I think the question is, is that contract worth anything regardless?

If they go into admin/liquidation, does he not becoma a large preferential creditor after the tax man of course, or is there nothing left for him if they liquidate?

I'm sure this has some significance other than stating the obvious but it's too early in the morning to work it out.

Not when the club may not exist in 5 weeks let alone 5 years.

Remember that we wouldn't be buying him from the Bulls - we'd be buying him from the administrator. He won't be concerned about contract length, simply who is willing to offer the highest bid.

Might not always be on the pitch?

But they haven't been liquidated. He won't be anywhere near the top earners so if the current priority is to save money via wages then other players will be going first as a preference.

It's the admins job to minimise expenditure and maximise income to pay off debts in order to avoid liquidation.

The length of the contract is irrelevent as the players don't have a contract in 11 days time.

Let's say that Bradford owe £600k.

Bateman may be on £40/50k Whitehead a little more £50/60k.

I would think something like £250k for the 2 would be certainly acceptable as it will save the club approx. £300k on just 2 players. Getting rid of other high earners such as Elima, Sammut, Lulia and Kearney (plus the coaching staff already gone), they won't be far off the mark. The first club wo go in (probably us) will then kick off a 'free-for-all' IMO

Regarding Elima.

There would be possibly no transfer fee, as he is OOC in a few months.

Administrator would be keen to get his salary off the expenditure bill.ASAP.

Wonder if its him.??

When is D day for Bradford?

Could another factor be that we can pay the player from today?

If Wire came in for somebody, would they be able to pay them anything this season (their creative accounting aside)?

Just been thinking about that how many clubs are in the position to be able to make the deal straightaway. unless the RFL give special dispensation on both the salary cap and quota can't actually see many clubs been able to make signings now

if they release a player now, who is OOC at end of season- maybe.

Fulfilling fixtures is another source of revenue so losing the cheaper members of the squad (wages) is counter productive unless you get a suitable transfer fee for those players. If contract length has no bearing then presumably any player OOC at the end of this season should also be commanding a transfer fee?

Not sure if that is D Day for them though.

Can't see HKR been one of the clubs.

cant see that working they would have to pay the contract off in full anyway or why would the player leave therefore it wouldnt help their cap im sure i wouldnt same as hull cutting ellis surely he will have wanted most of the rest of his contracted wages or why would he go ocarrol is differant i get the feeling his widnes wage is higher so it suited both parties

If he was that worried about fulfilling fixtures he wouldn't have sacked all the staff.

The main reason why the Bulls are in admin at all is that they can't make money from fixtures.

We really should have a sticky salary cap thread.

The money we have paid Ellis is still available on a pro-rata basis to pay a new player coming in. If we were paying Ellis 5k a month then we still have 5k a month salary cap value left to pay the new player.

Or so I'm lead to believe.

Rovers will have room on the salary cap. Think the problem we have is having the money to pay them without getting ourselves deeper into debt.

The staff aren't needed to actually play the game. They asked potter to work for free so clearly the intention is to try and see this season through. The fact the bulls aren't living by there means doesn't mean that home games don't provide a decent source of income.

Wouldn't any severance package count on the cap?

I would imagine Ben Crooks would do the kicking (if on pitch) he is a very decent kicker, if i remember he did all the kicking for u20s last season, barring that we have Westerman and even Whiting.

On another point i think Whiting (when on pitch) should be used for our 'kicking for touch' he is by far our best, Horne and Seymour aren't that good, an extra 10, 20 metres per kick can make a big difference over the course of a game.

They obviously don't or the Administrators wouldn't be asking for the fans who ALL have season passes[size=55(due the the ridiculously cheap prices of passes offered at the start of the season)[/size to pay on the gate at weekend.

Apparently not. When a player leaves a club his previous payments no longer matter. All that matters is that you had the cap space to pay that player 5k a month so you can pay a new player coming in 5k a month from that point on.

As its a live cap it's all about the pro-rata salary cap value of each player. It's actually possible to break the salary cap without spending more than 1.6 million.

That seems a very bad way of doing things. as an example then,

Rovers could lose 5 players in the last year of deals to long term injuries pay them a severance package and then sign another 5 players on the same money to finish the season providing they sign before July 20th.

That can't be correct surely?

Based on the running costs it's not sustainable but why would the administrators not bother with that source of income? The point is if they get say 30k for a home why wouldn't they want that 30k?