| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 17:44 - Dec 23 with 2405 views | Whiterockin |
Thanks for a clear explanation of the current finances. It looks as if the new owners have kept their word and invested the £20M. It should give us a little breathing space in January to rejig the squad which is desperately needed. |  | |  |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 17:49 - Dec 23 with 2381 views | QJumpingJack |
Good luck to Coleman and the new investors. Hopefully things will improve quickly.
It feels the club has been decaying over the last 8-9 years. The lack of engagement with the fans, and the lack of investment (at key times when we were pushing for promotion) has set the club back big time.
It is a steep learning curve for the new owners..... and this is why they and Luke need support with someone who has experience of this league. |  | | |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 14:49 - Dec 24 with 1982 views | KeithHaynes |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 17:44 - Dec 23 by Whiterockin |
Thanks for a clear explanation of the current finances. It looks as if the new owners have kept their word and invested the £20M. It should give us a little breathing space in January to rejig the squad which is desperately needed. |
Had to reach to the upper echelons of football hierarchy. 👍 |  |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:03 - Dec 24 with 1949 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
The numbers sort of make sense
42,058,434 new shares at a price of 50p a share of a is £21,029,217.
There are 164,874,306 shares in the club at 50p valuing the club at £82m. This is clearly overvalued meaning the dilution has been generous to minor shareholders.
The 5% protection for the fans holding confirms they will never be of importance and reflects the "wimpy" nature of this organisation. They had it all but chose to look for protection not big money and clout. [Post edited 24 Dec 15:05]
|  |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:12 - Dec 24 with 1913 views | Whiterockin |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:03 - Dec 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The numbers sort of make sense
42,058,434 new shares at a price of 50p a share of a is £21,029,217.
There are 164,874,306 shares in the club at 50p valuing the club at £82m. This is clearly overvalued meaning the dilution has been generous to minor shareholders.
The 5% protection for the fans holding confirms they will never be of importance and reflects the "wimpy" nature of this organisation. They had it all but chose to look for protection not big money and clout. [Post edited 24 Dec 15:05]
|
It's the total share value not the value of the club. Shares are only worth what someone will pay for them. In reality just a paper valuation. | | | |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:12 - Dec 24 with 1916 views | KeithHaynes |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:03 - Dec 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The numbers sort of make sense
42,058,434 new shares at a price of 50p a share of a is £21,029,217.
There are 164,874,306 shares in the club at 50p valuing the club at £82m. This is clearly overvalued meaning the dilution has been generous to minor shareholders.
The 5% protection for the fans holding confirms they will never be of importance and reflects the "wimpy" nature of this organisation. They had it all but chose to look for protection not big money and clout. [Post edited 24 Dec 15:05]
|
I see the supporters trust essential to those who contribute to its membership as we do, and some of the work which is more credible than in recent times. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:44 - Dec 24 with 1857 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:12 - Dec 24 by Whiterockin |
It's the total share value not the value of the club. Shares are only worth what someone will pay for them. In reality just a paper valuation. |
Yes I agree but the valuation of a notional 50p is used presumably to determine % percentage holding of the club. What % holding arises from the £20m invested. This depends on the notional share price.
The higher the club share price the lower number of share to be purchased and the less the minor shareholders are diluted in terms of percentage holding. The Trust will not tell you this. I do (if I have interpreted the figures correctly)
The fans hate 'the Yank's but do not appreciate their kind actions. It is the same with Leigh Dineen and his support for the Women's team.
How much did Coleman and co buy the club for? Not a lot I suspect. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:46 - Dec 24 with 1857 views | QJumpingJack |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:44 - Dec 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Yes I agree but the valuation of a notional 50p is used presumably to determine % percentage holding of the club. What % holding arises from the £20m invested. This depends on the notional share price.
The higher the club share price the lower number of share to be purchased and the less the minor shareholders are diluted in terms of percentage holding. The Trust will not tell you this. I do (if I have interpreted the figures correctly)
The fans hate 'the Yank's but do not appreciate their kind actions. It is the same with Leigh Dineen and his support for the Women's team.
How much did Coleman and co buy the club for? Not a lot I suspect. |
why do you continue to use the Y word?
Maybe use asterixes if you are quoting it from another poster? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:51 - Dec 24 with 1829 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:46 - Dec 24 by QJumpingJack |
why do you continue to use the Y word?
Maybe use asterixes if you are quoting it from another poster? |
Yes I hope is now Andy and the team. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:52 - Dec 24 with 1830 views | QJumpingJack |
"hate" is the wrong term.
I think a lot of fans (+ the new ownership group) were fed up of the lack of engagement & investment after so much was promised in the Summer of 2016.
It would be so refreshing if new thoughts and analysis were posted instead of the same repetitive posts some of which are very untrue (WoL is not the only source in the world). | | | |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 17:21 - Dec 24 with 1737 views | SullutaCreturned |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:44 - Dec 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Yes I agree but the valuation of a notional 50p is used presumably to determine % percentage holding of the club. What % holding arises from the £20m invested. This depends on the notional share price.
The higher the club share price the lower number of share to be purchased and the less the minor shareholders are diluted in terms of percentage holding. The Trust will not tell you this. I do (if I have interpreted the figures correctly)
The fans hate 'the Yank's but do not appreciate their kind actions. It is the same with Leigh Dineen and his support for the Women's team.
How much did Coleman and co buy the club for? Not a lot I suspect. |
As far as I can see there is only one person who still iuses "yank" or "yanks" and that is you. Pretty much everybody else has moved on and is giving the new regime its fair chance.
The trust again, you always attack the trust even when there is no apparent justification.
On a previous thread you reckoned they'd paid a pittnace for it, I can't remember the number you guessed at though, possibly 3 million? It's all guesses though. You do love to tell us stuff but at least this time you have put a disclaimer in, just in case it is complete bs. | | | |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 21:16 - Dec 24 with 1627 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 17:21 - Dec 24 by SullutaCreturned |
As far as I can see there is only one person who still iuses "yank" or "yanks" and that is you. Pretty much everybody else has moved on and is giving the new regime its fair chance.
The trust again, you always attack the trust even when there is no apparent justification.
On a previous thread you reckoned they'd paid a pittnace for it, I can't remember the number you guessed at though, possibly 3 million? It's all guesses though. You do love to tell us stuff but at least this time you have put a disclaimer in, just in case it is complete bs. |
The Trust represent feature of South Wales mentality that is holding us back. Passive, timid and low risk. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 11:52 - Dec 25 with 1390 views | SullutaCreturned |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 21:16 - Dec 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The Trust represent feature of South Wales mentality that is holding us back. Passive, timid and low risk. |
How can the "South Wales mentality" be holding the Swans back when the Swans have, for the last 8 years, been owned by Americans?
If it's a "south Wales mentality" then why is it the fans made their displaeasure well known? What is passive, timid and low risk about haranguing the people who you usually stuck up for, still stick up for even after all the damage Levein and Kaplan did?
Not forgetting your slating of a brave move by the Ospreys to try and kick start their prospects, your slating could be seen as a passive, timid and low risk atitude by saying they should stay where they are? The Ospreys made a brave move, maybe you should be lauding it, not criticising it.
You do love to criticise your fellow South Walians, is it a superiority complex? Are you an egotist who believes you are right even when you are so onviously wrong? | | | |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 14:01 - Dec 25 with 1324 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 11:52 - Dec 25 by SullutaCreturned |
How can the "South Wales mentality" be holding the Swans back when the Swans have, for the last 8 years, been owned by Americans?
If it's a "south Wales mentality" then why is it the fans made their displaeasure well known? What is passive, timid and low risk about haranguing the people who you usually stuck up for, still stick up for even after all the damage Levein and Kaplan did?
Not forgetting your slating of a brave move by the Ospreys to try and kick start their prospects, your slating could be seen as a passive, timid and low risk atitude by saying they should stay where they are? The Ospreys made a brave move, maybe you should be lauding it, not criticising it.
You do love to criticise your fellow South Walians, is it a superiority complex? Are you an egotist who believes you are right even when you are so onviously wrong? |
South Wales was one of the poorest regions of the EU and was. getting EU backing. An Ineos factory was laid on by the Senedd to give jobs to soon to be redundent steel workers.
Welsh people voted out and many like you favour all decision taken by non Welsh people. People blame the Senedd for their own stupidity | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 14:07 - Dec 25 with 1312 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 21:16 - Dec 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The Trust represent feature of South Wales mentality that is holding us back. Passive, timid and low risk. |
Bit racist |  |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 14:45 - Dec 25 with 1276 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 14:07 - Dec 25 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
Bit racist |
Not at all. There is nothing at all holding Welsh people back only a reluctance for self determination.. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 18:08 - Dec 25 with 1159 views | SullutaCreturned |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 14:01 - Dec 25 by ReslovenSwan1 |
South Wales was one of the poorest regions of the EU and was. getting EU backing. An Ineos factory was laid on by the Senedd to give jobs to soon to be redundent steel workers.
Welsh people voted out and many like you favour all decision taken by non Welsh people. People blame the Senedd for their own stupidity |
Show me one post of mine where I have EVER said I favour all decisions taken by Westminster, they are not all non Welsh people either, we have our elected reps there.
I blame the Sened for their stupidity. The PFI money they have spent that will cost Wlaes hundreds of millions, the costs of the 20mph change that didn't need to be spent, the raising of numbers in the Senedd that will cost more millions and for what?
As critical as I have been of the Senedd, I have been fiercely croitical of Westminster too. This is the part you don't understand. We spend enough money on one collection of useless fools, why spend more money on more useless fools? The more politicians we have, the worse things get.
The more politicians we have the less money there is for the things we nreally do need. Teachers, medical staff, police, we need more. Infratsructure that is 50 years out of date and we have no money or the political will to upgrade it yet we have the money and political will for more snouts in the government trough.
I blame the Senedd for the things they get wrong and for over 25 years now I haven't been stupid enough to vote Labour or Tory.
What about you? | | | |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 01:23 - Dec 27 with 824 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 18:08 - Dec 25 by SullutaCreturned |
Show me one post of mine where I have EVER said I favour all decisions taken by Westminster, they are not all non Welsh people either, we have our elected reps there.
I blame the Sened for their stupidity. The PFI money they have spent that will cost Wlaes hundreds of millions, the costs of the 20mph change that didn't need to be spent, the raising of numbers in the Senedd that will cost more millions and for what?
As critical as I have been of the Senedd, I have been fiercely croitical of Westminster too. This is the part you don't understand. We spend enough money on one collection of useless fools, why spend more money on more useless fools? The more politicians we have, the worse things get.
The more politicians we have the less money there is for the things we nreally do need. Teachers, medical staff, police, we need more. Infratsructure that is 50 years out of date and we have no money or the political will to upgrade it yet we have the money and political will for more snouts in the government trough.
I blame the Senedd for the things they get wrong and for over 25 years now I haven't been stupid enough to vote Labour or Tory.
What about you? |
Its good that you do not support the abolition of the Senedd. Thank you for clarifying that.
PFi was a Tony Blair Government policy if i recall it correctly and not specific to Wales. People can elect who they want. If people want "useless fools " then that is what they will get.
The Scots took the decision to ditch the Labour party two decades ago and may be moving back towards them.
I favour more power for Government bodies not less. The 'cutting of red tape' has weakened govt bodies that appear unable to prevent the mass denigration of our environment especially rivers and near coastal seas. They seem toothless. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 01:36 - Dec 27 with 821 views | raynor94 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 14:01 - Dec 25 by ReslovenSwan1 |
South Wales was one of the poorest regions of the EU and was. getting EU backing. An Ineos factory was laid on by the Senedd to give jobs to soon to be redundent steel workers.
Welsh people voted out and many like you favour all decision taken by non Welsh people. People blame the Senedd for their own stupidity |
There's a big gap between Ineos pulling out and Tata announcing the closure of the blast Furnaces.
So don't try to give credit to the Sennedd which they don't deserve |  |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 06:14 - Dec 27 with 763 views | Whiterockin |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 14:01 - Dec 25 by ReslovenSwan1 |
South Wales was one of the poorest regions of the EU and was. getting EU backing. An Ineos factory was laid on by the Senedd to give jobs to soon to be redundent steel workers.
Welsh people voted out and many like you favour all decision taken by non Welsh people. People blame the Senedd for their own stupidity |
Why have you taken a thread off topic yet again. The thread was about the new finances logged by the Swans and nothing to do with your Welsh agenda. | | | |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:43 - Dec 27 with 561 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 01:36 - Dec 27 by raynor94 |
There's a big gap between Ineos pulling out and Tata announcing the closure of the blast Furnaces.
So don't try to give credit to the Sennedd which they don't deserve |
The Tata plans were well established well before workers finding the fate. The coal at Flos y fan was mined without planning permission and times to close when the Furness s did.
The WAG allowed the mine to close at exactly the same time. All planed. Ineos was good to go until Welsh folk voted away they future work. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:49 - Dec 27 with 538 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 06:14 - Dec 27 by Whiterockin |
Why have you taken a thread off topic yet again. The thread was about the new finances logged by the Swans and nothing to do with your Welsh agenda. |
The Trust are owners and failed to be involved in this investment because they did not wheel and deal..It is not in their make up. They are unable to fully fill their brief due to a fear of investing and dealing in their shares.
With the protected shares they never will. Deckchairs out. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:52 - Dec 27 with 520 views | Whiterockin |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:49 - Dec 27 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The Trust are owners and failed to be involved in this investment because they did not wheel and deal..It is not in their make up. They are unable to fully fill their brief due to a fear of investing and dealing in their shares.
With the protected shares they never will. Deckchairs out. |
How much did Morris invest in this investment round. | | | |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 18:35 - Dec 27 with 425 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 15:52 - Dec 27 by Whiterockin |
How much did Morris invest in this investment round. |
Nothing at all from what has been published. Only a small amount less than the Trust's total investment in 2002. | |
| |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 20:21 - Dec 27 with 333 views | SullutaCreturned |
| New finances logged by the Swans : But what are the implications ? on 01:23 - Dec 27 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Its good that you do not support the abolition of the Senedd. Thank you for clarifying that.
PFi was a Tony Blair Government policy if i recall it correctly and not specific to Wales. People can elect who they want. If people want "useless fools " then that is what they will get.
The Scots took the decision to ditch the Labour party two decades ago and may be moving back towards them.
I favour more power for Government bodies not less. The 'cutting of red tape' has weakened govt bodies that appear unable to prevent the mass denigration of our environment especially rivers and near coastal seas. They seem toothless. |
Your first line, where did I ever say that? Don't make things up.
The Senedd has used PFI of their own accord and recently so Blair isn'tto blame for Drakefords decisions.
The Scots ditched the SNP and have elected Labour, haven't they?
There is a massive difference between red tape and government ability. Any excessive paperwork should be cut, it makes life easier.
And with that we should put the thread back on topic. If you want to carry on this debate, start a new thread. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
