| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. 04:05 - Feb 19 with 6586 views | NOTRAC |
The papers are making great ploy about the fact that the Liberty lease is possibly going to be transferred to SwanseaCity Football Club, as if the transfer is being made for the good of football in Swansea and for the people of Swansea.
Yet in reality the lease is being sold to a group of American investors, and the negotiating party on their behalf are probably the same people who conspired together to keep the Trust out of the sale of the Club itself.
The Trust should be involved fully in this sale/transfer.Legally they have no power, but this is not a normal transaction.This is a sale involving representatives of the City of Swansea, in other words ourselves.Surely if these representatives have the future good of football in Swansea at heart they should involve the Trust ,who represent that future more than the Americans or the sell outs, Jenkins, Morgan etc could ever do.
When we talk about a long term lease of say 50 years it doesn't sound so bad as an outright sale. But of course it is game changing for ever as far as we, the people are concerned, because where will most of us be in fifty years time.
The Trust are the people of Swansea as far as the football club is concerned.They should be the Contributors as well as the watchdogs as far as this transaction is concerned.
It is no good for the Trust to come back and say afterwards that they wished that this or that had happened in respect of the lease.They should be consultants and leaders .If that twenty two per cent is worth anything it should be brought into action now, and the Council told in no uncertain way, that the Trust wants to be part of these discussions and must be part of these discussions, for the future good of the foot ball club and for the future benefit of Swansea. |  |
| |  |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:51 - Feb 19 with 5601 views | monmouth |
A lease isn't sold though is it? It is transferring the lessee from the holding company to one of the current partners in the holding company. So the Swans take the responsibility and reward from generating the stadium revenue, the Ospreys pay rent, the council are bought (?) out and there's no more shit from Dineen about 'that's the management company' to explain his incompetence.
I'm as uneasy as anyone about the stadium in general but this sounds sensible. SCAFC was always the major income generator anyway. |  |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:56 - Feb 19 with 5590 views | Nookiejack |
Yes as of you have previously warned us - why does the club want to terminate current position where the club is paying a 'peppercorn' rent. To s smaller extent we have an advantageous position like West Ham at the Olympic Stadium, who are also paying a peppercorn rent.
Why take a mortgage out with associated fees and financing costs to buy the lease(I thought we were making a substantial loss and couldn't afford players) - when we are currently paying a 'peppercorn' rent.
We hear all this talk building of bridges between the Yanks and Trust. So Trust surely must be party to the discussion and should sign-off on this. | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:03 - Feb 19 with 5578 views | monmouth |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:56 - Feb 19 by Nookiejack |
Yes as of you have previously warned us - why does the club want to terminate current position where the club is paying a 'peppercorn' rent. To s smaller extent we have an advantageous position like West Ham at the Olympic Stadium, who are also paying a peppercorn rent.
Why take a mortgage out with associated fees and financing costs to buy the lease(I thought we were making a substantial loss and couldn't afford players) - when we are currently paying a 'peppercorn' rent.
We hear all this talk building of bridges between the Yanks and Trust. So Trust surely must be party to the discussion and should sign-off on this. |
We must believe we can generate more income and don't want to give two thirds of it away, otherwise there is no point. Yanks would be worse off otherwise, wouldn't they? They won't own the stadium will they?
I agree Trust should be involved whatever, but didn't they say that Perlman had presented his plans to them? | |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:12 - Feb 19 with 5555 views | barry_island |
People still refer to the club as "... We ..."?
It seems to me we are trying to build bridges to an iceberg that is drifting further away with each day.
Results have improved, the club BS hasn't. | |
| Swansea City, THE Austerity Club. |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:28 - Feb 19 with 5533 views | monmouth |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:12 - Feb 19 by barry_island |
People still refer to the club as "... We ..."?
It seems to me we are trying to build bridges to an iceberg that is drifting further away with each day.
Results have improved, the club BS hasn't. |
True. Tough habit to shake. It really is 'they' I suppose. I think I'll stick to 'we' though. | |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:44 - Feb 19 with 5497 views | Nookiejack |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:03 - Feb 19 by monmouth |
We must believe we can generate more income and don't want to give two thirds of it away, otherwise there is no point. Yanks would be worse off otherwise, wouldn't they? They won't own the stadium will they?
I agree Trust should be involved whatever, but didn't they say that Perlman had presented his plans to them? |
It does give you more comfort if Pearlman has presented his plans to the Trust and they have analysed the business case comparing:-
(i) increased costs of the lease (including arrangement fees any financing involved) over current peppercorn rent
verses
(ii) increased revenue (Club now keeps all income generated from stadium verses current case of only a third).
Trust is hopefully ensuring projections are all credible and is comfortable of increased risk in respect of a downward spiral scenario. As would be committed to a 50 year lease but presumably will not have the associated revenues. So hopefully will be analysing this 'stress test' scenario as well.
As Notrac has argued is there much difference between a 50 year lease and ownership?
Do we understand who will own the 50 year lease?
(i) Swansea City Association Football Club Ltd?
(ii) Swansea City 2002 Ltd (The holding company of Swansea City Association Football Club Ltd? or
(iii) Swansea Football LLC (The Yanks holding company) or a special vehicle owned by Swansea Football LLC? | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:49 - Feb 19 with 5479 views | Nookiejack |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:44 - Feb 19 by Nookiejack |
It does give you more comfort if Pearlman has presented his plans to the Trust and they have analysed the business case comparing:-
(i) increased costs of the lease (including arrangement fees any financing involved) over current peppercorn rent
verses
(ii) increased revenue (Club now keeps all income generated from stadium verses current case of only a third).
Trust is hopefully ensuring projections are all credible and is comfortable of increased risk in respect of a downward spiral scenario. As would be committed to a 50 year lease but presumably will not have the associated revenues. So hopefully will be analysing this 'stress test' scenario as well.
As Notrac has argued is there much difference between a 50 year lease and ownership?
Do we understand who will own the 50 year lease?
(i) Swansea City Association Football Club Ltd?
(ii) Swansea City 2002 Ltd (The holding company of Swansea City Association Football Club Ltd? or
(iii) Swansea Football LLC (The Yanks holding company) or a special vehicle owned by Swansea Football LLC? |
PS Why does this make sense to the council?
Presumably they will lose two thirds of the match day revenue - but then be able to increase cost of the lease?
If match day revenues were so great then why would they do this? | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:53 - Feb 19 with 5467 views | monmouth |
Yes, you would expect a proper business case, with all the 'what if's' covered, obviously. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 10:00 - Feb 19 with 5440 views | costalotta |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:56 - Feb 19 by Nookiejack |
Yes as of you have previously warned us - why does the club want to terminate current position where the club is paying a 'peppercorn' rent. To s smaller extent we have an advantageous position like West Ham at the Olympic Stadium, who are also paying a peppercorn rent.
Why take a mortgage out with associated fees and financing costs to buy the lease(I thought we were making a substantial loss and couldn't afford players) - when we are currently paying a 'peppercorn' rent.
We hear all this talk building of bridges between the Yanks and Trust. So Trust surely must be party to the discussion and should sign-off on this. |
There is money to do THIS deal. It was always there, think about it, poster on this board, fans/people on the radio in the stadium itself on match day have been asking for a few months where has the money gone. You now have the answer/confirmation of what you probably thought. |  | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 10:01 - Feb 19 with 5437 views | Nookiejack |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:53 - Feb 19 by monmouth |
Yes, you would expect a proper business case, with all the 'what if's' covered, obviously. |
It would be interesting to understand the quantum of additional income per season we expect to benefit by.
If it say £250,000 per season then why take the risk when 1 in every 4 seasons we have a chance of being relegated. We are not exactly safe the season - however you wouldn't expect this to be completed until we hopefully do become safe.
...and bearing in mind that Yanks and not the City of Swansea have control of the stadium for the next 50 years.
If it is £5m per season then risk/return trade off is in your favour. | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 10:14 - Feb 19 with 5410 views | Loyal |
The council stayed away from any liberty development when McClure and Hamer where getting their grubby hands even dirtier. It was only when they left and the other losers were ran out of town they acted.
Same scenario now. |  |
| 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 |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 11:30 - Feb 19 with 5339 views | Nookiejack |
Does anyone understand the legal position if Swansea Football LLC (the Yanks' vehicle) or a Special Purpose Vehicle owned by the Yanks enters into a 50 year lease with the council - but then charge Swansea City Association Football Club Ltd a premium on the lease.
I suppose that would be prejudicial to the Trust - but then again Swansea Football LLC would then own the lease - so what is to stop them sub letting it - at a profit? | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 13:16 - Feb 19 with 5266 views | Dewi1jack |
The council, who are paid for by the people of Swansea, and the elected few (also by the people of Swansea) need to ensure that the deal is in the best interests of the supporters of Swansea City.
Otherwise life can become difficult for them (with the help of the Cardiff based and national council bashing media outlets)
There are many forms of "mismanagement/ misconduct" charges that we can make against Public employees, costing them both their job and pension.
The elected can be voted out.
The council need to ensure that the Trust are a fully informed and active partner of any change of terms and conditions.
And to Barry Island,
I think it's going to take a long time for us to stop referring to the club as "we, ours, us" etc
If we ever do. |  |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 16:19 - Feb 19 with 5143 views | perchrockjack |
I'm struggling to see howxSwansea council ever helped the club
Plenty of times exactly the opposite
The city s biggest business utterly ignored
The biggest potential money spinning business in Swansea
Treated with contempt | |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 17:18 - Feb 19 with 5090 views | johnlangy |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:56 - Feb 19 by Nookiejack |
Yes as of you have previously warned us - why does the club want to terminate current position where the club is paying a 'peppercorn' rent. To s smaller extent we have an advantageous position like West Ham at the Olympic Stadium, who are also paying a peppercorn rent.
Why take a mortgage out with associated fees and financing costs to buy the lease(I thought we were making a substantial loss and couldn't afford players) - when we are currently paying a 'peppercorn' rent.
We hear all this talk building of bridges between the Yanks and Trust. So Trust surely must be party to the discussion and should sign-off on this. |
People often refer to the Club paying peppercorn rent. I don't know if we pay a rent as well but the original deal was that the Swans would pay 10/11/12% of matchday income which equates to about £1.2 million at the moment.
West Ham pay £2.5 million, I believe, but when you consider their stadium cost us (ALL UK taxpayers) about £800 million in construction and conversion then that really is peppercorn when you consider they can accommodate crowds of 50,000 + nowadays. | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 20:17 - Feb 19 with 4994 views | waynekerr55 |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:51 - Feb 19 by monmouth |
A lease isn't sold though is it? It is transferring the lessee from the holding company to one of the current partners in the holding company. So the Swans take the responsibility and reward from generating the stadium revenue, the Ospreys pay rent, the council are bought (?) out and there's no more shit from Dineen about 'that's the management company' to explain his incompetence.
I'm as uneasy as anyone about the stadium in general but this sounds sensible. SCAFC was always the major income generator anyway. |
Will Dineen even be in post next season? We have a seasoned pro in Pearlman with a background in sports marketing Vs, well, good 'ol Leigh. |  |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 20:18 - Feb 19 with 4992 views | Dr_Winston |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 16:19 - Feb 19 by perchrockjack |
I'm struggling to see howxSwansea council ever helped the club
Plenty of times exactly the opposite
The city s biggest business utterly ignored
The biggest potential money spinning business in Swansea
Treated with contempt |
They built them a stadium, without which we probably wouldn't be where we are now. |  |
| 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. |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 06:35 - Feb 20 with 4848 views | dobjack2 |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 11:30 - Feb 19 by Nookiejack |
Does anyone understand the legal position if Swansea Football LLC (the Yanks' vehicle) or a Special Purpose Vehicle owned by the Yanks enters into a 50 year lease with the council - but then charge Swansea City Association Football Club Ltd a premium on the lease.
I suppose that would be prejudicial to the Trust - but then again Swansea Football LLC would then own the lease - so what is to stop them sub letting it - at a profit? |
Surely it depends on the contents of the lease.
For example the lease could contain provisions stopping them sub-leasing Without the consent of the freeholder or provisions that the lease comes to an end in certain circumstances.
Presumably the majority shareholders would want as few of those type of clauses in as possible whilst one would hope that the council would want them in.
Negotiations, compromise or even who needs the deal the most. The Trust need to be careful that they are not being buttered up by the majority owners ahead of a sting as do the council.
Coventry and the Ricoh arena spring to mind although I don't know if that is a relevant analogy. | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:15 - Feb 20 with 4794 views | Clinton |
My only worry is the state of the stadium, it's not being maintained that well by the look of all the rust on the steelwork. Next time you walk round the outside of the stadium, look at the rust coming through on the struts, especially at the joints. |  |
| If you can fill the unforgiving minute.
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man, my son! |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:20 - Feb 20 with 4788 views | Nookiejack |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 17:18 - Feb 19 by johnlangy |
People often refer to the Club paying peppercorn rent. I don't know if we pay a rent as well but the original deal was that the Swans would pay 10/11/12% of matchday income which equates to about £1.2 million at the moment.
West Ham pay £2.5 million, I believe, but when you consider their stadium cost us (ALL UK taxpayers) about £800 million in construction and conversion then that really is peppercorn when you consider they can accommodate crowds of 50,000 + nowadays. |
West Ham look like they have got a fantastic deal which will make them very competitive for years to come. Worth an extra £5m to £10m player each year.
We also appear to have a great deal if only paying £1.2m a year as assume we also receive match day revenues as well. I would be very surprised if any PL club has a better deal (bar West Ham) and also taking stadium capacity into account.
So interesting what the projections are that forecast we will better this deal. I keep thinking why would the council be looking to renegotiate if this deal was a bad one for the club. | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:27 - Feb 20 with 4783 views | Nookiejack |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 06:35 - Feb 20 by dobjack2 |
Surely it depends on the contents of the lease.
For example the lease could contain provisions stopping them sub-leasing Without the consent of the freeholder or provisions that the lease comes to an end in certain circumstances.
Presumably the majority shareholders would want as few of those type of clauses in as possible whilst one would hope that the council would want them in.
Negotiations, compromise or even who needs the deal the most. The Trust need to be careful that they are not being buttered up by the majority owners ahead of a sting as do the council.
Coventry and the Ricoh arena spring to mind although I don't know if that is a relevant analogy. |
Yes really good post for me.
Trust are going to have to raise their game and be all over this.
Can't come out with all this nonsense of building bridges then in a year or more time come out with a statement that they were stitched up.
They also have a bit of leverage in that if legal action is launched - then interesting if council would do a deal with the Yanks. Maybe that is why Pearlman appears to be buttering the Trust up. | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:54 - Feb 20 with 4764 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:20 - Feb 20 by Nookiejack |
West Ham look like they have got a fantastic deal which will make them very competitive for years to come. Worth an extra £5m to £10m player each year.
We also appear to have a great deal if only paying £1.2m a year as assume we also receive match day revenues as well. I would be very surprised if any PL club has a better deal (bar West Ham) and also taking stadium capacity into account.
So interesting what the projections are that forecast we will better this deal. I keep thinking why would the council be looking to renegotiate if this deal was a bad one for the club. |
Stadco receive match day revenues (and all other revenues attached to the stadium) nookie, not the Swans. All costs come out of that, and 'profits' are shared (under different percentages at different crowd levels).
Reading the articles, it appears that what is being proposed is the club take over the revenues, and in compensation, pay an amount to both the Ospreys and the council each year.
There are covenants in place at present and I imagine these will remain in place.
As I said previously, this is similar to the arrangement in place at Man City. The Trust need to ensure that the leaseholder is the club to protect it, and the council could also insert provisions about the lease reverting back under a variety of circumstances.
The council will want to renegotiate to protect the revenues over the course of the lease, it gets the stadium away from their need to manage it, and it is quite possible that he club will also pay an amount up front to 'purchase' the lease. | | | |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 08:59 - Feb 20 with 4754 views | Watchman |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 16:19 - Feb 19 by perchrockjack |
I'm struggling to see howxSwansea council ever helped the club
Plenty of times exactly the opposite
The city s biggest business utterly ignored
The biggest potential money spinning business in Swansea
Treated with contempt |
They built the stadium R! And as it has turned out has paid for itself and brought more money and jobs and associated employment into the area than anyone ever envisaged, this is a good negotiating point as the Council cannot make money from any sale as monies initially raised and granted by an organisation would have to be repaid in full!
The old councils have saved the club in ways that will never be publically known
The contempt comes from old school egg supporting council members |  |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:22 - Feb 20 with 4726 views | perchrockjack |
H
How would you judge the councils when we were up shitcreek | |
| |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:26 - Feb 20 with 4723 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Sale of Liberty.The Trust should be involved now. on 09:22 - Feb 20 by perchrockjack |
H
How would you judge the councils when we were up shitcreek |
The council years ago bought back the Vetch and leased it back to the club to save the club Perch. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
