| Interesting Trust Email 20:09 - Jun 29 with 141818 views | Neath_Jack |
Regarding the options open to us.
It's going to cause some massive debate on here i reckon  | |
| |  |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:26 - Jun 29 with 2763 views | Uxbridge |
And I probably should have refreshed before seeing Phil say much the same  | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:32 - Jun 29 with 2742 views | Phil_S |
Both valid concerns and difficult to give you an answer that says you dont need to have them as concerns but I will answer them
1. They could just stop it but I think one thing everyone has learned is that you need supporters on side. And whilst being prepared to stand by their decisions nobody enjoyed some of the toxic atmospheres of last season (Man Utd and West Ham spring to mind) and completely bypassing the Trust and ignoring us will just fuel that. It is a good working relationship and we are all behind Stuart who is committed to making it work)
2. That threat will always be real but it is our decision as members whether we choose to keep par or accept dilution. They can only dilute through share issue which requires investment from them/others. Lets say as members we chose to invest to retain the 16% shareholding then they would have to invest more than £40m to dilute us. I cant see that happening. And let's say it did happen and we were diluted to 10% the tag conditions we have been offered would mean that we participate in an increased value of the club - so is 10% of £200m as an example better than a 15% (or even 21% at the moment) that doesn't need to be sold and therefore could have no real value. (I really hope my calculations are correct on this)
My belief is that the fighting fund we are creating goes more towards one of our aims of long term security of the football club than remaining in on the terms we currently have!
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:34 - Jun 29 with 2733 views | BillyChong |
The sellouts didn't seem to give much consideration to the 'massive damage' they could have caused the football club in the way they acted last year. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:38 - Jun 29 with 2710 views | nantywatcher |
I bet I'm not far wrong in guessing that the most negative commentators on this thread are the least likely to roll up their sleeves and actually sweat blood to get a better deal. I respect the people who have devoted so much of their personal time to negotiate a deal they think good enough to put forward to members. It's the real world and I go along with their recommendations. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:38 - Jun 29 with 2703 views | pencoedjack |
Sorry Jill I can't buy that I find it inconceivable that the trust could sit in the same room with people who fuked them over
As I said I'm no expert in the matter but if I was involved I would want all those who sold out removed ... At the end of the day if everything I read from the trust/Amercans is true ( not that I believe it if for a second) both were lied to by Jenkins & co.
They need to be removed [Post edited 29 Jun 2017 22:40]
| | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:48 - Jun 29 with 2643 views | max936 |
Surely the Trust can never work or have any dealing's with Jenkins again Phil and he's got to GO, in this instance time isn't a good healer. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:50 - Jun 29 with 2631 views | NeathJack |
The problem is that if the Americans are adamant that they want him to stay, there's not much that can be done. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:51 - Jun 29 with 2621 views | NOTRAC |
Jenkins will be watched like never before.It will come down to results on the pitch and the operating of the finances off it.
I believe that this is a superb result for the Trust.They can definitely justify their main aim of ensuring that sufficient funds are available in the future if ever a petty situation occurs again.
The American owners have offered an olive branch with plenty of fruit on it.
The Trust still retains at least 10per cent of the share capital.
This is a marvellous offer,and one which should see everyone working together for the benefit of the club.
The Trust are definitely to be congratulated | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:53 - Jun 29 with 2615 views | Phil_S |
Thank you - that is appreciated | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:55 - Jun 29 with 2605 views | max936 |
Well us fans will have to keep beating the drum for his removal, how I don't know there because, come game time the focus must be towards the support of the Team, yanks and Jenkins know this as well. it fuking stinks they he and is grubby mates are still there lapping it up, they've had their cake and now they're eating it. [Post edited 29 Jun 2017 22:58]
| |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:55 - Jun 29 with 2601 views | Swanzay |
Where is his end of season clear the air statement...
As previously highlighted in this thread....
We have a rare model where fans can directly be involved in the club management (albeit remotely throu the Trust reps). Isn't the aim to have as big an influence as possible, which can only be achieved through as large a shareholding as possible? These owners will soon go, but the Trust preserves the link between the fans and the club, so our kids and their kids still have a stake one day. Why would we want to dilute that link?
The Trust seem hell bent on reducing this influence, whilst suggesting to sell the shares to the very people that created this mess, as DAZ would say, feck my eyes! | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:55 - Jun 29 with 2597 views | Meraki |
Its basically, lets forget about everything that happened and carry on. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:01 - Jun 29 with 2576 views | max936 |
The Trust future side of things are on a better footing and the financial side is a comfort, but Jenkins and his gang have seemingly got away with the bigger Sting, it stinks. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:04 - Jun 29 with 2551 views | Meraki |
What pisses me off is the QC has said they have a case, but still don't want take court action. So what was the point of paying a QC £30,000? | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:06 - Jun 29 with 2543 views | NeathJack |
I suppose it could be argued that without doing so, this new offer would not be on the table. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:09 - Jun 29 with 2533 views | Swanzay |
Sorry but "£11" million is FA these days unless we go really tits up, no legal opportunity for redress. Plus selling to the very hunts who created this issue.
No wonder Brian Katzan is in town to take his share of this new opportunity. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:10 - Jun 29 with 2529 views | dameedna |
It is an offer
Massive congratz
Sincerely good effort | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:11 - Jun 29 with 2528 views | max936 |
I asked Phil if the Trust could now work with Jenkins, but he hasn't answered which is disappointing, the whole thing makes my blood boil to be honest, time to log off. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:14 - Jun 29 with 2508 views | pencoedjack |
Totally agree Max
Jenkins & co out is the starting point | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:53 - Jun 29 with 2458 views | londonlisa2001 |
There are many details that we don't have sight of, and many questions that I wôuld raise about aspects of the deal.
However, I think, having read the information we do have sight of, I would summarise it rather differently.
The Trust have been offered £5m (or whatever it, I don't think we've been told because we don't know the 'extra staying up' element) to:
- drop the threat of legal action
- shut up about Jenkins
The other relevant bit is the tag rights, which are already in place I believe for all other shareholders. So the Trust can get out if the Americans can which is the biggest positive of the deal. (Incidentally, on the drag fights, I assume there are protections about who the club is sold to).
The rest is all in favour of the Americans. They''ll only exercise their call option if it's a cheap way of getting the shares (by definition the Trust lose on this), and the extra 0.5% is pretty much the same as it only applies if we stay up.
There are two option - we go down, in which case the Trust have anything from £5m to £11m depending on timing - will that be enough? Who knows. Suspect not, but better than it has at present.
We stay up - we've sold out on the cheap. Although it doesn't much matter, as the Trust can't do anything with the money anyway.
Couple of asides - if in the successful for a bit then go down scenario happens, it could be that the Trust reinvest to maintain, say a 10% holding, the money all goes that way, and then we go down and the share is worth a lot less, the money has gone, and the Trust have 10% rather than the current 21%. Secondly, the is an impact on dividends of course that should be considered when looking at the figures. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 00:38 - Jun 30 with 2421 views | pikeypaul |
Slimy Knut Jenkins can not stay,his father must be turning in his grave.
If in the very unlikely case we lose a court case what difference would it make
since if we accept what the slimy knuts have done and are still prepared to work
with them the trust may aswell be dead anyway.Its 100% sure the sellout knuts and the Americans
will do similar in the future if we let them get away with screwing us over this time,a leopard does not change its spots.
It has to be legal action and all my household will be voting for it and we WILL win and they know it.
Time for the Trust to grow a set of balls. [Post edited 30 Jun 2017 0:40]
| |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 00:57 - Jun 30 with 2404 views | Loyal |
So where is the advice that Spew breached certain criminal law ? | |
| Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows.
The official inventor of the tit w@nk. | | Poll: | Who should be Swansea number 1 |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 01:31 - Jun 30 with 2385 views | Starsky |
So everyone who disagrees with your viewpoint aren't real fans then?
There we are then. | |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 06:04 - Jun 30 with 2322 views | Uxbridge |
Let's knock this fallacy to bed right here and now... Legal action is not guaranteed. Saying it is is an outright fallacy.
Also, legal action does not, in any way, shape or form, get rid of Huw Jenkins. Legal action will relate to the Trust’s shareholding, not who the majority shareholders choose to run the club.
If you think this is a poor deal then don't vote for it. I get that. But voting for legal action hoping to force something that would never be part of the legal process is wrong imo.
Legal action will go one of two ways. Trust win, and it sells its shares. Trust loses, it's financially much weaker. In neither scenario does it affect who runs the club although in neither case is the Trust going to be involved to the same degree it is now. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 06:05 - Jun 30 with 2321 views | Dr_Winston |
The Trust have been in a difficult position since they got f*cked over in the first place. There's not much you can do about a betrayal that large, even if certain individuals should have been on the look out for one rather than allowing themselves to become a pet. That's where the mistakes were made.
I'll give them credit for getting from where we were to here. A death or glory legal battle could be fought yeah, but what would be the outcome? Chances are Jenkins would still be sitting pretty at the end of it no matter what, as Uxy says above.
I get the desire for vengeance. In an ideal world the arrogant big nosed c*nt and that useless tosser Dineen would be out on their arses tomorrow, but it's not an ideal world.
This post has been edited by an administrator | |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
