It's a done deal. Bulls to forfeit 50% Sky money which is to be distributed equally between other SL Clubs.

It is outside of the RFL,s hands and upto SL.

Asking all SL clubs to rescind next year's distributions is like asking turkeys to vote for two christmases in a year

Why would any other SL club want to promote a move to loose their extra £50,000 Sky income?



If I was at a club that had, or expected soon to have, an unsustainable debt structure then I might be envious of the the way the Bulls were able to get rid of theirs in one stoke of a receiver's pen whilst still being able to remain in Super League.

Out of everything I had read about it, that was only for the current year. I also do not believe that it would even be possible to have agreed this for next year, as unless and until the RFL say different, we only have a probationary licence for this year. Do you have any link for any such decision?



I had doubts whether we could realistically sustain the operation on half-money and the loans etc have suggested times must be exceedingly tight, but can we really afford to do a second year on half money? I would be seriously worried.





I think we've done this rather spurious one to death, but the answer is, do what we did if you want to, and see what happens. We had no guarantees, in advance, and so anyone else going down a similar route could not receive nor expect any assurance, however as I think you know the reason we were able to remain in SL is exactly because SL and the other clubs need us - i.e. we were kept in out of self-interest by the RFL and the majority of the other clubs, albeit at a hefty price. Many other clubs do not carry the perceived value to the competition that, whether people like it or not, we do.



Other, lesser clubs may carry a "do not resuscitate" tag, but that is not our fault. ATEOTD if another club is placed in a similar position, then like in our case, it will be the other SL clubs that ultimately decide their fate.

FA

I am sure that the Sky restriction money was for two years and will look back for confirmation.

As you say the provisional licence given to the Bulls was for 2013. If this is confirmed as a full licence then it would be automatically extended for 2014.

I share your concerns about bearing this loss of income through 2014, but if, as I understand Omar was aware of this in his purchase of the club then plans for financing are or will be in place. Clearly it will be a difficult year.

Perhaps sponsorship and commercial opportunities have been included in his 2014 budgets



I agree that the brand of Bradford Bulls carried weight within any decisions made by the RFL, Super League and the ultimate bankers of our game - Sky Sports. Whilst the latter were never mentioned in negotiations it is inconceivable that they did not have influence on this major issue.



I still hold that the perception of other clubs with debt problems could be miffed.

Way I understand it is that the reduced sky money is tied into the fact we're on a provisional license. Various articles have said we're negotiating with RFL about next years money. I can't see why we would say that if the reduction was set in stone. I'm guessing we can either be upgraded to a full license next year and get full sky money OR remain on a provisional license until end of current licensing period at end of next season and also remain on half money. There really needs to be some clarity about situation from RFL so we know where we stand and also so other clubs in trouble know what there options are. Maybe a good question for Saturdays forum?, assuming a announcement re: license isn't the reason for the forum anyway.

We're on a provisional licence for one year. Why would we have to give up Sky money that we might not even be entitled to if we do not get a further year?

Whichever way you look at it if the RFL keep some of our Sky money next what are we going to do! leave Super league ..I think not, it i will however just go to show how the RFL can blackmail teams in SL, they should be concentrating on their own goals, like getting a paying Sponsor for SL

I'm pretty sure it was too. That we would be on reduced funding for two years was one of the contradictions with our 'one year' provisional licence.



Incidentally, with a full licensing round due at the end of it [ievery[/i club will be effectively on a 'provisional temporary' licence for the 2014 season.

The next licence renewal round is going to be interesting. Do they keep battering away at the "expansion" plan, do they give a chance to the likes of Fax, Featherstone or Leigh from the heartlands, do they take a much harder line on finances, do they cut the league to 12?

Probably only half the current SL clubs will be totally confident of maintaining their status

I think the game needs to either make licensing a lot clearer or go back to P&R of one up one down across the board. The game feels too divided IMO.

Can't get the image out of my head of Omar meeting the rfl like when Alan Partridge met Tony Hayers at the BBC...



Give us a second season ya !

The smart thing would be to build the heartland. Make it a strong focal point for the sport. If we're viewed as a regional sport then we should damn well be THE regional sport.



It's all very well pushing for expansion teams, but without a solid base, both in terms of finance and fans, they're going to struggle and, if history is any judge, fail. Not that I'm against the expansion of the game. I would love nothing more than for RL to take it's place among the elite sporting competitions in this country. However, the sad truth is we're down the pecking order below football, union and even cricket and seems like we're in danger of dropping lower.



If we're to go back to P&R then the Championship season needs to end mid-summer to allow the promoted team time to prepare and build for the following season.

SMELL MY CHEESE YOU MUVVA!!!!!!!!!