| Some of our owners on 21:14 - Dec 17 with 2966 views | Tummer_from_Texas |
One interesting name who is NOT on this long list of owners: Dan Katz - a/k/a Barstool Big Cat.
Katz was a guest on NBC's Men In Blazers last season claiming to be a part owner, and talks about it on Twitter all the time with his half million followers.
Dude is an obnoxious, embarrassing douchebag and it would be hilarious if he has been lying all this time about owning part of the Swans. |  |
|  |
| Some of our owners on 21:18 - Dec 17 with 2939 views | Flashberryjack |
| Some of our owners on 21:03 - Dec 17 by Outsider |
This is spot on - the Trust asleep (compromised) at the wheel - and Jenking/Dineed/Morgan et al cashing in. Not welcome in Swansea anymore. |
Were they asleep or did they look the other way for some reason ? |  |
| |
| Some of our owners on 21:27 - Dec 17 with 2902 views | Outsider |
| Some of our owners on 21:18 - Dec 17 by Flashberryjack |
Were they asleep or did they look the other way for some reason ? |
Good question ... in my opinion the answer ranges from incompetence to far worse. |  | | |
| Some of our owners on 21:35 - Dec 17 with 2863 views | QJumpingJack |
Kaling has 11.1m followers on Twitter.
I wonder what she thinks of our current league position? | | | |
| Some of our owners on 21:37 - Dec 17 with 2848 views | Oldjack |
| Some of our owners on 21:35 - Dec 17 by QJumpingJack |
Kaling has 11.1m followers on Twitter.
I wonder what she thinks of our current league position? |
Ask her |  |
| Prosser the Tosser dwells on Phil's bum hole like a rusty old hemorrhoid ,fact
You Greedy Bastards Get Out Of OUR Club!
|
| |
| Some of our owners on 21:40 - Dec 17 with 2826 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Some of our owners on 21:14 - Dec 17 by Tummer_from_Texas |
One interesting name who is NOT on this long list of owners: Dan Katz - a/k/a Barstool Big Cat.
Katz was a guest on NBC's Men In Blazers last season claiming to be a part owner, and talks about it on Twitter all the time with his half million followers.
Dude is an obnoxious, embarrassing douchebag and it would be hilarious if he has been lying all this time about owning part of the Swans. |
As I said, it's largely a list of fund managers, who probably front a whole list of people that have invested in their fund...
It's turtles all the way down. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Some of our owners on 21:41 - Dec 17 with 2820 views | pencoedjack |
My biggest surprise is that Swans fans are surprised that an American hedge fund are in it to make money .... Who is in the hedge fund is pretty irrelevant
Please tell me you are not that naive |  | | |
| Some of our owners on 21:43 - Dec 17 with 2808 views | Swanjaxs |
| Some of our owners on 21:41 - Dec 17 by pencoedjack |
My biggest surprise is that Swans fans are surprised that an American hedge fund are in it to make money .... Who is in the hedge fund is pretty irrelevant
Please tell me you are not that naive |
Load of rubbish! You'll be telling us Farther Christmas isn't real next! 🙃 |  |
| |
| Some of our owners on 21:43 - Dec 17 with 2808 views | 3swan |
| Some of our owners on 21:41 - Dec 17 by pencoedjack |
My biggest surprise is that Swans fans are surprised that an American hedge fund are in it to make money .... Who is in the hedge fund is pretty irrelevant
Please tell me you are not that naive |
No not naive but what info are they being fed from the majority owners?
Any info may or may not be usable.
Let's not dismiss any bit of info | | | |
| Some of our owners on 21:44 - Dec 17 with 2808 views | Jackfath |
| Some of our owners on 21:41 - Dec 17 by pencoedjack |
My biggest surprise is that Swans fans are surprised that an American hedge fund are in it to make money .... Who is in the hedge fund is pretty irrelevant
Please tell me you are not that naive |
Correct fella. |  |
| |
| Some of our owners on 21:46 - Dec 17 with 2790 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Some of our owners on 20:54 - Dec 17 by MoscowJack |
From your experience, would you expect them to throw money at trying to keep us up (to protect their asset) or write it off a a bad investment and walk away?
I know that the sums involved will mean different things to different funds (ie larger funds will care less than the smaller ones) but I do wonder whether these fund managers and mini-stars could raise enough to save us this season. |
I'd be surprised if they don't see it as a punt - if it works, great, if not, get as much back as possible and try something else.
The way most of these work, is that they invest in a range of high risk investments, and only need a few to come off before they make enough overall. Tax losses on the others protect the profits on the ones that make a stack.
To be honest, I'd find it hard to imagine a more depressing scenario than this sort of investor profile. | | | |
| Some of our owners on 21:50 - Dec 17 with 2757 views | QJumpingJack |
Lisa - were the Trust aware of this set up/number of investors behind Steve and Jason? | | | |
| Some of our owners on 22:00 - Dec 17 with 2715 views | Garyjack |
| Some of our owners on 21:50 - Dec 17 by QJumpingJack |
Lisa - were the Trust aware of this set up/number of investors behind Steve and Jason? |
Of course they bloody weren't! Neither did the sell outs, but of course they didnt care either way! .........Obviously!
 |  | | |
| Some of our owners on 22:00 - Dec 17 with 2708 views | PawelAbbott |
What is interesting here is that these people hold a share of the club and that they are interested in making a profit from the club.
If we get relegated they won't see much return on their investment.
The trust still hold 21% of the club.
If the trust was to approach these guys directly and offer them a different approach to running it they could take the controlling share from Levein and co.
Propose to them that it is run how it used to be. Bring in quality, cheap players from Spain etc. No more expensive, poorly thought through flops. Get rid of Jenkins and bring in someone with contacts on the continent and a good scouting system.
They now have all the names to contact.
They want to make money, which is fine if money means success. The current plan is failing.
The trust have a large enough share to still do this. | | | |
| Some of our owners on 22:02 - Dec 17 with 2697 views | PozuelosSideys |
| Some of our owners on 21:46 - Dec 17 by londonlisa2001 |
I'd be surprised if they don't see it as a punt - if it works, great, if not, get as much back as possible and try something else.
The way most of these work, is that they invest in a range of high risk investments, and only need a few to come off before they make enough overall. Tax losses on the others protect the profits on the ones that make a stack.
To be honest, I'd find it hard to imagine a more depressing scenario than this sort of investor profile. |
I can.
Think of us being relegated and then all of our saleable assets released. Then imagine the club is sold back to Jenkins et al at a knock down price. The "boys" have made their money and they have the club back as well. The cake is there and its been eaten. |  |
| "Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper." | | Poll: | Hattricks |
| |
| Some of our owners on 22:07 - Dec 17 with 2668 views | Garyjack |
| Some of our owners on 22:00 - Dec 17 by PawelAbbott |
What is interesting here is that these people hold a share of the club and that they are interested in making a profit from the club.
If we get relegated they won't see much return on their investment.
The trust still hold 21% of the club.
If the trust was to approach these guys directly and offer them a different approach to running it they could take the controlling share from Levein and co.
Propose to them that it is run how it used to be. Bring in quality, cheap players from Spain etc. No more expensive, poorly thought through flops. Get rid of Jenkins and bring in someone with contacts on the continent and a good scouting system.
They now have all the names to contact.
They want to make money, which is fine if money means success. The current plan is failing.
The trust have a large enough share to still do this. |
You're not getting any of this are you? | | | |
| Some of our owners on 22:17 - Dec 17 with 2608 views | pencoedjack |
| Some of our owners on 22:07 - Dec 17 by Garyjack |
You're not getting any of this are you? |
He’s off with the fairies in la la Land Gary
Fuk me are people really so naive | | | |
| Some of our owners on 22:20 - Dec 17 with 2585 views | Garyjack |
| Some of our owners on 22:17 - Dec 17 by pencoedjack |
He’s off with the fairies in la la Land Gary
Fuk me are people really so naive |
 | | | |
| Some of our owners on 22:23 - Dec 17 with 2565 views | PawelAbbott |
| Some of our owners on 22:07 - Dec 17 by Garyjack |
You're not getting any of this are you? |
Quite possibly not.
The trust holds 21.1%.
The consortium holds 68% split over 25 sub share holders.
The consortium is held together by Levein and Kaplan.
However, a consortium member does not have to remain in support of its key shareholers and can use their shareholding to back a different controlling stake in the club if they feel that is a better management of their investment.
Current management of the club is looking like losing their entire investment, possibly they would seek a better leadership of the investment than Levein and Kaplan are currently displaying.
The idea that they are or can asset strip has been discussed at length on here previously and the result is always that it is not legally possible as they can't take the money from the club except via dividends or sale of shares.
Relegation means almost entire loss of investment.
I probably am missing something though | | | |
| Some of our owners on 22:23 - Dec 17 with 2565 views | Yossarian |
| Some of our owners on 19:02 - Dec 17 by londonlisa2001 |
So as I suspected and stated on here many times, the 'two' are just a front for a large group of people that fancied a plaything.
Not exactly the ownership structure that would lend itself to a sustained period of progression and investment.
Jenkins, Dineen, Morgan et al, should hang their heads in collective shame. Rather than sell a few percent to the Trust, or at the very least sell to people that may have a genuine interest in development of the club, they've ended up selling the club to a bunch of disintrested speculators. |
Spot on Lisa. Mark 8:36.
Merry Xmas and a combative 2018. |  |
| "Yossarian- the very sight of the name made him shudder.There were so many esses in it. It just had to be subversive" (Catch 22) |
| |
| Some of our owners on 22:35 - Dec 17 with 2511 views | Darran |
| Some of our owners on 19:02 - Dec 17 by londonlisa2001 |
So as I suspected and stated on here many times, the 'two' are just a front for a large group of people that fancied a plaything.
Not exactly the ownership structure that would lend itself to a sustained period of progression and investment.
Jenkins, Dineen, Morgan et al, should hang their heads in collective shame. Rather than sell a few percent to the Trust, or at the very least sell to people that may have a genuine interest in development of the club, they've ended up selling the club to a bunch of disintrested speculators. |
I’m not being a clever twát here Lis but how could they have sold a few percent to the Trust if the Trust didn’t have the money to buy? |  |
| |
| Some of our owners on 22:39 - Dec 17 with 2483 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Some of our owners on 22:35 - Dec 17 by Darran |
I’m not being a clever twát here Lis but how could they have sold a few percent to the Trust if the Trust didn’t have the money to buy? |
Wouldn't have been the first time shares were sold undervalue (Nurse), or people were given plenty of time to find the money...
You can sell your shares for what you want Darran. They'd have made less of course. Possibly a lot less. But they could have also held on and worked with the Trust to find someone that valued being different and working with fans. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
