I'm reading it as they've stopped paying the Crynes some agreed monies, because they won't play ball over the ground.
I'm not happy with that statement at all. It makes zero sense. Surely, if there was an explicit agreement between the Crynes and the new "investors" it would have happened. They certainly said there was a clause of 6 or 12 months. January 2020 is certainly out of the scope of that time. And if there was a contract and the Crynes are blocking it, would the claim not be from Conway et al AGAINST the Crynes? So why are the Crynes suing the clubs investment vehicle? Have they withheld one of the payments (the next one I'm assuming would have been outside of the accounting period just filed) and thats the reason for the action? The statement does what they always do when it relates to our owners. Try to cover the arses of Conway & Lee and paint everyone else as the bad guy. Whoever that may be.
What a strange feeling this is. I'm both concerned for the future of our club but happy someone(assuming it's the council or a wealthy supporter) are making moves to protect the stadium and land from any potential asset stripping. I'm so confused! Only other worry is if the Cryne's had a contingency plan to flog the ground to a property developer to recoup what they spent if things went titts up. As for the £2.5m, only thing I could imagine it is, is the balance of what is owed for the 80% of the shares as the owners have withheld it until things are sorted. Why doesn't anything ever go smoothly for us?
This is me with the whole damn thing !! I'm not even going to pretend I know what is going on .... but I do love little kittens, they're so soft and furry.
I think that last bit means they will continue to aggressively enforce/uphold the club's claims to XYZ.
That's precisely what I'm taking from it too. At least possible true motives are starting to seep through.
The statement is welcome, but doesn't read well. I'm no wiser as to who owns what, and who owes what. To who. This part particularly doesn't read well. Are they really trying to state the club is suing the club?? The Club will vigorously defend the claims, and its legitimate interests in respect of the Option and intend to aggressively prosecute the Club’s own claims by whatever means necessary and in the strongest possible terms
I can see that. It would be like Millmoor being the tip it is to this day or how the owners of the Rioch played tough so Coventry City don't play there anymore. The Cryne family and Barnsley Council will be in a mess if "the club" decide to build a brand new stadium somewhere else with a supporters bar and hotel complex where people can eat/drink 7 days a week and stay in a hotel and we might get some gigs there in the summer months. What then? Cryne/Council are left owning a stadium with nobody playing there and town centre businesses won't be happy with the council as they will lose matchday trade.
I suspect they'll keep their council and pursue their claim accordingly. I'm very surprised the owners have put out any form of statement. Its truly bizarre. Its a dispute between owners, settle it accordingly. Don't try and curry favour with fans through convoluted stories and opacity, as with the Stendel sacking.
The club is going to defend the £2.75m claim from the Crynes and pursue its own claims for the ground.
As I've said above I think it means to uphold/enforce/defend their claims to something they feel entitled to, not sue themselves
Hello troll. Nice to have you trolling again. Don't think I've ever seen you post unless its a slight dig at someone or liking a comment to me. What a non entity you truly are. Bizarre little man.
I don't think they've had any choice to be fair. It has leaked on here and some of our fans have approached journalists via twitter. It is a mess and I honestly have no idea who is in the wrong here.
Gotta be honest and say if as a businessman with no affiliation I had a choice between spending say £15 million to buy and upgrade a stadium or move to a purpose built for £25million, I would pick the latter as you’d get the return back quicker. Obviously made figures up before anyone says owt.
It's not that the Crynes won't play ball, it's that it appears that the Crynes misled Chien etc into thinking that they had first dibs and have been paid £750k even though they knew another party did have first dibs.