Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 11:46 am  

thepimp007 wrote:

Shaw is a total and utter kn0b typical idiot halifax inferiority complex, moron

Indeed. One of the things that gets me through the current carnage is just how miserable they must be. If we do stop existing, I'll be at fax games in my red amber and black. I can cope with putting a few quid into their club for the good of rugby league if I get to remind them that they still fundamentally hate themselves.

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 11:47 am  

Bullmans Parade wrote:

God I must sound like a broken record but nobody is clarifying my point...

The criteria outlined yesterday were for a NEW rugby club to be admitted where they not? We are talking about an EXISTING club, so those criteria may very well not even apply to this scenario!

You're confusing club and company/owner. There is no way the legal entity i.e. BBHL will be bought and continue to trade. A new entity (Bradford Bulls Capital Ltd) will be the "owner". But that business can legally buy the whole, or any part of the old business from the administrator.

For internal purposes when the RFL talk about the club they effectively mean what used to be called the "franchise", it isn't a legal entity. But it was thus BBHL that ceased to be a member and it would be BBCL that would be applying to be admitted; on the basis that if admitted they play under the existing franchise, or club.

Think of it this way - if it was both a new owner AND a new club in RFL terms, that would be like saying they were passing on the Bulls franchise, but instead starting from scratch as Bradford Phoenix or whatever. The RFL see the value in keeping "the club" ie a Bulls franchise alive and that for I think obvious reasons suits the new potential owners too.

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:00 pm  

In The T & A it states that the bid that collapsed Monday night is this bidder that we are left with now.
Obviously Green and the Admin have opted to take less / shares as opposed to nothing which now makes it viable for them.

This deal if i'm right was already ok'd by the RFL which is probably why they are success in buying the domain, and setting up a new limited company.

If this is the case there is no underhandedness afoot they have just managed to come in with a new bid before the liquidation paperwork was filed.

As someone else said the players will sign upto it as they A) get paid B) are no worse of than what they agreed before.

I just hope that if we do have a new owner they have the best interests of the club at heart, want us to succeed and if they want Odsal develop it they do what's right by all involved.

I also hope they have money to do all this and Green is a very silent partner that never steps foot in the stadium again.

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:04 pm  

bowlingboy wrote:

In The T & A it states that the bid that collapsed Monday night is this bidder that we are left with now.
Obviously Green and the Admin have opted to take less / shares as opposed to nothing which now makes it viable for them.

This deal if i'm right was already ok'd by the RFL which is probably why they are success in buying the domain, and setting up a new limited company.

If this is the case there is no underhandedness afoot they have just managed to come in with a new bid before the liquidation paperwork was filed.

As someone else said the players will sign upto it as they A) get paid B) are no worse of than what they agreed before.

I just hope that if we do have a new owner they have the best interests of the club at heart, want us to succeed and if they want Odsal develop it they do what's right by all involved.

I also hope they have money to do all this and Green is a very silent partner that never steps foot in the stadium again.

Richardson is worth about £50m. Don't know about Thorne.

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:05 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

You're confusing club and company/owner. There is no way the legal entity i.e. BBHL will be bought and continue to trade. A new entity (Bradford Bulls Capital Ltd) will be the "owner". But that business can legally buy the whole, or any part of the old business from the administrator.

For internal purposes when the RFL talk about the club they effectively mean what used to be called the "franchise", it isn't a legal entity. But it was thus BBHL that ceased to be a member and it would be BBCL that would be applying to be admitted; on the basis that if admitted they play under the existing franchise, or club.

Think of it this way - if it was both a new owner AND a new club in RFL terms, that would be like saying they were passing on the Bulls franchise, but instead starting from scratch as Bradford Phoenix or whatever. The RFL see the value in keeping "the club" ie a Bulls franchise alive and that for I think obvious reasons suits the new potential owners too.

Thanks FA that's the kind of response I've been waiting for. I had a feeling i was misunderstanding things and was looking for someone knowledgeable enough to clear it up for me!

So just to clarify, is the "club" effectively just an alias for the holding company? Therefore when the RFL grants membership it is to that holding company who are simply "also known as" the club?

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:14 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

Define "influence". Like I said it depends on whether his shareholding is enough to have any influence. If not then no big deal. If yes then no deal.

This a defintion of "significant influence" which is used for accounting purposes.

Significant Influence

The existence of the ability to exercise significant influence is an important concept in relation to this standard. It is one of the two criteria stipulated in the definition of a related party, which when present would, for the purposes of this standard, make one party related to another. In other words, for the purposes of this standard, if one party is considered to have the ability to exercise significant influence over another, then the two parties are considered to be related.

The existence of the ability to exercise significant influence may be evidenced in one or more of the following ways :

By representation on the board of directors of the other entity;
By participation in the policy-making process of the other entity;
By having material intercompany transactions between two entities;
By interchange of managerial personnel between two entities; or
By dependence on another entity for technical information
Significant influence may be gained through agreement, by statute, or by means of share ownership. Under the provisions of IAS 24, similar to the presumption of significant influence under IAS 28, an entity is deemed to possess the ability to exercise significant influence if it directly or indirectly through subsidiaries holds 20% or more of the voting power of another entity (unless it can be clearly demonstrated that despite holding such voting power the investor does not have the ability to exercise significant influence over the investee).

Conversely, if an entity, directly or indirectly through subsidiaries, owns less than 20% of the voting power of another entity, it is presumed that the investor does not possess the ability to exercise significant influence (unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the investor does have such an ability despite holding less than 20% of the voting power).

Further, while explaining the concept of significant influence, IAS 28 also clarifies that “a substantial or majority ownership by another investor does not necessarily preclude an investor from having significant influence” (emphasis added).

[Bullseye]

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:17 pm  

V helpful ta.

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:27 pm  

You could take £50 million as enough money..
If they are both loaded it could be the shot in the arm needed.
About 4 or 5 class players to bring in now.

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:34 pm  

bowlingboy wrote:

You could take £50 million as enough money..
If they are both loaded it could be the shot in the arm needed.
About 4 or 5 class players to bring in now.

Sorry for going off topic bowlingboy do you know when the challenge cup game against kells will be being played?

Re: Players meeting with new owner today : Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:36 pm  

At this stage morals and integrity can go do one. If there's someone with a bit of brass willing to invest let them get on with it and let's get a team on the field to support. If it winds the hand-wringing cloth-cutters up then so be it.