Creditors in desperate fight to get £1.5m owed by Bradford Bulls (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)

Mumby was the best wrote:
So how far down the pecking order of the creditors list is the administrator? Or doesn`t he become a creditor?

Mumby was the best wrote:
So how far down the pecking order of the creditors list is the administrator? Or doesn`t he become a creditor?

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote:
So how far down the pecking order of the creditors list is the administrator? Or doesn`t he become a creditor?

You said you would do the job of the administrator for a fraction of the cost they charged yet you ask how far down the pecking order of the creditors they come. Glad you were not appointed with your amount of financial knowledge

raisemeup wrote:
Catch 22 is the answer.

Without the intervention of the Administrator we wouldn't have had a club. Everyone should know the Administration process is costly.

I think though that no sale equals no pay, so he would have been taking a gamble.

I do feel for the creditors and the new buyer, what a mess this has turned out to be. Realistically the amount is still relatively low in the scheme of things, but no one is going to be prepared to pay the unsecured creditors a bean. Doubtfull that the secured creditors or shareholders will get anything. Time will tell?

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:
I feel for the small companies whom £6k is alot of money and could push them under.
Lets hope in Mr Khan the Bulls have a person who won't let this happen again.

Mumby was the best wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote: I feel for the small companies whom £6k is alot of money and could push them under. Lets hope in Mr Khan the Bulls have a person who won't let this happen again.

What happened to the small companies when your beloved City went thru the same process? The Bulls aren`t the first company or last to go into admin. It`s a sorry fact of life that there are always winners and losers especially in the present climate.

Walruss wrote:
Shipley Paul said that HMRC are always on top of the pile when it comes to recovery of money owed, suggesting that they are preferential creditors. I don't think that is the case and they are in the same boat as other creditors and take their place in the queue for their percentage of whatever is left.

Are we now having a phoenix company arise from the ashes of the old one?

Will this company trade insolvently just as the old one did?

Or will Khan pay the creditors in full as I think he should?

BierleyBoy wrote:
Questions have to be asked about where all the money went. The club took in roughly £2.7m in season ticket sales, ground lease sale and pledge fund money from the start of 2012 to going into administration in June.

It still owed £1.5m so just where di that £2.7m go? I would not be surprised if the ex directors & shareholders had taken out their own investments in the knowledge the club was in trouble.

It is shameful that the RFL is allowing one company to go under with such huge debts with a new one being allowed to take it's place. This is exactly what happened at London Broncos & the rules were changed to prevent it happening again.

The mini licensing scenario is a complete sham. The Bulls were given a B licence last year such is the credibility of the process.

jdsbarras041989 wrote:
I am disgusted by what I read in this article, I mean how dare a company come into our great club claiming to help us out of trouble and then pay themselves an extortionate amount to do it. As far as I am concerned the P&A Partnership should hang its head in shame they could have destroyed our club doing what they did, Thankfully they failed, Bradford Till I Die, COYB.

monkey belly wrote:
does anyone in the know have a clue who Integrated Bradford LEP ltd are and what they do as they are owed £186,100

monkey belly wrote:
does anyone in the know have a clue who Integrated Bradford LEP ltd are and what they do as they are owed £186,100

monkey belly wrote:
does anyone in the know have a clue who Integrated Bradford LEP ltd are and what they do as they are owed £186,100

Mumby was the best wrote:

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote: So how far down the pecking order of the creditors list is the administrator? Or doesn`t he become a creditor?

You said you would do the job of the administrator for a fraction of the cost they charged yet you ask how far down the pecking order of the creditors they come. Glad you were not appointed with your amount of financial knowledge

Obviously I`m not a smart a*** .

Adeybull wrote:
The debt is not stated at £1.5m. I have told you that earlier. . The P&A costs were up to 24/8. The costs to complete will take this amount very considerably higher, and then we will have the costs to liquidate (P&A have proposed themselves for that role). I suspect we could see £1/4m costs in total before this is all done. . P&A were IMO a surprising and high-profile choice for the job. One dediuces from what one reads that business connections with certain shareholders may have played a not insignificant part in that. But, even so, these are the sorts of costs you clock up when you go into administration. . Something I tried to explain to those who, a few months ago, were extolling the virtues of administration as a nice easy and relatively painless way of ditching shareholders you did not want and just carrying on as normal afterwards. How wrong were they...? They can't say I did not try to warn them.

blue marlin wrote:
so the bulls have been sold to ok and gs
can any body tell me if creditors have been offered something in the pound?

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Adeybull wrote:
The debt is not stated at £1.5m. I have told you that earlier. . The P&A costs were up to 24/8. The costs to complete will take this amount very considerably higher, and then we will have the costs to liquidate (P&A have proposed themselves for that role). I suspect we could see £1/4m costs in total before this is all done. . P&A were IMO a surprising and high-profile choice for the job. One dediuces from what one reads that business connections with certain shareholders may have played a not insignificant part in that. But, even so, these are the sorts of costs you clock up when you go into administration. . Something I tried to explain to those who, a few months ago, were extolling the virtues of administration as a nice easy and relatively painless way of ditching shareholders you did not want and just carrying on as normal afterwards. How wrong were they...? They can't say I did not try to warn them.

The Bulls will still see to the tune of £1m worth of debt written off after paying the administrator so the point still stands.

People can't come on here and slate the administrators whilst at the same time ignore the fact a huge debt has been wipped off.

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote:

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote: So how far down the pecking order of the creditors list is the administrator? Or doesn`t he become a creditor?

You said you would do the job of the administrator for a fraction of the cost they charged yet you ask how far down the pecking order of the creditors they come. Glad you were not appointed with your amount of financial knowledge

Obviously I`m not a smart a*** .

Just a a***.

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Adeybull wrote:
The debt is not stated at £1.5m. I have told you that earlier. . The P&A costs were up to 24/8. The costs to complete will take this amount very considerably higher, and then we will have the costs to liquidate (P&A have proposed themselves for that role). I suspect we could see £1/4m costs in total before this is all done. . P&A were IMO a surprising and high-profile choice for the job. One dediuces from what one reads that business connections with certain shareholders may have played a not insignificant part in that. But, even so, these are the sorts of costs you clock up when you go into administration. . Something I tried to explain to those who, a few months ago, were extolling the virtues of administration as a nice easy and relatively painless way of ditching shareholders you did not want and just carrying on as normal afterwards. How wrong were they...? They can't say I did not try to warn them.

The Bulls will still see to the tune of £1m worth of debt written off after paying the administrator so the point still stands.

People can't come on here and slate the administrators whilst at the same time ignore the fact a huge debt has been wipped off.

Sheffieldbull wrote:

Thee Voice of Reason wrote:

Adeybull wrote: The debt is not stated at £1.5m. I have told you that earlier. . The P&A costs were up to 24/8. The costs to complete will take this amount very considerably higher, and then we will have the costs to liquidate (P&A have proposed themselves for that role). I suspect we could see £1/4m costs in total before this is all done. . P&A were IMO a surprising and high-profile choice for the job. One dediuces from what one reads that business connections with certain shareholders may have played a not insignificant part in that. But, even so, these are the sorts of costs you clock up when you go into administration. . Something I tried to explain to those who, a few months ago, were extolling the virtues of administration as a nice easy and relatively painless way of ditching shareholders you did not want and just carrying on as normal afterwards. How wrong were they...? They can't say I did not try to warn them.

The Bulls will still see to the tune of £1m worth of debt written off after paying the administrator so the point still stands. People can't come on here and slate the administrators whilst at the same time ignore the fact a huge debt has been wipped off.

Who are the Bulls TVoR? Are you getting your entities confused? Are you saying the Bulls are the Fans/Players/Coaches and as such have benefited from Administration? Should we not be proportioning blame to where it belongs... Those who are no longer there? Smug git!

bobbyo wrote:
£205 smackers an hour geez !! needs investigating,

bobbyo wrote:
£205 smackers an hour geez !! needs investigating,

Storck wrote:
So have the Bulls come out of Admin through a CVA, or have some of their assets been bought eg the team, Odsal lease, sporting rights etc. If it is the second then they should be in the same position as Rangers and should be sent to the bottom of the leagues as they have been liquidated. If it is a CVA then details should be available about what is been paid to creditors as there should have been a vote like when BCFC came out of admin.

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote:

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote: So how far down the pecking order of the creditors list is the administrator? Or doesn`t he become a creditor?

You said you would do the job of the administrator for a fraction of the cost they charged yet you ask how far down the pecking order of the creditors they come. Glad you were not appointed with your amount of financial knowledge

Obviously I`m not a smart a*** .

Just a a***.

bartsbull wrote:
This is a new company as stated they have purchased a company in administation so no old debt would be liable to be cleared

They are a seperate entity to the old Bradford Bulls Holdings
depending on what as been negociated with the administrator whom from what as been stated was going to liquidated the club

This is a very long drawn out process and what as gone on behind the sceens will not be revealed to us mortals

The main thing is the club as been saved and hopefully secured its future in whatever guise that is.

I do sincerely hope that is in super league at least until the next round of licenses and gives something back to the fans staff and players who have given so much

Adeybull wrote:

BierleyBoy wrote:
Questions have to be asked about where all the money went. The club took in roughly £2.7m in season ticket sales, ground lease sale and pledge fund money from the start of 2012 to going into administration in June.

It still owed £1.5m so just where di that £2.7m go? I would not be surprised if the ex directors & shareholders had taken out their own investments in the knowledge the club was in trouble.

It is shameful that the RFL is allowing one company to go under with such huge debts with a new one being allowed to take it's place. This is exactly what happened at London Broncos & the rules were changed to prevent it happening again.

The mini licensing scenario is a complete sham. The Bulls were given a B licence last year such is the credibility of the process.

Get hold of a copy of the administrators' report to creditors and shareholders, as the T&A has done. There will be maybe 1,300 copies or so in circulation (the T&A getting hold of a copy is hardly a major scoop). That will tell you what happened (well apart from the bits it mysteriously failed to comment on, like the replacement of the board) and, more to the point, what did not happen.
.
Just how exactly could a shareholder "take out their own investments"? (None did, btw - the share capital remained unchanged).
.
And if any creditor was paid in preference to another when the club was not in a position to pay all its creditors, without very good reason, that constitutes a fraudulent preference and can be recovered by the liquidator. And if it transpires any WERE, I very much hope some creditors are prepared to fund the liquidator to pursue such claims. Nothing said on this score in the report though.
.
One thing we were not told about in January was that there were arrears of PAYE from 2011, as well as the loan from the RFL, that the lease sale money was used to repay. That would explain where much of the difference between the lease sale money and the RFL loan repaytment went. Seems very clear The season ticket money was all spent in 2011 funding the club for the last quarter (as happens in many clubs). And the pledge money went to repay the bank, which had called in the overdraft, and effectively to fund part of the trading losses for 2012 which the club had till then been (very wrongly) using the VAT on the lease sale to do. When you add into the mix the operating loss before lease sale of around £1m (per Peter Hood) in 2011, you can soon account for most of the monies. The PAYE arrears from 2011 filled in the last major gap for me.

Mumby was the best wrote:

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote:

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote: So how far down the pecking order of the creditors list is the administrator? Or doesn`t he become a creditor?

You said you would do the job of the administrator for a fraction of the cost they charged yet you ask how far down the pecking order of the creditors they come. Glad you were not appointed with your amount of financial knowledge

Obviously I`m not a smart a*** .

Just a a***.

I`m only an a*** on this forum unlike you who are one on other forums. This is the last time I respond

Adeybull wrote:
The administrator has sold the assets.
.
The issue of what dividend, if any, will be paid to any of the classes of creditor, will be an issue for the liquidator once the administrator secures his discharge.
.
Integrated Bradford is the owner of the Tong facilities, yes. The amount owing surprised me, as they are the second biggest creditor.
.
Wondered if the T&A would report who the third biggest creditor is.
.
The pure pledges raised around £400k. The further £100k was apparently a combination of the additional monies raised at the Leeds game over and above what was budgeted for (as they said at the time), and similar income which I presume includes things like the auction. I do not know which category things like the substantial funds raised by the Bullbuilder bucket collection at the Leeds match or the donation from Steve O'Connor were put into.

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote:

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote:

Correctness wrote:

Mumby was the best wrote: So how far down the pecking order of the creditors list is the administrator? Or doesn`t he become a creditor?

You said you would do the job of the administrator for a fraction of the cost they charged yet you ask how far down the pecking order of the creditors they come. Glad you were not appointed with your amount of financial knowledge

Obviously I`m not a smart a*** .

Just a a***.

I`m only an a*** on this forum unlike you who are one on other forums. This is the last time I respond

Looser.

Storck wrote:

bartsbull wrote:
This is a new company as stated they have purchased a company in administation so no old debt would be liable to be cleared

They are a seperate entity to the old Bradford Bulls Holdings
depending on what as been negociated with the administrator whom from what as been stated was going to liquidated the club

This is a very long drawn out process and what as gone on behind the sceens will not be revealed to us mortals

The main thing is the club as been saved and hopefully secured its future in whatever guise that is.

I do sincerely hope that is in super league at least until the next round of licenses and gives something back to the fans staff and players who have given so much

So exactly the same as Rangers did up in the SPL. I know it is different rules between rugby and football but Bulls should be kicked out of SL or agree a CVA.

I hope all those screwed out of money have nothing to do with the "new" club. Wonder how long they will keep playing with no ambulance on stand by, no St.Johns or police.

allinittogether wrote:

Storck wrote:

bartsbull wrote:
This is a new company as stated they have purchased a company in administation so no old debt would be liable to be cleared

They are a seperate entity to the old Bradford Bulls Holdings
depending on what as been negociated with the administrator whom from what as been stated was going to liquidated the club

This is a very long drawn out process and what as gone on behind the sceens will not be revealed to us mortals

The main thing is the club as been saved and hopefully secured its future in whatever guise that is.

I do sincerely hope that is in super league at least until the next round of licenses and gives something back to the fans staff and players who have given so much

So exactly the same as Rangers did up in the SPL. I know it is different rules between rugby and football but Bulls should be kicked out of SL or agree a CVA.

I hope all those screwed out of money have nothing to do with the "new" club. Wonder how long they will keep playing with no ambulance on stand by, no St.Johns or police.

Hear Hear!

Hope the printers, the caterers etc (and yes the cheerleaders) who are owed money have nowt to do with The Bulls if the outstanding invoices are not settled in full. It's morally wrong to not do so.

allinittogether wrote:
Obviously legally the "new" Bulls have "zip all" to do with past losses but morally they have.
But then blind loyalty will always trump integrity.

Sheffieldbull wrote:

allinittogether wrote:
Obviously legally the "new" Bulls have "zip all" to do with past losses but morally they have.
But then blind loyalty will always trump integrity.

Sins of my Fathers eh? And where exactly would you say that stops in your high moral world 'allinittogether' - in the normal world businesses make the best of the situation, integrity cannot be banked, sad but true. I know that myself, from painful experience.

allinittogether wrote:

Sheffieldbull wrote:

allinittogether wrote:
Obviously legally the "new" Bulls have "zip all" to do with past losses but morally they have.
But then blind loyalty will always trump integrity.

Sins of my Fathers eh? And where exactly would you say that stops in your high moral world 'allinittogether' - in the normal world businesses make the best of the situation, integrity cannot be banked, sad but true. I know that myself, from painful experience.

C'mon! It cannot be right that creditors of The Bulls do not get paid when they pop up the next day as a different legal entity yet to all intents and purposes the same club.
The same goes for all the other clubs, double glazing companies etc that do it.
It stinks and it taints.
I don't know exactly where it stops but it's not very palatable is it?

Adeybull wrote:
The administrator's report makes it clear that there will be NO funds available to pay the unsecured creditors, so I can't see why the report is full of speculation on this score. Surprised the T&A reporter did not ask a financial professional to explain the document and what it entails.
.
The debts according to the statement of affairs are not £1.5m but £1.328m. Looks like the reporter did not realise share capital is not creditors.
.
Given what we were told about how much OK paid for the business, it would seem all of that is likely to go in paying the administrator. The report and his proposals effectively say this, unless creditors convene a meeting and object.
.
I obtained a copy of the report early last week, but it was not my place to publicise its contents, and I will continue not to do so although I may from time to time comment on what others report. Plenty in it, and a few things I expected to see and did not.

raisemeup wrote:

Adeybull wrote: The administrator's report makes it clear that there will be NO funds available to pay the unsecured creditors, so I can't see why the report is full of speculation on this score. Surprised the T&A reporter did not ask a financial professional to explain the document and what it entails. . The debts according to the statement of affairs are not £1.5m but £1.328m. Looks like the reporter did not realise share capital is not creditors. . Given what we were told about how much OK paid for the business, it would seem all of that is likely to go in paying the administrator. The report and his proposals effectively say this, unless creditors convene a meeting and object. . I obtained a copy of the report early last week, but it was not my place to publicise its contents, and I will continue not to do so although I may from time to time comment on what others report. Plenty in it, and a few things I expected to see and did not.

Yes you are right on the button. The report is a lot of what we expected but some surprises also. I will leave all the dissemination to those who have more experience than me. Unfortunately I was on the list of unpaid creditors on a couple of companies that went belly up. And with the Bulls I stand only to lose mine and my wifes shareholding. Insignificant amount of £175-£200 I think. It is always sad when a company goes, and the creditors know it's not worth the bother of a CVA, as there is nothing left for them. I suppose the only way anything could have been salvaged is if someone did a management buyout of a £1 plus debts...but that would have had to be done pre the winding up threat, and the administration process beginning. Also we would have had to have had a Management that could have done it? (or even a Management Team, period) I have only been involved once in my past career with such a deal.