Oakwell Holdings Limited v BFC Investment Company Limited

As others have said, this could simply be something and nothing.

Although, is this THE devastating news we’ve been waiting for?

Can only presume that an instalment has been missed, or, a clause has been activated that has not been satisfied. May prove to be nothing

 

This is correct, the High Court has District Registries in various places outside London.

Some are suggesting this is misinformation. It’s not. Various business intelligence providers monitor claims issued and then provide an information feed to fee paying subscribers. That’s the source of the information. I use one of these feeds in a different context and came across this.

If you went along to Manchester District Registry it would be possible to verify that the claim has been issued using the action number I have quoted.

 

It will be interesting to see who is in the Directors' Box for the first home game.

 

Oakwell Holdings Ltd is the original Cryne company that owned the club from the start. It’s not a new vehicle - it’s current remit is to hold the 20% shares the Cryne family has in the club.

It is not related to Oakwell Stadium or it’s assets as this company has no control over it. It’s an ‘issue’ between the minority shareholder and the majority shareholder. The exact issue is unknown.

 

Thats the most obvious situation isn't it? But surely.... billionaires can afford £1m a year? Surely..... unless.....

 

I don’t know if they’re billionaires or not. I suspect probably not. (And for the record, they’ve never claimed to be)

But even billionaires have their money tied up in stocks and shares. Being a billionaire doesn’t mean you have a billion quid sitting in an account.

 

When do we get to start blaming Wigan?

 

It was obvious the way the takeover happened that they'd want the Cryne's out at some point and also at some point the Cryne's would want their money. At the end of the day the current set up doesn't allow the club to move forward. It's a nice fail safe with the ground etc but it holds us back. I wouldn't be surprised to see the back of the Council and the Cryne's.

 

They absolutely are not billionaires. They were very happy to allow the information to be peddled in the media. Typically, the media will be given an information pack with bullets and key info to use as source material for when they then report post presser. So how did the billionaire info get into the public realm?

And of course a person of such wealth doesn't have immediate liquidity. However, they just made a killing on Nice. They know such payments are due annually, probably on anniversary of the acquisition. So allegedly wealthy individuals who are alleged to be good at business would surely have the funds and the organisation to pay a contractually agreed amount on time, wouldn't they?

Its also a timely reminder with the solvency of football clubs and threats of their existence, that just because the football club is technically solvent, it doesn't mean our owners have the best interests of the club at heart either.

I am very worried though. Little good comes of directors of a company taking fellow directors to court.

 

Just had a random thought.

Would the current issues in Hong Kong have any impact on BFC Investment Company being able to perform transactions? That could be the cause of all this.

 

The curious thing for me has been the lack of movement on the share of Oakwell from the Crynes. One of the few things they did confirm was that there was a clause to allow them to acquire that share within a period of time. I don't know if that was mandatory, but what we do know is that the ground ownership hasn't changed, and we're well past the 6mths or 12mths that were stipulated (can't recall the exact timing).

I won't go any further of what I think may have happened until more is confirmed, but it doesn't take much connecting of dots to come to a fairly logical position of what may have occurred.

 

See my post above. I wonder if the Hong Kong issues have made transactions from that company more difficult or impossible. As you say, not good. But I'll wait for more info.

 

Yeah, they must have backed us to get relegated, and were surprised as anyone to find out we escaped by Wigan's 12 point deduction. They lost billions and are now taking the minority company to court to repay losses accrued.

It's all Wigan's fault, ffs

 

If that were the case, why would you take out proceedings? Hong Kong is still trading internationally and is still connected well with UK businesses. Surely if there were blocks on international fund transfers, that would have made headline UK news as plenty of UK businesses that have been acquired have investment holdings in HK.

 

The proceedings could well have been triggered automatically by the lawyer that controls Oakwell Holdings.

I don’t know. The situation over there is not exactly stable. I’m not saying it’s the reason, but it’s a possibility. Remember that China introduced that law a couple of years ago massively taxing international football investment.

 

Yes, only council involvement in that company.

This action though is Oakwell Holdings Company vs. BFC Investment Company.

So Jean and James Cryne, with Robert Zuk, vs. Chien, Conway, Beane et al.

Not a good look really; hopefully it’s something and nothing but it doesn’t fill me with confidence.

 

My mistake but I won't be subscribing to a fee paying service to verify what the op suggested or traipsing over to Manchester to see what's been filed there and I suspect I won't be the only one. Unfortunately by not posting a link it creates an information vacuum and feeds the rumour mill and what we require is unity on and off the field and this doesn't help foster that.

 

It will have morphed into something entirely different by the time it hits Latics Speyk. They can twist anything to fit their agenda.

 

Not paying rent?

 

I wonder if this might be the beginnings of a move from Oakwell ?