Season tickets

I just can't get my head round wanting them to invest while also being happy for them to take £750k out. The two are contradictory

 

But isn't the isse that the 750k was owed by the ownership group, rather than the club? Hence it being loaned by the club to the holding company and then being written off. Whether it was then agreed by the Crynes to pay that from club funds is another matter. I've not actually seen that directly asked of them.

 

Regardless of the legal aspect Paul Conway is on record saying they won't take a penny out of the club and all income would go back into the club. That has been proven to be false.

 

How can you argue that though? £750,000 was in the club and now because the 80% owners have used it to pay to the crynes then they have surely taken it out.

 

As a season ticket holder for over 20 years .
Which I gave up 3 years ago.
I find the matchday prices obscene.
The cost for me the Mrs and my son for the Bournemouth game was 72 pound.
Ask Mr Conway if he believes this is value for money.
Hence attending 4 games this season,including Huddersfield away where they dropped the prices.
When the season ticket holders lose faith like me ,suporter for coming up to 50 years ,fail to renew their season tickets and see the matchday prices the crowds will dwindle very quickly.
This is going to happen, all the good work building the fan base up over the last 10 years.
Fans like me will get out of the habit, sadly.

 

You're right he didn't take it out to pay himself but he did take it out to pay the crynes. It seems he's trying to play clever, he didn't take it out for himself he took it out to pay James and co. I totally get that and get why you're explaining it that way but the way I see it is if he wants to act all clever and more intelligent than anyone else then he should have stated that he wouldn't take it out except for a b and c. The fact he didn't means ANY transfer of funds from the club's bank account by the owners of the club goes against what he stated.

And that's before we even get into the record payments to directors while he was fecking the club up and pretending he knew how to run one day to day

 

If this is the case Gibson Booth’s audit of the 2019 accounts is incorrect at best or possibly negligent if these ‘facts’, which are widely known by people not even directors of the club, are correct.

 

I know we've discussed this privately, but I think this is worth stating as an explanation as to why this is still unsatifactory.

"No dispute" over the source of the payment isn't the same thing as it being a contractual debt of the Investment Company. It simply means that the Cryne's were content for the funds to come from the football club when the payment was made, which in turn opens up other questions that I find too depressing to contemplate.

The statutory accounts disclosures give 100% certainty that the £750k was a debt of the investment company unless, as @Archerfield has stated, you're suggesting that the auditors didn't do their job properly.

Regardless, the fact that we're still having these debates is exactly why a clear and unequivocal explanation needs to be provided by the club, ideally by Robert Zuk. Beyond the £750k there's the question of the £2.75m still owed, so this impacts the future as well as the past history, and the only interpretation that can be made based on your information is that this will also be paid by the football club should the legal case be concluded in the Crynes' favour.

I'm not the only person intent on maintaining the Not A Penny More stance due primarily to the £750k issue, so I can only interpret the ongoing silence as an indication that they simply don't care about retaining long-standing season ticket holders.

 

But why, then, did the transaction involve the club lending the money to the parent company and then the debt being written off? Explain this, and I might be a bit more willing to renew. If something smells like fish….

 

The Crynes could have refused it as not being a legitimate source for the payment It’s not as if they are hard up

 

They could but it was Paul Conway who stated the 80% mob wouldn't take any money out of the club not Jean cryne

 

I know you believe this to be true, but if it is, the accounts submitted to companies house are not legal. They're just not mate, and as much as you keep pedalling this, if it's right, our club are in a lot of trouble. I don't know why you don't address this.

 

To put this in perspective: You keep talking about this as though we've got mixed up. We really haven't Paul. This hasn't been taken from 'he said this and she said that'. It's taken from submitted accounts. To the government. If what you keep saying is true then you are talking about a fraud that has taken place. You really need to realise this.

 

I think people are using this payment to just beat the club with it.

With the situation the club was in at the time of the sale in late 2017 it was reasonable for this clause to be put in.

Paul Conway and James Cryne are very intelligent people.