By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
CONFIDENTIAL This update is being sent to you as a registered member of Swansea City Supporters’ Society Limited, which is also known as the ‘Swansea City Supporters’ Trust’ (‘Trust’). If you are not a member of the Trust, please do not read it. If you are a member, please do not share it or pass it on to others. On the advice of our lawyers, we need to state that nothing in this update is, or is intended as, a waiver of legal professional privilege or any other type of privilege. In January 2018 the majority owners of Swansea City decided to ‘put on hold’ indefinitely the ongoing discussions on the previously proposed deal relating to the part sale of the Trust’s shareholding in Swansea City Football 2002 Limited, which (through another company) owns the Football Club. With no indication as to whether the deal could be resurrected in the future, the Trust engaged further specialist legal advice in order to determine the next steps that could be taken to best protect the interests of the Trust and, therefore, our members. It will be recalled that we have previously reported that initial advice from Queen’s Counsel (a senior lawyer) was taken last year. As a result, the Trust and our legal advisers have carried out a comprehensive review of the circumstances surrounding the 2016 sale of a controlling interest in the Club and the impact of these events on the Trust and our shareholding. This involved going back to 2001/2002, when the Club was saved from bankruptcy by the Trust and others, and establishing the relevant factual history and developments from then until the present day. Many people and sources had to be consulted to achieve this and the exercise has only been completed within the last few days. Our lawyers have today sent (by electronic means or post) to the Club and its shareholders a detailed letter, setting out a number of legal claims on the part of the Trust, including complaints as to the very negative impact the sale and related matters have had on the Trust’s position as a shareholder. The letter and its schedules extend to some 60 pages. On advice from our lawyers, and in accordance with Court guidelines, the Trust has offered to enter into a formal ‘mediation’ process with the majority owners and others, in order to seek to resolve these claims and complaints. The aim is to seek a provisional agreement to settle past differences, with a view to moving ahead together with the task of rebuilding the Club and returning it to top level football. Any such provisional agreement would be put to members for approval, by way of a consultation. Mediation is a voluntary and confidential process in which relevant parties seek to resolve disputes with the assistance of a trained independent and impartial mediator. The mediator cannot impose a solution, but uses his or her skills to bring the parties together. The letter that has been sent proposes that mediation takes place in early July, to allow time for responses to be provided to the letter. While it is a voluntary process, mediation is increasingly being seen by courts as a necessary first step before any formal court proceedings are taken and costs sanctions can be applied for unreasonably failing to mediate. The Trust is duty bound to explore all available legal avenues to protect the interests of the Trust and our members. If mediation were refused or the process proved unsuccessful, and if Trust members support such action, future court proceedings are possible. If a potential resolution is achieved via the mediation process, it will be set out in a binding, written settlement agreement. However, we can assure our members that any agreement will not be finalised unless it is approved by Trust members as part of a formal consultation exercise. Members should be aware, however, that if the offer of formal mediation is accepted, that it is a confidential process. This means that the Trust Board will be limited in what we are able to report during the mediation process, unless or until a provisional agreement is reached (or alternative options are identified) on which members can be consulted. We will update members as soon as we are able to provide further information.
This. Then who knows. Although it currently looks unlikely there may be an opportunity to buy some more shares in the future to take the holding to over 25%.
We're at the stage whereby the percentage of holding is meaningless. It's all about cash.And the trust need to get as much as they can out of these cvnts. They need to realise that they have one shot at this, and the ONLY shot they have is to take this to court. Anything else will be a total waste of time. Win or lose, the dice has to be rolled.
We're at the stage whereby the percentage of holding is meaningless. It's all about cash.And the trust need to get as much as they can out of these cvnts. They need to realise that they have one shot at this, and the ONLY shot they have is to take this to court. Anything else will be a total waste of time. Win or lose, the dice has to be rolled.
The problem is that the communication specifically says the "aim is. . moving ahead together with the task of rebuilding the Club and returning it to top level football"
Which clearly precludes legal action to force a sale.
So which is it?
We realistically have no idea, and the whole process has in effect been kicked into touch again for an indeterminate period of time.
Right?
Deliberately argumentative I feel.
‘……. like a moth to Itchy’s flame ……’
The way I read it is that we're hoping for a settlement of *% of what would have been the total sum IF it went to court. Unless them 60 pages hold significant reason for litigation and the Trust have enough funds to pursue it the * may equal anything. Rest assured that it will be very much less than 100 though. Our choice though. Apparently if any offer is made it's up to us.
Maximising investor returns not a bad goal however Jack to a King I still cant watch. As a pre sell story it is acceptable. However it is a film that my mates enjoy as they believe it. Possibly should have fought harder earlier as the horse has truly bolted now. However with the club worth less the supporters become more focussed on ownership and not the football. Where the Trust gets funds will be an achiles heel.
It looks quite clear that the Trust are preparing for their day in court and are doing everything right to ensure that the judge doesn't have any reason to be disappointed that the case got as far as him! They're rightly covering themselves well there and we could still see the case solved in mediation, no matter how unlikely that might be.
Going to court is a brave move against any American company or group as they usually have very aggressive strategies and tend to do their best to ensure the "opposition" run out of cash to fund their litigation, if that's possible.
It's a risky move as there's always the chance they'll fail, but it's what most of us have been asking for. Either way, the relationship isn't going to even pretend to be a happy one soon and it's going to surprise a few if/when the full truth comes out!
It looks quite clear that the Trust are preparing for their day in court and are doing everything right to ensure that the judge doesn't have any reason to be disappointed that the case got as far as him! They're rightly covering themselves well there and we could still see the case solved in mediation, no matter how unlikely that might be.
Going to court is a brave move against any American company or group as they usually have very aggressive strategies and tend to do their best to ensure the "opposition" run out of cash to fund their litigation, if that's possible.
It's a risky move as there's always the chance they'll fail, but it's what most of us have been asking for. Either way, the relationship isn't going to even pretend to be a happy one soon and it's going to surprise a few if/when the full truth comes out!
Im not sure there will be any surprises, but this has dragged its feet for too long, there are time limits as well.
Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows.
The official inventor of the tit w@nk.
Seems quite fitting this thread is descending into a bit of petty squabbling -- why not, i very much doubt anything else is going to happen for at least 3 months, that being the maximum period allowed for Kaplan to produce some kind of response. Where's Dim and the Saviour when you need them?
In the meantime the best way to safeguard against some kind of new stitch-up deal being agreed once mediation gets off the ground, is to get organised, put some Trust board candidates forward and vote off the existing lot deemed undesirable. In fact unless I am very much mistaken that is the only way. Go get 'em, kids.
Seems quite fitting this thread is descending into a bit of petty squabbling -- why not, i very much doubt anything else is going to happen for at least 3 months, that being the maximum period allowed for Kaplan to produce some kind of response. Where's Dim and the Saviour when you need them?
In the meantime the best way to safeguard against some kind of new stitch-up deal being agreed once mediation gets off the ground, is to get organised, put some Trust board candidates forward and vote off the existing lot deemed undesirable. In fact unless I am very much mistaken that is the only way. Go get 'em, kids.
Perhaps it's me just being cynical because of the 'standard(s)' of the people we're dealing with here?
But I hope this mediation attempt doesn't end up with the SCST negotiating an even worse deal than the last one?
Now that would be a complete and utter travesty bearing in mind the fact that the last one seemed an utterly unfair 'bend-over-backwards' farce with the sole aim to please the Yanks. And?.....let em get away with murder!
5m is still a considerable amount of money for a 21% share. Cash and retaining some shares would be ok. Maybe the commercial manager will have a task in the off season involving makig an offer simar or better than previous. I seem to recall the deal was reneged upon by the three amigos.
Not sure this situation will help us bring in manager of real quality nor players with all this going on . Relegation is one thing but uncertainly over ownership and possible legal action is another
Looks like Jenkins is actually staying in his job and the owners sitting tight saying fook all.
5m is still a considerable amount of money for a 21% share. Cash and retaining some shares would be ok. Maybe the commercial manager will have a task in the off season involving makig an offer simar or better than previous. I seem to recall the deal was reneged upon by the three amigos.
Fair play, you're a really funny guy! .....You are joking i presume, cos if you ain't. then you have no idea what's coming.
You realise you failed the fans? The Americans took over on your watch? Did you know about Cooze? What was the meeting in March 2016 with Steve and Jas about?
Perhaps it's me just being cynical because of the 'standard(s)' of the people we're dealing with here?
But I hope this mediation attempt doesn't end up with the SCST negotiating an even worse deal than the last one?
Now that would be a complete and utter travesty bearing in mind the fact that the last one seemed an utterly unfair 'bend-over-backwards' farce with the sole aim to please the Yanks. And?.....let em get away with murder!
I suspect that it will be exactly that. And us fans will be advised to condone it or maintain the status quo.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
