The Option To Buy Oakwell - Summary

From what has been said, it all makes sense to me - although we still need to hear Cryne’s side obviously.

In summary, it appears the Club have been told they don’t have first dibs on Cryne’s 50% of Oakwell. This was either missed by all parties, covered up by the seller, or ignored by the buyer during the negotiating period a few years ago.

Presume for now, that BMBC have first dibs. Any other party having first dibs would be strange..... It’s normal for the other shareholder of a joint partnership to be offered the other half first.

The Investment company have refused to make any further payments until this is resolved, hence the legal action from Crynes to try to get it.

We just need to hear Cryne’s side of it now.

It’s all about the paperwork of the contract now. Either one side or both sides have cocked up or ignored it until now. You’d hope there wasn’t intention involved from either side.

IMO the Council have no right to exercise any further rights without making the announcement themselves. They are supposedly open to public scrutiny, and this would have been a costly exercise.

Time will tell.

 

Surely this could be worked out without court action though?

 

Yes it will. That seems a fair assessment. Thanks.

 

I wonder if this is why Nudgers Bridge hasn't been built? The Council knows it won't have a football traffic problem in Tarn Centre for much longer

 

The Club say they tried, but it has been dismissed. That’s their side anyway.

 

A good summary. you and sherrif have offered up the most reasoned analysis so far.

I guess/hope this episode will now throw some light on what's going on behind the scenes.

 

surely this could have been worked out without another thread!

 

In simple terms it's like getting a half price discount for Sophie Dee on adultwork and then when you get there you cant use the condoms.

Don't google that kids.

 

I should imagine this weeks Chronicle is going to be an interesting read.
Or it should be - as James Cryne has the chance to put his side of the story.

 

Doubt it. He doesnt seem the type to air his dirty washing in public.

 

I wonder if the recent tie up with AX Soccer means that young James is out on his ear

 

Fooking smarter than some people give them credit for.

 

Is that correct though?

We do not know if it is The Club that has tried to take up the option, or BFC Investments. The statement confusingly uses the two entities interchangeably. Maybe the intention is to muddy the waters.

The legal action seems to be between Oakwell Holdings and BFC Investments. It is perfectly possible that option applies specifically to the football club.

 

I just though I’d try and simplify it more. It’s not the easiest of statements to read, but I understood it so thought it might help others.

I’ve also tried to sit on the fence a bit - as there’s always 2 sides to a story.

 

The legal action, is against the Investment company, not the club as you say. And that’s not about ‘options’, but a lack of payment. Which is likely linked to the ‘options’ issue.

Guessing it’ll all unfold as part of the case.

 

BFC Investments is the Club,

 

I’ve been controversial enough on here in the last six months so my only offering on the subject is this - no good ever comes of separating the football club from the stadium asset. It ends in tears every single time.

 

possibly. Cryne younger basically identifies all our players. Last few transfer windows he’s not done a great job, wasting quite a bit of money in the process. Now clear change of strategy in moving away from spreadsheet for certain players, AX soccer tie in, Murphy been brought in because of his experience in recruiting. Maybe owners just want rid of him

 

Let’s be honest cryne knows absolutely f all about football and players.

 

Murphy called James Cryne a genius in a recent interview