I agree entirely.I'd wager that even if the entire shareholding agreed to sell their's zero chance they could agree a valuation. This is why I've argued that adminstration is the only means by which the shareholding situation can be resolved.

Maislebugs, in what for me is a very well-reasoned post, alludes to an excellent and extremely important point here IMO. I'd refrained from saying it myself in the hope that the club would do so, but now its been said anyway.

I do not think anyone making the pledge is doing so expecting it to improve the position of the shareholders (most shares are not held by directors) in a subsequent sale. If the club is now insolvent, their shares should be worthless. And that is how it should remain in any future sale, unless those who pledged and paid are first reimbursed.

Maybe if the board issued a call for new people to step forward it would be answered?

I can imagine there are people who don't want to be seen to be pushing themselves forward and causing division at this difficult time, but who might answer the call.

That's why I would suggest it would be better for them to announce an intention to resign at a certain date and call for new people to come forward.

If no-one comes forward then the board would have to stay in place, but it would have a degree of legimitacy conferred on it by the failure of anyone to come up with a better solution after they did the right thing and offered to step aside.

Whilst I agree with the scentiment I can't see how that could happen. My understanding would be that a business which recieved 500k onto its books is worth 500k more than it was yesterday. By next friday the supporters of Bradford Bulls could well have made Mr Caisley approx 125k better off than he was on thursday night. I'm not comfortable with that.

Thanks again. I appreciate the time you have taken to make that clear.

My pleasure.

Whilst I know little about private companies I'd guess that Bradford Bulls shares market value would be broadly unchanged at 3/5ths of sod all. What's the value? You can't sell them, and you get no dividend. Or to put another way, if you could sell them, how would the whip-round affect the price you could get? Am I wrong? Do the shares have an appreciable value? If so, what?

And if they do have a value(or maybe even if they don't) then why not raise cash by issuing new shares and inviting supporters or anyone to buy them? I'm sure very many would prefer to do that than just throw a hundred quid away, even if the benefit of owning a share might be purely notional.

Precisely. Which is why I have implored the club to say considerably more on the issues that are being raised.

As far as I can tell, the situation remains that if the club does NOT get this cash, its administration and all the risks that that entails. Which is why I cannot see a better alternative in the time frame. But that does not mean we should not expect some clarifications and undertakings regarding what happens afterwards, in return?

In all of this, I have always assumed that - even after the cash injection - the club shares would still have only nominal value. The club will never make enough money to pay dividends, and the net assets on a going concern basis would disappear on a realisation basis, so I cannot see anyone placing any material value on the shares. But should shares subsequently change hands for material value, then what you say would very much have come to pass.

Its a private company, so they could not invite the public to subscribe for shares without converting to a plc and issuing a prospectus. The first would take ages, and the second would be fraught with difficulties, if possible at all - and again would take ages.

You then have the issue of the existing holders, and the valuation of their shares and how to address the dilution in their voting rights (not that any of that is worth Jack Shìt the day the Court stamps the petition for Administration)

Time ain't on our side.

I would personally very very much prefer to receive shares for whatever sum I ultimately commit to. I would personally like to see a supporter-owned club if it was at all possible - then it really WOULD be "The People's Team". But its a non-starter in the time-frame. And anyway, it would prevent the acquisition by a sugar daddy (or a load of Daddylets) that we really need eventually to compete at the highest level.

I'll take that as meaning you can't then.

Sell a couple of young and up and coming players every year to make ends meet?

From what I understand we have enough money from gate receipts etc to pay all the bills, but the income doesn't pay off the debt so when we clear the debt the clubs income pays all the expenses.

I have just had a text from a friend of mine this afternoon and he has said that he saw Garry Hetherington at The Holiday Inn in Brighouse and that he met with Craig Kopczak and John Bateman,i hope that this is not true
He is not the kind of friend that would rub my nose in it what with it being April Fools day,as he is an arm chair Bulls fan too

0/10. Poor effort.

John Bateman will not be going anywhere, unless it is to save the club.

Income from gate receipts? When most people who attend have already paid, i cant see the away support generating enough to cover our wage roll

It would seem that Bulls are currently worth roughly minus £1m and would be worth roughly minus £500k post pledge. I didnt think Caisley actually owned shares, just controlled Jack Bates' shares, but even if he did the £125k improvement would be from minus £250k to minus £125k!

Live on West Yorkshire Sport daily from 6pm tonight Bradford Bulls RL chairman Peter Hood. Listen in on BBC Leeds 92.4FM.

Could anyone clarify what the position of the RFL would be if we end up in Administration?

How much, roughly, would they be owed as a creditor?

And, to what extent could they use their position to maximise their negotiating position? For example, could they insist that any successor company would not be admitted into any RFL competitions without re-paying any debts owing to the RFL by the existing company?

We have been given to understand the advance from last year has been repaid.

No idea if they owe us or if we owe them at this point in the year.

Rent is usually paid in advance, but who knows.

Our entitlement to Sky monies and other central funding would doubtless be voided in the event of insolvency.

There may well be a reversionary clause in the lease, same was as there was in the lease with the council - if not tenant paying rent for minimum of x years, repay £x amount on sliding scale - sort of thing.

The lease will doubtless be voidable in the event of insolvency, anf the RFL could enter into a new lease with the phoenix company on whatever terms they agreed.

The RFL could insist on any terms it chose, regarding a phoenix company repaying monies owed by the failed copmpany. Whether it could persuade the phoenix to pay up would be a matter between the parties, and would reflect their respective bargaining positions.

My suspicion is that a phoenix company would be in a strong initial position, since the RFL and Sky would be very very keen to have Phoenix stand seamlessly in place of Failed, with the mimimum disruption. But only if we had a prepack, and Phoenix was all set up waiting in the wings and ready to rock. The longer the intrerregnum went on, the more the club's pklayers and other assets would be likley to dissipate IMO, and the less likelihood IMO of Phoenix taking to the air.

Peter Hood has just said on Radio Leeds that the immediate creditors are the bank and HRMC, no mention of the RFL.

Doesnt sound like there's any immediate prospect of a white knight.

It still seems very vague as to what makes up the difference between the £500k and the £1m. Not clear whether its ongoing losses or whether there are other specific big bills in the pipeline.

It still doesnt give me any confidence that, if the pledge raises the £500k, we will not be in the same situation in 6 months, and all of that money raised by the fans will be wasted.

Still mulling over my pledge/not pledge decision.

If you have a new board or person taking over from admin they will have to pass a fit and proper business test. When glover did this the RFL took a Some time over this and this is when the cultures came in.

If you have a new board or person taking over from admin they will have to pass a fit and proper business test. When glover did this the RFL took a Some time over this and this is when the cultures came in.

Sorry vultures I hate iPhone text

Supercat...exactly!!!!!

That is why I keep saying that unless there is a prepack in place already (and that would presumably mean the RFL had already issued the necessary confidential assurances), the longer the interregnum the greater the damage - and the greater the mountain for the phoenix to climb.