The Cryne’s side

Just tell em no pay,will take it away,so if they have refused to pay this amount, surely a small fraction of money has actually been received by the cryne family since they sold 80% ,could they take back control ,,,

 

I’ve read both statements a few times and it all just seems a bit ‘toys out of the pram’ to me. I’m not taking sides or pointing fingers at this moment in time as both statements are (obviously) biased.

My interpretation (for what it’s worth) is as follows:

The Cryne’s are already pissed off (quite rightly) with the consortium because they renegotiated the overall price of the club and extended payment terms (which I’ll assume was due to relegation from the Championship) despite agreeing a purchase price when Patrick was still around. This could be seen as sly behaviour - Knowing the family probably had no interest, or not enough money to fund the club if the consortium walked away, they had little choice but to agree. It’s also very clever PR as it instantly makes most neutrals side with The Cryne’s.

Others have said that our accounts seem to suggest payments were made to The Cryne’s in 2019, or at least one payment was made as part of the renegotiated payment terms. Then, in January, the consortium approach The Cryne’s to purchase their half of Oakwell, but, this breaks down after a week - presumably due to the third party issue (?) and things become toxic between both parties. The consortium are pissed off with The Cryne’s for potentially withholding info about the sale of their share of Oakwell and presumably say they won’t make any further payments towards the purchase of the club until this is resolved (this is an assumption based on the info in the official statement). The Cryne’s say they’re happy to sell and only the consortium have ‘concerns’ with some part of the deal and that’s not their problem.

Fast forward a few months and The Cryne’s start legal proceedings against the consortium for the total amount they’re owed for the purchase of the club because the agreed payment terms have been broken. Claiming they’ve tried numerous times to resolve the issue. The club probably counter on the basis that info was missing/withheld around the purchase of Oakwell when the sale was agreed, possibly even suggesting the whole terms of the sale should be null and void.

The official statement doesn’t address the actual price paid for the club. We’re told 8 million was agreed in 2017. The Cryne’s say the value was renegotiated 15 months later and claim to be owed 2.75 million. Are we to assume the price was significantly reduced to 3.75 million?

The Cryne’s statement doesn’t fully address the ‘concerns’ the consortium have with the sale of their share of Oakwell. Probably because that isn’t their problem, but, is seemingly what’s caused this whole issue despite them claiming the legal action is for monies owed.

 

Yes, neither scenario looks good, someone is lying through their teeth and the tide is about to go out- who’s not wearing any trunks?

 

On a couple I know little about . But on most would you not have backed their stance. Pretty sure I would.
Hearts
Stendel
Hull
Wigan
EFl

 

Like I say some are warranted in my opinion but surely people can see that there is a pattern here of disputes with other entities, something we haven't seen before. Just my opinion and everyone is entitled to interpret it as they wish

 

It felt reassuring to me that these owners were prudent and didn't want to get the club into debt. I had the impression that they were running things sensibly and paying the bills as and when required. They had won me round and I thought we were in safe hands. This has been thrown into doubt now. It's concerning that they felt the need to renegotiate and reschedule their payment for the club in the first place. Repayments have then been withheld altogether, apparently due to the ground dispute. It makes you wonder how up to date we are with other things and what other nasty surprises there are.

 

The owners have been economical with the truth many times.

They stated that we had broken the club transfer record. We haven't
They stated that it was the most successful transfer window in the club's history. It wasn't, whether you use quality OR quantity as a method of calculating it.
They stated that they couldn't give any information about stendels sacking due to legal reasons. Legal reasons which apparently didn't stop Paul Conway giving a full explanation to the Scottish press and legal reasons which magically changed to 'out of respect' later down the line.
They took the plaudits for nice's new training facility despite the fact that it was already well under construction when they took over.
Paul Conway heavily implied that the owners had signed and developed Connor hourihane despite him having been a Barnsley player whole they were still begging any owner in England to let them buy their club.

So yes, one party has given us a lot of reasons not to trust what they say.

 

Are they though? Both parties statements broadly agree don't they?

 

Just a thought...if they are paying for the club in installments....would it be reasonable to suggest that some player sales may have been used to pay for said payments(thinking potts).
Im pretty sure that happened at Nice.

 

Not disputing your opinion Titus. I see it more as looking after themselves and the interests of the club. The Cryne issue is certainly a strange one. But after reading the chronicle interview with James Cryne. It appears they may be getting a taste of their own medicine so to speak. It does appear it could be settled amicably. Here’s hoping.
The Nice fans issue i’d have to refresh and look up.

 

Be weird. given the statement nothing has been taken out of the club. In fact put money into the club at this stage.
I’m under no illusion that they will be looking at profits in the future. But that’s a long way off. Unless we produce a George Best. ( I know. I’m an owd un)

 

Well they wouldnt be lying, they did state that all player sales would be reinvested in the club...with this they would be using the monies to purchase the club...just a question i thought worthy of discussion.

 

Good point.

 

You have to smile though. All the sabre rattling they have done and yet they are the ones being taken to court !

 

"I'll sue your ass off". You can imagine the words coming out of Conway's mouth. All bluff and bluster. Solicitors cost money and we don't seem to have a lot of it. Where's the lawsuit against Hull. We just seem to have let them get away with short changing us over Angus.

 

But not fact based. And not what was put forward. All monies coming into the club reinvested. Provide the evidence. Of not Then it may be worth discussion .

 

Surely to fook as a club we aren't as skint as people make out. People are going on like we have a budget like Southport or something. Luton are not having these discussions either

 

Another guess Seeming is not knowing. Where have you provided evidence. I neither have evidence. So will keep court until all the facts come out.

 

What’s up with folk. A lot of guesswork a lot of vitriol and a lot of ********. One thing I do know is. Until people have proof it’s like p1ssing in the wind.

 

the amount of people who claim to have read both statements and then make something totally new up is quite staggering really.