in due course, allowing the Bulls to continue to be directed by Ian Watt and Andrew Calvert.

“Former chairman Mark Moore is to continue to work as part of the club for the benefit of supporters, staff and partners. The club will be making no further comment at this time.”

Bradford restaurant boss Mr Khan has so far refused to transfer his stake in the club, claiming Mr Moore and former director and general manager Ryan Whitcut have not paid him an undisclosed sum for the sale of the business.

Mr Khan is expected to continue his legal action against the two men he agreed to sell the club to in September, after a stand-off over the transfer of his shares led to a Christmas Eve walkout by Mr Moore and directors Andrew Calvert and Mr Watt.

Mr Moore, along with Mr Watt and Mr Calvert – who later joined as investors – say they found “massive holes” in the club’s finances.

Despite Mr Moore stepping down as a director in the wake of Mr Khan’s legal action against him, he remains involved in the running of the club and looks set to form a new ownership team along with Mr Calvert and Mr Watt.

Although no deal has yet been signed to transfer the club’s ownership from Mr Khan, representatives of the Bulls owner said: “We can confirm that positive discussions have taken place.”

Comments (27)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:10am Fri 10 Jan 14

bullybullman says...

Well it’s a step forward! What is clear is Omar now realises he has nowhere to go & he has to relinquish his shares. The main creditor in all this is the RFL & they will want to ensure they keep some reign on the 1.2 million they are owed.

Omar once seen as the saviour of the Bulls has now been exposed for what he really is & I really do hope the full story comes out in time & Mr Sutcliffe get exposed for what he is.

We have an obligation to every other Super league club Central Monies have been given to the club & these need to be paid back one way or another we have become a laughing stock in super league & we need to restore faith, so Omar`s plan for a quick buck has backfired big style.
Although the finer points are not yet sorted we can now look forward to the season we have a much better squad than last year & with stability confidence will grow.
Well it’s a step forward! What is clear is Omar now realises he has nowhere to go & he has to relinquish his shares. The main creditor in all this is the RFL & they will want to ensure they keep some reign on the 1.2 million they are owed. Omar once seen as the saviour of the Bulls has now been exposed for what he really is & I really do hope the full story comes out in time & Mr Sutcliffe get exposed for what he is. We have an obligation to every other Super league club Central Monies have been given to the club & these need to be paid back one way or another we have become a laughing stock in super league & we need to restore faith, so Omar`s plan for a quick buck has backfired big style. Although the finer points are not yet sorted we can now look forward to the season we have a much better squad than last year & with stability confidence will grow. bullybullman
  • Score: 9

8:10am Fri 10 Jan 14

Adeybull says...

bullybullman wrote:
Well it’s a step forward! What is clear is Omar now realises he has nowhere to go & he has to relinquish his shares. The main creditor in all this is the RFL & they will want to ensure they keep some reign on the 1.2 million they are owed.

Omar once seen as the saviour of the Bulls has now been exposed for what he really is & I really do hope the full story comes out in time & Mr Sutcliffe get exposed for what he is.

We have an obligation to every other Super league club Central Monies have been given to the club & these need to be paid back one way or another we have become a laughing stock in super league & we need to restore faith, so Omar`s plan for a quick buck has backfired big style.
Although the finer points are not yet sorted we can now look forward to the season we have a much better squad than last year & with stability confidence will grow.
What is this £1.2m you say is owed to the RFL?
[quote][p][bold]bullybullman[/bold] wrote: Well it’s a step forward! What is clear is Omar now realises he has nowhere to go & he has to relinquish his shares. The main creditor in all this is the RFL & they will want to ensure they keep some reign on the 1.2 million they are owed. Omar once seen as the saviour of the Bulls has now been exposed for what he really is & I really do hope the full story comes out in time & Mr Sutcliffe get exposed for what he is. We have an obligation to every other Super league club Central Monies have been given to the club & these need to be paid back one way or another we have become a laughing stock in super league & we need to restore faith, so Omar`s plan for a quick buck has backfired big style. Although the finer points are not yet sorted we can now look forward to the season we have a much better squad than last year & with stability confidence will grow.[/p][/quote]What is this £1.2m you say is owed to the RFL? Adeybull
  • Score: 15

8:11am Fri 10 Jan 14

UNBULLIEVABLE says...

bullybullman wrote:
Well it’s a step forward! What is clear is Omar now realises he has nowhere to go & he has to relinquish his shares. The main creditor in all this is the RFL & they will want to ensure they keep some reign on the 1.2 million they are owed.

Omar once seen as the saviour of the Bulls has now been exposed for what he really is & I really do hope the full story comes out in time & Mr Sutcliffe get exposed for what he is.

We have an obligation to every other Super league club Central Monies have been given to the club & these need to be paid back one way or another we have become a laughing stock in super league & we need to restore faith, so Omar`s plan for a quick buck has backfired big style.
Although the finer points are not yet sorted we can now look forward to the season we have a much better squad than last year & with stability confidence will grow.
Hear Hear! , well put bullybullman. I for one hope the focus and comments on here will focus on the players and games / performances as it should, because THAT as true fans is what we pay our money for to watch,support and comment/discuss the game itself!!, COYB
[quote][p][bold]bullybullman[/bold] wrote: Well it’s a step forward! What is clear is Omar now realises he has nowhere to go & he has to relinquish his shares. The main creditor in all this is the RFL & they will want to ensure they keep some reign on the 1.2 million they are owed. Omar once seen as the saviour of the Bulls has now been exposed for what he really is & I really do hope the full story comes out in time & Mr Sutcliffe get exposed for what he is. We have an obligation to every other Super league club Central Monies have been given to the club & these need to be paid back one way or another we have become a laughing stock in super league & we need to restore faith, so Omar`s plan for a quick buck has backfired big style. Although the finer points are not yet sorted we can now look forward to the season we have a much better squad than last year & with stability confidence will grow.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear! , well put bullybullman. I for one hope the focus and comments on here will focus on the players and games / performances as it should, because THAT as true fans is what we pay our money for to watch,support and comment/discuss the game itself!!, COYB UNBULLIEVABLE
  • Score: 11

8:42am Fri 10 Jan 14

bd7 helper says...

Another scam once again
Another scam once again bd7 helper
  • Score: -25

9:36am Fri 10 Jan 14

fedupwiththeBS says...

where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess! fedupwiththeBS
  • Score: -15

9:43am Fri 10 Jan 14

Thee Voice of Reason says...

fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess!
Nothings changed since yesterday.

If a sale has been agreed why is he still pursuing Whitcut and Moore. Whats he going to get, a court to force them to buy the club he has just agreed to sell to the other two?
[quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]Nothings changed since yesterday. If a sale has been agreed why is he still pursuing Whitcut and Moore. Whats he going to get, a court to force them to buy the club he has just agreed to sell to the other two? Thee Voice of Reason
  • Score: -20

9:44am Fri 10 Jan 14

Adeybull says...

fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement".

2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement". 2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me. Adeybull
  • Score: 32

9:49am Fri 10 Jan 14

Adeybull says...

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess!
Nothings changed since yesterday.

If a sale has been agreed why is he still pursuing Whitcut and Moore. Whats he going to get, a court to force them to buy the club he has just agreed to sell to the other two?
Except, no.

1 - See above. We are now told there is an agreement in principle for transfer of ownership. Yesterday there was no agreement (since Whitcut has disappeared, and Moore made it clear he beleived what was buying was very different to what he was sold).

2 - OK's remedy for (alleged) breach of contract is unlikely to be specific performance of the contrcat, but for damages for breach of contrcat. Which is nothinth whatsoever to do with the club, but a private matter between OK and Moore.

Next?
[quote][p][bold]Thee Voice of Reason[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]Nothings changed since yesterday. If a sale has been agreed why is he still pursuing Whitcut and Moore. Whats he going to get, a court to force them to buy the club he has just agreed to sell to the other two?[/p][/quote]Except, no. 1 - See above. We are now told there is an agreement in principle for transfer of ownership. Yesterday there was no agreement (since Whitcut has disappeared, and Moore made it clear he beleived what was buying was very different to what he was sold). 2 - OK's remedy for (alleged) breach of contract is unlikely to be specific performance of the contrcat, but for damages for breach of contrcat. Which is nothinth whatsoever to do with the club, but a private matter between OK and Moore. Next? Adeybull
  • Score: 15

10:01am Fri 10 Jan 14

Parz says...

I'm really not sure how to react to this, I'd forgotten what good news felt like!

A good step forwards. Onwards and upwards!
I'm really not sure how to react to this, I'd forgotten what good news felt like! A good step forwards. Onwards and upwards! Parz
  • Score: 21

10:40am Fri 10 Jan 14

rogerthat! says...

fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?
[quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong? rogerthat!
  • Score: -10

11:21am Fri 10 Jan 14

Adeybull says...

rogerthat! wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?
Except...

1 - From what has been reported, the steps to achieve the annualised £400k savings seem to have aready been taken. The wage bill HAS been reduced. Through redundancies and reduced hours. And the cost base HAS been reduced in other areas. So your point is?

2 - As stated above, Khan vs Whitcut & Moore for payment for the shares is nothing to do with the club - it is a private matter between the parties. We are told an agreement in principle for transfer of the shares has now been agreed (nothing is stated regarding the nature and details of the transfer - it could be to the man in the moon for all we know?). So, your point is?

3 - The only way Khan will see a cent of his loan to the club is if it is transferred to new owners, who are able to make a success of it to generate the cash to repay him. Otherwise, as the principal creditor of a business that is technically insolvent, he'll not see anything in the event of liquidation. So he is hardly likely to have any interest whatsoever in seeing the club fall over. So, your point is?

4 - No-one is going to invest anything, or finance anything in major sponsorship or other ways, until all this is finally resolved. After that...well who knows? YOU certainly don't. So, your point is?

As the original article makes quite clear (and objectivly and fairly), this looks to be a signicant step forward towards a final resolution of the problem, although not yet the resolution itself. So, seeking to turn the development into a big negative (or, for that matter, suggesting it is the end of the problem) is rather silly and transparent. MY point is.

OK, next?
[quote][p][bold]rogerthat![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?[/p][/quote]Except... 1 - From what has been reported, the steps to achieve the annualised £400k savings seem to have aready been taken. The wage bill HAS been reduced. Through redundancies and reduced hours. And the cost base HAS been reduced in other areas. So your point is? 2 - As stated above, Khan vs Whitcut & Moore for payment for the shares is nothing to do with the club - it is a private matter between the parties. We are told an agreement in principle for transfer of the shares has now been agreed (nothing is stated regarding the nature and details of the transfer - it could be to the man in the moon for all we know?). So, your point is? 3 - The only way Khan will see a cent of his loan to the club is if it is transferred to new owners, who are able to make a success of it to generate the cash to repay him. Otherwise, as the principal creditor of a business that is technically insolvent, he'll not see anything in the event of liquidation. So he is hardly likely to have any interest whatsoever in seeing the club fall over. So, your point is? 4 - No-one is going to invest anything, or finance anything in major sponsorship or other ways, until all this is finally resolved. After that...well who knows? YOU certainly don't. So, your point is? As the original article makes quite clear (and objectivly and fairly), this looks to be a signicant step forward towards a final resolution of the problem, although not yet the resolution itself. So, seeking to turn the development into a big negative (or, for that matter, suggesting it is the end of the problem) is rather silly and transparent. MY point is. OK, next? Adeybull
  • Score: 28

11:26am Fri 10 Jan 14

UNBULLIEVABLE says...

UNBULLIEVABLE wrote:
bullybullman wrote:
Well it’s a step forward! What is clear is Omar now realises he has nowhere to go & he has to relinquish his shares. The main creditor in all this is the RFL & they will want to ensure they keep some reign on the 1.2 million they are owed.

Omar once seen as the saviour of the Bulls has now been exposed for what he really is & I really do hope the full story comes out in time & Mr Sutcliffe get exposed for what he is.

We have an obligation to every other Super league club Central Monies have been given to the club & these need to be paid back one way or another we have become a laughing stock in super league & we need to restore faith, so Omar`s plan for a quick buck has backfired big style.
Although the finer points are not yet sorted we can now look forward to the season we have a much better squad than last year & with stability confidence will grow.
Hear Hear! , well put bullybullman. I for one hope the focus and comments on here will focus on the players and games / performances as it should, because THAT as true fans is what we pay our money for to watch,support and comment/discuss the game itself!!, COYB
hope the focus and comments on here will focus on the players and games / performances as it should, because THAT as true fans is what we pay our money for to watch,support and comment/discuss the game itself!!, , ** I guess NOT then!! , yawn!!
[quote][p][bold]UNBULLIEVABLE[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bullybullman[/bold] wrote: Well it’s a step forward! What is clear is Omar now realises he has nowhere to go & he has to relinquish his shares. The main creditor in all this is the RFL & they will want to ensure they keep some reign on the 1.2 million they are owed. Omar once seen as the saviour of the Bulls has now been exposed for what he really is & I really do hope the full story comes out in time & Mr Sutcliffe get exposed for what he is. We have an obligation to every other Super league club Central Monies have been given to the club & these need to be paid back one way or another we have become a laughing stock in super league & we need to restore faith, so Omar`s plan for a quick buck has backfired big style. Although the finer points are not yet sorted we can now look forward to the season we have a much better squad than last year & with stability confidence will grow.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear! , well put bullybullman. I for one hope the focus and comments on here will focus on the players and games / performances as it should, because THAT as true fans is what we pay our money for to watch,support and comment/discuss the game itself!!, COYB[/p][/quote]hope the focus and comments on here will focus on the players and games / performances as it should, because THAT as true fans is what we pay our money for to watch,support and comment/discuss the game itself!!, , ** I guess NOT then!! , yawn!! UNBULLIEVABLE
  • Score: 5

12:31pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Ryanbulls says...

With Dr.Koukash at Salford saying Bradford are ahead of them in terms of season ticket sales and that hes dissapointed with the fans there, it only makes you think if he would of done proper research he would have found that the bulls have a large amount of debt (marginally bigger than salfords) but with a bigger fanbase with more potential. Would be a match made in heaven for both parties and we would be competing with wigan and warrington this season unlike salford who i suspect will be lucky to make the playoffs with older players wanting to make a quick buck before they retire!
With Dr.Koukash at Salford saying Bradford are ahead of them in terms of season ticket sales and that hes dissapointed with the fans there, it only makes you think if he would of done proper research he would have found that the bulls have a large amount of debt (marginally bigger than salfords) but with a bigger fanbase with more potential. Would be a match made in heaven for both parties and we would be competing with wigan and warrington this season unlike salford who i suspect will be lucky to make the playoffs with older players wanting to make a quick buck before they retire! Ryanbulls
  • Score: 3

1:22pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Ahrmen Aleg says...

Adeybull wrote:
rogerthat! wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?
Except...

1 - From what has been reported, the steps to achieve the annualised £400k savings seem to have aready been taken. The wage bill HAS been reduced. Through redundancies and reduced hours. And the cost base HAS been reduced in other areas. So your point is?

2 - As stated above, Khan vs Whitcut & Moore for payment for the shares is nothing to do with the club - it is a private matter between the parties. We are told an agreement in principle for transfer of the shares has now been agreed (nothing is stated regarding the nature and details of the transfer - it could be to the man in the moon for all we know?). So, your point is?

3 - The only way Khan will see a cent of his loan to the club is if it is transferred to new owners, who are able to make a success of it to generate the cash to repay him. Otherwise, as the principal creditor of a business that is technically insolvent, he'll not see anything in the event of liquidation. So he is hardly likely to have any interest whatsoever in seeing the club fall over. So, your point is?

4 - No-one is going to invest anything, or finance anything in major sponsorship or other ways, until all this is finally resolved. After that...well who knows? YOU certainly don't. So, your point is?

As the original article makes quite clear (and objectivly and fairly), this looks to be a signicant step forward towards a final resolution of the problem, although not yet the resolution itself. So, seeking to turn the development into a big negative (or, for that matter, suggesting it is the end of the problem) is rather silly and transparent. MY point is.

OK, next?
Adey I am glad you are back to clarify the issues with the fans.

Several weeks ago then newbies sought admn.Presumably when they opened a few drawers once in.
RFL baulked and they set playing rules so what they say goes.
Creditors other than players matter not in their world other than players.

Omar"s loans and others (the club has now run for a further 3 1/2 months and I guess the RFL have funded the £100k monthly losses)may mean accumulated negative shareholder funds are at least 1.6million.
We know 2 loans
180k green
200k Bfd council.

You are right the shares are worthless.
Other stakeholders debts are secured.
On stock Coral stand and debtors.
Omar is responsible for the state of the finances.He and fellow director Sutcliffe.Why no cost cutting till now?
In fact NO PROPER FINANCIAL COTROL AT ALL>
He wants his cake and eat it.But their are strong rumour it my be third uknown parties cake introduced n August.If OK had it why was it not presented a year earlier.Instead a 25 k instalment arrangement to buy th assets and begging appeals to Akbars.
Hope the club did not pay his 20k fine and season ticket holders contribute to his purchase.
People say he had NOWT
And while this lot have more savvy the have NOWT.
A tougjh few years ahead.
Saddled with this mess.

PLEASE ADEY LEAD AN APPEAL FOR A FANS TRUST ON THE PORTSMOUTH MODEL>
The like of Tordoff may support that.Confidence otherwise will make it very difficult to attract anyone.

And if progressed could see the idiots never recover the debt of their own making.
Don't like the sound of the source of the funding in the summer.
We do not see any debentures against alleged property portfolio 900k introductions.

Maybe someone presented him with a lego set as everyone sang Happy Birthday to him at a cost of the pop concerts loss...£100k.
Build it and they will come.
What a feking shambles.
I"ll write the potential best seller with you when its all over.
The Eleventh Earl of Mars was very appropriate lyric.

If you are confident enough just do it.
You know it makes sense.

FANS TRUST WITH SEVERAL BIGGER INVESTORS>

Otherise I fear worse than WONGA types wlll be underwriting going forward.As indeed they may already be

Any idea where the Bateman brass went?
Flight to the Bahamas maybe

Taxi for
Khan
Whitcut
Sutcliffe.
Destination....Armle
y if I had my way

Its a very thin line between Pentonville Prison and The House of Lords.
Isnt it Gerry xx
[quote][p][bold]Adeybull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rogerthat![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?[/p][/quote]Except... 1 - From what has been reported, the steps to achieve the annualised £400k savings seem to have aready been taken. The wage bill HAS been reduced. Through redundancies and reduced hours. And the cost base HAS been reduced in other areas. So your point is? 2 - As stated above, Khan vs Whitcut & Moore for payment for the shares is nothing to do with the club - it is a private matter between the parties. We are told an agreement in principle for transfer of the shares has now been agreed (nothing is stated regarding the nature and details of the transfer - it could be to the man in the moon for all we know?). So, your point is? 3 - The only way Khan will see a cent of his loan to the club is if it is transferred to new owners, who are able to make a success of it to generate the cash to repay him. Otherwise, as the principal creditor of a business that is technically insolvent, he'll not see anything in the event of liquidation. So he is hardly likely to have any interest whatsoever in seeing the club fall over. So, your point is? 4 - No-one is going to invest anything, or finance anything in major sponsorship or other ways, until all this is finally resolved. After that...well who knows? YOU certainly don't. So, your point is? As the original article makes quite clear (and objectivly and fairly), this looks to be a signicant step forward towards a final resolution of the problem, although not yet the resolution itself. So, seeking to turn the development into a big negative (or, for that matter, suggesting it is the end of the problem) is rather silly and transparent. MY point is. OK, next?[/p][/quote]Adey I am glad you are back to clarify the issues with the fans. Several weeks ago then newbies sought admn.Presumably when they opened a few drawers once in. RFL baulked and they set playing rules so what they say goes. Creditors other than players matter not in their world other than players. Omar"s loans and others (the club has now run for a further 3 1/2 months and I guess the RFL have funded the £100k monthly losses)may mean accumulated negative shareholder funds are at least 1.6million. We know 2 loans 180k green 200k Bfd council. You are right the shares are worthless. Other stakeholders debts are secured. On stock Coral stand and debtors. Omar is responsible for the state of the finances.He and fellow director Sutcliffe.Why no cost cutting till now? In fact NO PROPER FINANCIAL COTROL AT ALL> He wants his cake and eat it.But their are strong rumour it my be third uknown parties cake introduced n August.If OK had it why was it not presented a year earlier.Instead a 25 k instalment arrangement to buy th assets and begging appeals to Akbars. Hope the club did not pay his 20k fine and season ticket holders contribute to his purchase. People say he had NOWT And while this lot have more savvy the have NOWT. A tougjh few years ahead. Saddled with this mess. PLEASE ADEY LEAD AN APPEAL FOR A FANS TRUST ON THE PORTSMOUTH MODEL> The like of Tordoff may support that.Confidence otherwise will make it very difficult to attract anyone. And if progressed could see the idiots never recover the debt of their own making. Don't like the sound of the source of the funding in the summer. We do not see any debentures against alleged property portfolio 900k introductions. Maybe someone presented him with a lego set as everyone sang Happy Birthday to him at a cost of the pop concerts loss...£100k. Build it and they will come. What a feking shambles. I"ll write the potential best seller with you when its all over. The Eleventh Earl of Mars was very appropriate lyric. If you are confident enough just do it. You know it makes sense. FANS TRUST WITH SEVERAL BIGGER INVESTORS> Otherise I fear worse than WONGA types wlll be underwriting going forward.As indeed they may already be Any idea where the Bateman brass went? Flight to the Bahamas maybe Taxi for Khan Whitcut Sutcliffe. Destination....Armle y if I had my way Its a very thin line between Pentonville Prison and The House of Lords. Isnt it Gerry xx Ahrmen Aleg
  • Score: 8

1:31pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Ahrmen Aleg says...

Ahrmen Aleg wrote:
Adeybull wrote:
rogerthat! wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?
Except...

1 - From what has been reported, the steps to achieve the annualised £400k savings seem to have aready been taken. The wage bill HAS been reduced. Through redundancies and reduced hours. And the cost base HAS been reduced in other areas. So your point is?

2 - As stated above, Khan vs Whitcut & Moore for payment for the shares is nothing to do with the club - it is a private matter between the parties. We are told an agreement in principle for transfer of the shares has now been agreed (nothing is stated regarding the nature and details of the transfer - it could be to the man in the moon for all we know?). So, your point is?

3 - The only way Khan will see a cent of his loan to the club is if it is transferred to new owners, who are able to make a success of it to generate the cash to repay him. Otherwise, as the principal creditor of a business that is technically insolvent, he'll not see anything in the event of liquidation. So he is hardly likely to have any interest whatsoever in seeing the club fall over. So, your point is?

4 - No-one is going to invest anything, or finance anything in major sponsorship or other ways, until all this is finally resolved. After that...well who knows? YOU certainly don't. So, your point is?

As the original article makes quite clear (and objectivly and fairly), this looks to be a signicant step forward towards a final resolution of the problem, although not yet the resolution itself. So, seeking to turn the development into a big negative (or, for that matter, suggesting it is the end of the problem) is rather silly and transparent. MY point is.

OK, next?
Adey I am glad you are back to clarify the issues with the fans.

Several weeks ago then newbies sought admn.Presumably when they opened a few drawers once in.
RFL baulked and they set playing rules so what they say goes.
Creditors other than players matter not in their world other than players.

Omar"s loans and others (the club has now run for a further 3 1/2 months and I guess the RFL have funded the £100k monthly losses)may mean accumulated negative shareholder funds are at least 1.6million.
We know 2 loans
180k green
200k Bfd council.

You are right the shares are worthless.
Other stakeholders debts are secured.
On stock Coral stand and debtors.
Omar is responsible for the state of the finances.He and fellow director Sutcliffe.Why no cost cutting till now?
In fact NO PROPER FINANCIAL COTROL AT ALL>
He wants his cake and eat it.But their are strong rumour it my be third uknown parties cake introduced n August.If OK had it why was it not presented a year earlier.Instead a 25 k instalment arrangement to buy th assets and begging appeals to Akbars.
Hope the club did not pay his 20k fine and season ticket holders contribute to his purchase.
People say he had NOWT
And while this lot have more savvy the have NOWT.
A tougjh few years ahead.
Saddled with this mess.

PLEASE ADEY LEAD AN APPEAL FOR A FANS TRUST ON THE PORTSMOUTH MODEL>
The like of Tordoff may support that.Confidence otherwise will make it very difficult to attract anyone.

And if progressed could see the idiots never recover the debt of their own making.
Don't like the sound of the source of the funding in the summer.
We do not see any debentures against alleged property portfolio 900k introductions.

Maybe someone presented him with a lego set as everyone sang Happy Birthday to him at a cost of the pop concerts loss...£100k.
Build it and they will come.
What a feking shambles.
I"ll write the potential best seller with you when its all over.
The Eleventh Earl of Mars was very appropriate lyric.

If you are confident enough just do it.
You know it makes sense.

FANS TRUST WITH SEVERAL BIGGER INVESTORS>

Otherise I fear worse than WONGA types wlll be underwriting going forward.As indeed they may already be

Any idea where the Bateman brass went?
Flight to the Bahamas maybe

Taxi for
Khan
Whitcut
Sutcliffe.
Destination....Armle

y if I had my way

Its a very thin line between Pentonville Prison and The House of Lords.
Isnt it Gerry xx
Of Course Omar could be claiming something for Goodwill.

He is after all the messiah.
His twitter account is flagged up

"The man who saved the Bulls"
Forgive me I just need to go be sick.

Give me ten minutes in a room with Khan and Sutcliffe.
They would be walking faster then.
[quote][p][bold]Ahrmen Aleg[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Adeybull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rogerthat![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?[/p][/quote]Except... 1 - From what has been reported, the steps to achieve the annualised £400k savings seem to have aready been taken. The wage bill HAS been reduced. Through redundancies and reduced hours. And the cost base HAS been reduced in other areas. So your point is? 2 - As stated above, Khan vs Whitcut & Moore for payment for the shares is nothing to do with the club - it is a private matter between the parties. We are told an agreement in principle for transfer of the shares has now been agreed (nothing is stated regarding the nature and details of the transfer - it could be to the man in the moon for all we know?). So, your point is? 3 - The only way Khan will see a cent of his loan to the club is if it is transferred to new owners, who are able to make a success of it to generate the cash to repay him. Otherwise, as the principal creditor of a business that is technically insolvent, he'll not see anything in the event of liquidation. So he is hardly likely to have any interest whatsoever in seeing the club fall over. So, your point is? 4 - No-one is going to invest anything, or finance anything in major sponsorship or other ways, until all this is finally resolved. After that...well who knows? YOU certainly don't. So, your point is? As the original article makes quite clear (and objectivly and fairly), this looks to be a signicant step forward towards a final resolution of the problem, although not yet the resolution itself. So, seeking to turn the development into a big negative (or, for that matter, suggesting it is the end of the problem) is rather silly and transparent. MY point is. OK, next?[/p][/quote]Adey I am glad you are back to clarify the issues with the fans. Several weeks ago then newbies sought admn.Presumably when they opened a few drawers once in. RFL baulked and they set playing rules so what they say goes. Creditors other than players matter not in their world other than players. Omar"s loans and others (the club has now run for a further 3 1/2 months and I guess the RFL have funded the £100k monthly losses)may mean accumulated negative shareholder funds are at least 1.6million. We know 2 loans 180k green 200k Bfd council. You are right the shares are worthless. Other stakeholders debts are secured. On stock Coral stand and debtors. Omar is responsible for the state of the finances.He and fellow director Sutcliffe.Why no cost cutting till now? In fact NO PROPER FINANCIAL COTROL AT ALL> He wants his cake and eat it.But their are strong rumour it my be third uknown parties cake introduced n August.If OK had it why was it not presented a year earlier.Instead a 25 k instalment arrangement to buy th assets and begging appeals to Akbars. Hope the club did not pay his 20k fine and season ticket holders contribute to his purchase. People say he had NOWT And while this lot have more savvy the have NOWT. A tougjh few years ahead. Saddled with this mess. PLEASE ADEY LEAD AN APPEAL FOR A FANS TRUST ON THE PORTSMOUTH MODEL> The like of Tordoff may support that.Confidence otherwise will make it very difficult to attract anyone. And if progressed could see the idiots never recover the debt of their own making. Don't like the sound of the source of the funding in the summer. We do not see any debentures against alleged property portfolio 900k introductions. Maybe someone presented him with a lego set as everyone sang Happy Birthday to him at a cost of the pop concerts loss...£100k. Build it and they will come. What a feking shambles. I"ll write the potential best seller with you when its all over. The Eleventh Earl of Mars was very appropriate lyric. If you are confident enough just do it. You know it makes sense. FANS TRUST WITH SEVERAL BIGGER INVESTORS> Otherise I fear worse than WONGA types wlll be underwriting going forward.As indeed they may already be Any idea where the Bateman brass went? Flight to the Bahamas maybe Taxi for Khan Whitcut Sutcliffe. Destination....Armle y if I had my way Its a very thin line between Pentonville Prison and The House of Lords. Isnt it Gerry xx[/p][/quote]Of Course Omar could be claiming something for Goodwill. He is after all the messiah. His twitter account is flagged up "The man who saved the Bulls" Forgive me I just need to go be sick. Give me ten minutes in a room with Khan and Sutcliffe. They would be walking faster then. Ahrmen Aleg
  • Score: -8

2:47pm Fri 10 Jan 14

raisemeup says...

Adeybull wrote:
rogerthat! wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?
Except...

1 - From what has been reported, the steps to achieve the annualised £400k savings seem to have aready been taken. The wage bill HAS been reduced. Through redundancies and reduced hours. And the cost base HAS been reduced in other areas. So your point is?

2 - As stated above, Khan vs Whitcut & Moore for payment for the shares is nothing to do with the club - it is a private matter between the parties. We are told an agreement in principle for transfer of the shares has now been agreed (nothing is stated regarding the nature and details of the transfer - it could be to the man in the moon for all we know?). So, your point is?

3 - The only way Khan will see a cent of his loan to the club is if it is transferred to new owners, who are able to make a success of it to generate the cash to repay him. Otherwise, as the principal creditor of a business that is technically insolvent, he'll not see anything in the event of liquidation. So he is hardly likely to have any interest whatsoever in seeing the club fall over. So, your point is?

4 - No-one is going to invest anything, or finance anything in major sponsorship or other ways, until all this is finally resolved. After that...well who knows? YOU certainly don't. So, your point is?

As the original article makes quite clear (and objectivly and fairly), this looks to be a signicant step forward towards a final resolution of the problem, although not yet the resolution itself. So, seeking to turn the development into a big negative (or, for that matter, suggesting it is the end of the problem) is rather silly and transparent. MY point is.

OK, next?
Well put Adey, couldn't have said it better.
[quote][p][bold]Adeybull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rogerthat![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]Yes the debt has not gone away. Khan still wants his money and is after Moore and Whitcut. Council owed £200,000.00 Plus savings of £400.000.00 to be made. No new money invested as the Directors do not have any. Wage bill not reduced. Who is kidding who. Fear this is like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. Hope I am wrong?[/p][/quote]Except... 1 - From what has been reported, the steps to achieve the annualised £400k savings seem to have aready been taken. The wage bill HAS been reduced. Through redundancies and reduced hours. And the cost base HAS been reduced in other areas. So your point is? 2 - As stated above, Khan vs Whitcut & Moore for payment for the shares is nothing to do with the club - it is a private matter between the parties. We are told an agreement in principle for transfer of the shares has now been agreed (nothing is stated regarding the nature and details of the transfer - it could be to the man in the moon for all we know?). So, your point is? 3 - The only way Khan will see a cent of his loan to the club is if it is transferred to new owners, who are able to make a success of it to generate the cash to repay him. Otherwise, as the principal creditor of a business that is technically insolvent, he'll not see anything in the event of liquidation. So he is hardly likely to have any interest whatsoever in seeing the club fall over. So, your point is? 4 - No-one is going to invest anything, or finance anything in major sponsorship or other ways, until all this is finally resolved. After that...well who knows? YOU certainly don't. So, your point is? As the original article makes quite clear (and objectivly and fairly), this looks to be a signicant step forward towards a final resolution of the problem, although not yet the resolution itself. So, seeking to turn the development into a big negative (or, for that matter, suggesting it is the end of the problem) is rather silly and transparent. MY point is. OK, next?[/p][/quote]Well put Adey, couldn't have said it better. raisemeup
  • Score: 11

6:28pm Fri 10 Jan 14

fedupwiththeBS says...

Adeybull wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement".

2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.
you are missing the point the club has no money; OK has no money and the two remaining directors clearly do not have the money to run the club or they would have brought OK out; why run it for him?

If the rumours that the RFL have been paying the wages since Aug who is going to be left to pick up that debt and I bet that will be one point raised by some of the other clubs at the RFL meeting next week?

OK is adamant that he is not going to just sign over his shares and walk away so we are stuck with him which is good news for all you free curry brigade.

There is also a wind up order listed on the London Gazette on the 24th Dec 13 against OK Bulls; so lets see where that leaves us.

Our players will be doing hill work tomorrow in the wet and cold whilst other teams are in the US, Australia, Portugal and South Africa at their training camps; thats fair!
[quote][p][bold]Adeybull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement". 2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.[/p][/quote]you are missing the point the club has no money; OK has no money and the two remaining directors clearly do not have the money to run the club or they would have brought OK out; why run it for him? If the rumours that the RFL have been paying the wages since Aug who is going to be left to pick up that debt and I bet that will be one point raised by some of the other clubs at the RFL meeting next week? OK is adamant that he is not going to just sign over his shares and walk away so we are stuck with him which is good news for all you free curry brigade. There is also a wind up order listed on the London Gazette on the 24th Dec 13 against OK Bulls; so lets see where that leaves us. Our players will be doing hill work tomorrow in the wet and cold whilst other teams are in the US, Australia, Portugal and South Africa at their training camps; thats fair! fedupwiththeBS
  • Score: -17

6:30pm Fri 10 Jan 14

fedupwiththeBS says...

OK's shares would be worthless if this was being floated on the stock market, as it is a private sale he can ask what he wants for them.
OK's shares would be worthless if this was being floated on the stock market, as it is a private sale he can ask what he wants for them. fedupwiththeBS
  • Score: -12

6:54pm Fri 10 Jan 14

axlef1963 says...

There is a long way to go in this farce.No body can trust anything that has comes out of odsal for the past 5 years.The only way I wiil believe anything is if a representative of the bulls supporters was allowed in these meetings.If the rf allowed this it would go a long to building the trust between the fans and the board.There are a lot of questions we want answering so come on he powers that be show us some transparency. in the memory of the late great Trevor Foster make this happen and keep the dream alive.COME ON YOU BULLS
There is a long way to go in this farce.No body can trust anything that has comes out of odsal for the past 5 years.The only way I wiil believe anything is if a representative of the bulls supporters was allowed in these meetings.If the rf allowed this it would go a long to building the trust between the fans and the board.There are a lot of questions we want answering so come on he powers that be show us some transparency. in the memory of the late great Trevor Foster make this happen and keep the dream alive.COME ON YOU BULLS axlef1963
  • Score: -10

7:25pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Adeybull says...

fedupwiththeBS wrote:
OK's shares would be worthless if this was being floated on the stock market, as it is a private sale he can ask what he wants for them.
Indeed. He can ask whatever he wants. He can ask till the cows come home.

Still does not make them worth anything.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: OK's shares would be worthless if this was being floated on the stock market, as it is a private sale he can ask what he wants for them.[/p][/quote]Indeed. He can ask whatever he wants. He can ask till the cows come home. Still does not make them worth anything. Adeybull
  • Score: 20

7:27pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Parz says...

fedupwiththeBS wrote:
Adeybull wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement".

2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.
you are missing the point the club has no money; OK has no money and the two remaining directors clearly do not have the money to run the club or they would have brought OK out; why run it for him?

If the rumours that the RFL have been paying the wages since Aug who is going to be left to pick up that debt and I bet that will be one point raised by some of the other clubs at the RFL meeting next week?

OK is adamant that he is not going to just sign over his shares and walk away so we are stuck with him which is good news for all you free curry brigade.

There is also a wind up order listed on the London Gazette on the 24th Dec 13 against OK Bulls; so lets see where that leaves us.

Our players will be doing hill work tomorrow in the wet and cold whilst other teams are in the US, Australia, Portugal and South Africa at their training camps; thats fair!
Incorrect. The entry on the London Gazette has the code D2. D2 is simply the notification that the Company's Annual Return has been filed. If you don't believe me, scroll up to Page 1 of that entry and the Key is there for you to see for yourself.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Adeybull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement". 2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.[/p][/quote]you are missing the point the club has no money; OK has no money and the two remaining directors clearly do not have the money to run the club or they would have brought OK out; why run it for him? If the rumours that the RFL have been paying the wages since Aug who is going to be left to pick up that debt and I bet that will be one point raised by some of the other clubs at the RFL meeting next week? OK is adamant that he is not going to just sign over his shares and walk away so we are stuck with him which is good news for all you free curry brigade. There is also a wind up order listed on the London Gazette on the 24th Dec 13 against OK Bulls; so lets see where that leaves us. Our players will be doing hill work tomorrow in the wet and cold whilst other teams are in the US, Australia, Portugal and South Africa at their training camps; thats fair![/p][/quote]Incorrect. The entry on the London Gazette has the code D2. D2 is simply the notification that the Company's Annual Return has been filed. If you don't believe me, scroll up to Page 1 of that entry and the Key is there for you to see for yourself. Parz
  • Score: 15

8:13pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Adeybull says...

fedupwiththeBS wrote:
Adeybull wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement".

2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.
you are missing the point the club has no money; OK has no money and the two remaining directors clearly do not have the money to run the club or they would have brought OK out; why run it for him?

If the rumours that the RFL have been paying the wages since Aug who is going to be left to pick up that debt and I bet that will be one point raised by some of the other clubs at the RFL meeting next week?

OK is adamant that he is not going to just sign over his shares and walk away so we are stuck with him which is good news for all you free curry brigade.

There is also a wind up order listed on the London Gazette on the 24th Dec 13 against OK Bulls; so lets see where that leaves us.

Our players will be doing hill work tomorrow in the wet and cold whilst other teams are in the US, Australia, Portugal and South Africa at their training camps; thats fair!
Not missing any point.

No way on God's earth would OK ever have stepped back in. After the financial mess the business seemingly got into under his and the invisible Gerry's control. The guy is (or was) in a corner, and the only outcomes for him financially are poor, whatever the result. If someone else did not step in, he'd end up with an insolvency on his hands and he'd lose every cent.

And, of course, there would be questions in the House for Gerry...

If he intended to step back in, he'd have sacked off the gang of three and put his own people in again. And still sued Moore and Whitcut personally. Which reminds me, where IS Whitcut these days? THAT appointment did not work out so well, did it? Good judgment there, Omar.

If someone else takes it on, then at least OK has a fighting chance of getting his loan repaid. As I hope he does. Any reaonable person, looking at a business with a net worth after just 12 months under OK's control of minus £1.2m (based on what has been reported) would say that is the very best OK can expect. And no level-headed businessman, looking at having to find ongoing funding at least till 1 November, would pay him more than a notional £1 for his shares.

So, the announcement that we have an agreement in principle that someone or some entity IS agreeable to taking on the business can only be a positive development for ALL parties concerned. (Except, maybe, any bandit waiting in the wings to try and pick up the business for nothing out of insolvency - assuming of course he passed the "fit and proper person" test). It certainly is not a NEGATIVE development, or a "no change" development.

THAT is what this article, and its resulting comments thread, is about. SO no, I am not missing any point.

OK WILL give up his shares, one way or the other. As you say, it is likely he does not have more money to put in. And he will assuredly not have the inclination, even if he did. What probably matters now is how it is structured and presented, so he does not lose face - or his shirt and everything else.

What happens then, regarding ongoing funding, is for another article, and another day. There is no sugar daddy waiting in the wings, so the latest development can only be a step forward - even if not on the unrealistic scale that some people might wish for. Or be seeking to mislead readers about.

Yes, some of the the rich teams, bankrolled by their sugar daddies, may well be in warmer climes. Good for them. The rest, including us, are not. We are hardly alone - life is not fair; for many, it is not at all fair - get over it. This coming season is about survival. If we want much better than that, someone get off their backside and go find a sugar daddy.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Adeybull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement". 2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.[/p][/quote]you are missing the point the club has no money; OK has no money and the two remaining directors clearly do not have the money to run the club or they would have brought OK out; why run it for him? If the rumours that the RFL have been paying the wages since Aug who is going to be left to pick up that debt and I bet that will be one point raised by some of the other clubs at the RFL meeting next week? OK is adamant that he is not going to just sign over his shares and walk away so we are stuck with him which is good news for all you free curry brigade. There is also a wind up order listed on the London Gazette on the 24th Dec 13 against OK Bulls; so lets see where that leaves us. Our players will be doing hill work tomorrow in the wet and cold whilst other teams are in the US, Australia, Portugal and South Africa at their training camps; thats fair![/p][/quote]Not missing any point. No way on God's earth would OK ever have stepped back in. After the financial mess the business seemingly got into under his and the invisible Gerry's control. The guy is (or was) in a corner, and the only outcomes for him financially are poor, whatever the result. If someone else did not step in, he'd end up with an insolvency on his hands and he'd lose every cent. And, of course, there would be questions in the House for Gerry... If he intended to step back in, he'd have sacked off the gang of three and put his own people in again. And still sued Moore and Whitcut personally. Which reminds me, where IS Whitcut these days? THAT appointment did not work out so well, did it? Good judgment there, Omar. If someone else takes it on, then at least OK has a fighting chance of getting his loan repaid. As I hope he does. Any reaonable person, looking at a business with a net worth after just 12 months under OK's control of minus £1.2m (based on what has been reported) would say that is the very best OK can expect. And no level-headed businessman, looking at having to find ongoing funding at least till 1 November, would pay him more than a notional £1 for his shares. So, the announcement that we have an agreement in principle that someone or some entity IS agreeable to taking on the business can only be a positive development for ALL parties concerned. (Except, maybe, any bandit waiting in the wings to try and pick up the business for nothing out of insolvency - assuming of course he passed the "fit and proper person" test). It certainly is not a NEGATIVE development, or a "no change" development. THAT is what this article, and its resulting comments thread, is about. SO no, I am not missing any point. OK WILL give up his shares, one way or the other. As you say, it is likely he does not have more money to put in. And he will assuredly not have the inclination, even if he did. What probably matters now is how it is structured and presented, so he does not lose face - or his shirt and everything else. What happens then, regarding ongoing funding, is for another article, and another day. There is no sugar daddy waiting in the wings, so the latest development can only be a step forward - even if not on the unrealistic scale that some people might wish for. Or be seeking to mislead readers about. Yes, some of the the rich teams, bankrolled by their sugar daddies, may well be in warmer climes. Good for them. The rest, including us, are not. We are hardly alone - life is not fair; for many, it is not at all fair - get over it. This coming season is about survival. If we want much better than that, someone get off their backside and go find a sugar daddy. Adeybull
  • Score: 19

8:23pm Fri 10 Jan 14

AUGUST1964 says...

Adeybull been watching your comments on here and other forums for a long time,absolute common sense as always,if you are still involved with Bull Builder now is the time to push on,use this forum to publicise.(only needs a link)
Adeybull been watching your comments on here and other forums for a long time,absolute common sense as always,if you are still involved with Bull Builder now is the time to push on,use this forum to publicise.(only needs a link) AUGUST1964
  • Score: 12

8:23pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Albion. says...

Adeybull wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
Adeybull wrote:
fedupwiththeBS wrote:
where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK?

What a mess!
1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement".

2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.
you are missing the point the club has no money; OK has no money and the two remaining directors clearly do not have the money to run the club or they would have brought OK out; why run it for him?

If the rumours that the RFL have been paying the wages since Aug who is going to be left to pick up that debt and I bet that will be one point raised by some of the other clubs at the RFL meeting next week?

OK is adamant that he is not going to just sign over his shares and walk away so we are stuck with him which is good news for all you free curry brigade.

There is also a wind up order listed on the London Gazette on the 24th Dec 13 against OK Bulls; so lets see where that leaves us.

Our players will be doing hill work tomorrow in the wet and cold whilst other teams are in the US, Australia, Portugal and South Africa at their training camps; thats fair!
Not missing any point.

No way on God's earth would OK ever have stepped back in. After the financial mess the business seemingly got into under his and the invisible Gerry's control. The guy is (or was) in a corner, and the only outcomes for him financially are poor, whatever the result. If someone else did not step in, he'd end up with an insolvency on his hands and he'd lose every cent.

And, of course, there would be questions in the House for Gerry...

If he intended to step back in, he'd have sacked off the gang of three and put his own people in again. And still sued Moore and Whitcut personally. Which reminds me, where IS Whitcut these days? THAT appointment did not work out so well, did it? Good judgment there, Omar.

If someone else takes it on, then at least OK has a fighting chance of getting his loan repaid. As I hope he does. Any reaonable person, looking at a business with a net worth after just 12 months under OK's control of minus £1.2m (based on what has been reported) would say that is the very best OK can expect. And no level-headed businessman, looking at having to find ongoing funding at least till 1 November, would pay him more than a notional £1 for his shares.

So, the announcement that we have an agreement in principle that someone or some entity IS agreeable to taking on the business can only be a positive development for ALL parties concerned. (Except, maybe, any bandit waiting in the wings to try and pick up the business for nothing out of insolvency - assuming of course he passed the "fit and proper person" test). It certainly is not a NEGATIVE development, or a "no change" development.

THAT is what this article, and its resulting comments thread, is about. SO no, I am not missing any point.

OK WILL give up his shares, one way or the other. As you say, it is likely he does not have more money to put in. And he will assuredly not have the inclination, even if he did. What probably matters now is how it is structured and presented, so he does not lose face - or his shirt and everything else.

What happens then, regarding ongoing funding, is for another article, and another day. There is no sugar daddy waiting in the wings, so the latest development can only be a step forward - even if not on the unrealistic scale that some people might wish for. Or be seeking to mislead readers about.

Yes, some of the the rich teams, bankrolled by their sugar daddies, may well be in warmer climes. Good for them. The rest, including us, are not. We are hardly alone - life is not fair; for many, it is not at all fair - get over it. This coming season is about survival. If we want much better than that, someone get off their backside and go find a sugar daddy.
In preference to a curry one?
[quote][p][bold]Adeybull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Adeybull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwiththeBS[/bold] wrote: where is the step forward? OK still owns the club and we still have a board that has no money otherwise they would have brought the club off of OK? What a mess![/p][/quote]1 - Any objective observer would agree an "agreement in principle" is considerably further forward than "no agreement". 2 - The club's shares are totally and utterly worthless. OK Bulls Ltd has a substantial deficit of shareholders' funds, built up under OK, and arising principally because the money he put into the club was in the form of loans NOT as share capital. It is likely to need ongoing external funding at least until the RFL SKY monies are fully restored in November 2014, so any new owner will almost certainly have to provide or find further funding in the interim. So why the HELL anyone should think OK should receive a penny for the totally worthless shares escapes me.[/p][/quote]you are missing the point the club has no money; OK has no money and the two remaining directors clearly do not have the money to run the club or they would have brought OK out; why run it for him? If the rumours that the RFL have been paying the wages since Aug who is going to be left to pick up that debt and I bet that will be one point raised by some of the other clubs at the RFL meeting next week? OK is adamant that he is not going to just sign over his shares and walk away so we are stuck with him which is good news for all you free curry brigade. There is also a wind up order listed on the London Gazette on the 24th Dec 13 against OK Bulls; so lets see where that leaves us. Our players will be doing hill work tomorrow in the wet and cold whilst other teams are in the US, Australia, Portugal and South Africa at their training camps; thats fair![/p][/quote]Not missing any point. No way on God's earth would OK ever have stepped back in. After the financial mess the business seemingly got into under his and the invisible Gerry's control. The guy is (or was) in a corner, and the only outcomes for him financially are poor, whatever the result. If someone else did not step in, he'd end up with an insolvency on his hands and he'd lose every cent. And, of course, there would be questions in the House for Gerry... If he intended to step back in, he'd have sacked off the gang of three and put his own people in again. And still sued Moore and Whitcut personally. Which reminds me, where IS Whitcut these days? THAT appointment did not work out so well, did it? Good judgment there, Omar. If someone else takes it on, then at least OK has a fighting chance of getting his loan repaid. As I hope he does. Any reaonable person, looking at a business with a net worth after just 12 months under OK's control of minus £1.2m (based on what has been reported) would say that is the very best OK can expect. And no level-headed businessman, looking at having to find ongoing funding at least till 1 November, would pay him more than a notional £1 for his shares. So, the announcement that we have an agreement in principle that someone or some entity IS agreeable to taking on the business can only be a positive development for ALL parties concerned. (Except, maybe, any bandit waiting in the wings to try and pick up the business for nothing out of insolvency - assuming of course he passed the "fit and proper person" test). It certainly is not a NEGATIVE development, or a "no change" development. THAT is what this article, and its resulting comments thread, is about. SO no, I am not missing any point. OK WILL give up his shares, one way or the other. As you say, it is likely he does not have more money to put in. And he will assuredly not have the inclination, even if he did. What probably matters now is how it is structured and presented, so he does not lose face - or his shirt and everything else. What happens then, regarding ongoing funding, is for another article, and another day. There is no sugar daddy waiting in the wings, so the latest development can only be a step forward - even if not on the unrealistic scale that some people might wish for. Or be seeking to mislead readers about. Yes, some of the the rich teams, bankrolled by their sugar daddies, may well be in warmer climes. Good for them. The rest, including us, are not. We are hardly alone - life is not fair; for many, it is not at all fair - get over it. This coming season is about survival. If we want much better than that, someone get off their backside and go find a sugar daddy.[/p][/quote]In preference to a curry one? Albion.
  • Score: 0

8:33pm Fri 10 Jan 14

Adeybull says...

I'd settle for a brussels sprouts daddy if he fronted up with a shedload of dosh...
I'd settle for a brussels sprouts daddy if he fronted up with a shedload of dosh... Adeybull
  • Score: 11

12:37am Sat 11 Jan 14

Ahrmen Aleg says...

AUGUST1964 wrote:
Adeybull been watching your comments on here and other forums for a long time,absolute common sense as always,if you are still involved with Bull Builder now is the time to push on,use this forum to publicise.(only needs a link)
Yes Adey certainly understands the situation well.
Survival the key word.
Even at the height of Bulmania there was no sugar daddy.

So I"d settle for putting Adey in charge after all the good work Bullbuilder has done over the years.
Sounds like OK could not even manage to get even lukewarm about Bullbluilder.

It is really only common sense that is needed right now.
In the absence of the sugar daddy
[quote][p][bold]AUGUST1964[/bold] wrote: Adeybull been watching your comments on here and other forums for a long time,absolute common sense as always,if you are still involved with Bull Builder now is the time to push on,use this forum to publicise.(only needs a link)[/p][/quote]Yes Adey certainly understands the situation well. Survival the key word. Even at the height of Bulmania there was no sugar daddy. So I"d settle for putting Adey in charge after all the good work Bullbuilder has done over the years. Sounds like OK could not even manage to get even lukewarm about Bullbluilder. It is really only common sense that is needed right now. In the absence of the sugar daddy Ahrmen Aleg
  • Score: 4

11:14pm Sun 12 Jan 14

bradfordbronco says...

Would be nice if the Bulls did offer Adey and Bullbuilder some kind of non exec place on the board as a fans representative. The last administration could have done far worse than run ideas past them for approval.
Would be nice if the Bulls did offer Adey and Bullbuilder some kind of non exec place on the board as a fans representative. The last administration could have done far worse than run ideas past them for approval. bradfordbronco
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
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