[urlhttp://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=knob%20head[/url
[urlhttp://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=&page=2[/url
[urlhttp://www.internetslang.com/KNOB-meaning-definition.asp[/url

Now, before the bell rings and you have to scoot off somewhere else to be schooled by someone else, the Oxford English Dictionary would define me as a person of wealth if I were a "nob". I somehow doubt that was the meaning Roger was intending.


[urlhttp://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/nob?q=nob[/url

Fuck me sideways, even the grammar police are dim oop norf

Well I'm sure if he just repeats it over and over and over and over again then it must become funny. That's how your "jokes" work after all

I really don't think entering into the semantics about whether you perceive a poster to be a 'knob' or a 'nob' is worthy of this forum. He might be a wind-up merchant but some of you need to get a sense of perspective.

Notice how the incredibly feeble attempts to bait him about the London club have yet to have the slightest impact?

Sort of agree, to be fair, but the constant drivel and determination to make spurious comments about anything connected to the club are dragging the forum down. He reminds me of Keith Senior when he played for Leeds - no matter how many times he stood in an off-side position, the mods, sorry referees, never seemed to do anything about it...

A very apt comparison

And the opposition never had the intelligence to respond in kind?

Other teams didn't have the 'magic shirt' which apparently rendered him invisible to referees..

Which he passed on to gutterfax?

So it might appear as there are definite similarities.

I have never sold anything on ebay!

Ok Bullseye, three questions for you.

Where are the Shaky isles?

what country are those quotes on GFs posts from?

and finally, have you looked at [uall[/u the posts made by GF?

When you have done, tell me the conclusion you come to.

If its not a red card, you really are a see-through blouse.

Miss....miss.......it's not fair


The quoted contents of the Bradford Bulls business plan for 2014 are as follows:
365 days use of the Coral suite
The Club Shop
Summer Concerts
Monster Trucks
Possible return of speedway
10,000 season tickets

The 4 guys who apparently have a 25% share each in the club, immediately owe OK 250k each and have still to be ratified by the RFL....

I hear the wine and cheese evening went well though

QED Bullseye?

So rather than engage in debate about your new owners you cry to the moderators and look to get me banned?
Yeah....rational behaviour I suppose if you know I have a valid point.

Except that's not the whole plan. No one but the board and the RFL have seen that. But make assumptions based on pretty limited information or just making up facts and calling them true has long being your modus operandi.

And I don't actually see what point you're trying to make? As far as I can see, you're going "Ha ha, look at Bradford, they're looking at ways to improve their revenue streams by maximising the usage of their facilities so they never have to worry about the threat of administration again. What a bunch of losers."

Or to put it another way, you're not actually adding anything of substance to the debate. Other than pathetic "jokes" that no one thinks are funny and repeated slating of the club for doing everything it can to improve itself.

So really, I still hold the point that you're shouting about Bradford in the hope that everyone will look at us and overlook your club which has barely any players or anywhere to actually play their games and without a major financial backer it would have collapsed years ago.

Nope....it's only the bits that have been made public. As for my agenda.....I am not an "influencer" on Twitter and I certainly don't intend to make people for many opinion regarding Bradford Bulls, I simply find it amusing that OK left due to ill health taking the rest of the board with him and a series of smaller sponsors and staff have now taken over the club and it's 1 million debt and their aim is to become profitable inside 12 months.
As for London.....you'll get little debate from me on any of your points. The club is a basket case and if it were a real Bronco, the decent thing would be to walk it around the back of the stables and put it out of its misery. Won't happen though.....

Where did it say they were all equal. It was stated that no one person held a controling share - but one could have up to 50%. I wonder who is the largest shareholder - and then who is his best mate out of the other three.

Despite coming across as incredibly bitter, GF has raised various questions which I too would like the answers to.

I don't feel confident about buying my ST yet and we need a lot more from the new owners, which I'm hoping will come after the ratification (if it happens). Calvert gives me the most confidence out of the four.

We'll know as soon as they get their affairs in order and that annual return gets filed!

What information do you require from the new owners before buying a season ticket?

Indeed. The club is a business which is carrying on regardless of who the owners or shareholders are. I can understand some of the more paranoid hanging on until the OK is given by red hall but, other than that, I can't imagine what other pieces of information might be needed, or are likely to be forthcoming.

There's very little more info that the new owners are obliged to disclose.

And, in an ideal world, if the RFL gives the green light then supporters ought to be reassured by that, or as re-assured as they can be given the precarious state of RL finances generally. Unfortunately the average RL fan doesn't seem to have a huge amount of confidence in the RFL.

It really comes down to how keen the new owners are to shift season tickets. Whether they feel there is other information that they could voluntarily disclose that might make fans feel confident enough to put their hands in their pockets.

Perhaps not.
The date of the Annual Return is 27/9/2013. If shares were transferred subsequent to that date they will not show on it.

Except that the £1 million is not exactly a cut and dried creditor/debtor situation. And why would any company wanting to turn a profit in 12 months be a source of amusement? What company could be sensibly run and want to run at a loss? Again, I can understand your confusion given that that seems to be the way London have been run year on year with the expectation that the owner will bank roll the on and off field failures.

Yeah good point. Time will tell I guess.