| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. 13:48 - Apr 4 with 6697 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
I recall Easter 2010 under Paulo Sousa playing Trundle and Shefki Kuqi beating Barnsley 3-1 and the play off dream was on. It seems to me Swansea are in the exact same position (albeit in a better league position) as the club were when Paulo Sousa was in charge with tight purse strings
Reading between the lines the club did not like Sousa because of his unreasonable financial demands, (perhaps), and the rather turgid football style. Sousa took the club to the fringes of the playoffs with a relatively weak squad. He gave debuts to Keri Morgan and Jaz Richards as the acadmey was not as good as today's.
Cooper may be percieved in a similar way. This is based on the assumption that Cooper will not be able to raise the performance levels of his troops and will fail (based on current performances) to muster a credible promotion drive.
Sousa walked for whatever reason and the club got a compensation fee from Liecester. I presume the club declined Sousa's request for a bumper new deal based on his achievements. The club if is falls away this season will probably decline Coopers "bumper new deal".
My solution for this is to retrace what went right in 2010 and have a zoom call with Huw Jenkins's consultancy (in confidence ) to find and appoint the new manager. Brendan was a failed manager at Reading at the time. I would keep this confidential so as to not upset the activists and rabble rousers and fan forum cyber magnets.
[Post edited 4 Apr 2021 14:05]
|  |
| |  |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 14:23 - Apr 9 with 931 views | Chief |
So to answer my own question (which i believe you are aware of but don't want to answer): i think the trust may potentially have contacted the sellouts to ask about acquiring more shares to get to 25%, but it the sale was too far gone for that to happen&the sellouts wouldn't want to compromise their position with the Americans and compromise the veil of secrecy that they'd maintained along with Americans throughout negotiations.
To answer my second question, no the sellers obviously did consult the trust and offer them shares prior to the sale.
Therefore the shareholders agreement wasn't adhered to by the sellers. Agree Resolven? |  |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 15:05 - Apr 9 with 915 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 14:23 - Apr 9 by Chief |
So to answer my own question (which i believe you are aware of but don't want to answer): i think the trust may potentially have contacted the sellouts to ask about acquiring more shares to get to 25%, but it the sale was too far gone for that to happen&the sellouts wouldn't want to compromise their position with the Americans and compromise the veil of secrecy that they'd maintained along with Americans throughout negotiations.
To answer my second question, no the sellers obviously did consult the trust and offer them shares prior to the sale.
Therefore the shareholders agreement wasn't adhered to by the sellers. Agree Resolven? |
I think you might be struggling. I have argued the Trust should not go to court and should back the club in returning to the Premier league and look for an agreed sale ot a willing buyer where the rewards would be 3x what is achievable in court if the club returns to the PL.
There is a 20-25% chance of that happening by the summer and a very reasonable chance in the next 10 seasons. Cardiff city with their hoofball have done it twice in the last 10 years with McKay and Warnock. | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 15:32 - Apr 9 with 906 views | Chief |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 15:05 - Apr 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I think you might be struggling. I have argued the Trust should not go to court and should back the club in returning to the Premier league and look for an agreed sale ot a willing buyer where the rewards would be 3x what is achievable in court if the club returns to the PL.
There is a 20-25% chance of that happening by the summer and a very reasonable chance in the next 10 seasons. Cardiff city with their hoofball have done it twice in the last 10 years with McKay and Warnock. |
Why won't you answer my question then?
That reply perfectly encapsulates exactly what i said in my last but one post. Divert divert divert. [Post edited 9 Apr 2021 16:34]
| |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 17:20 - Apr 9 with 889 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 15:32 - Apr 9 by Chief |
Why won't you answer my question then?
That reply perfectly encapsulates exactly what i said in my last but one post. Divert divert divert. [Post edited 9 Apr 2021 16:34]
|
I am fed up answering your questions. After I do my best from the limited knowledge I have, you usually call it a rant or propoganda or some other harsh words. Its the way you work. Discredit the poster and at all cost have the last word. | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 17:53 - Apr 9 with 886 views | Chief |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 17:20 - Apr 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I am fed up answering your questions. After I do my best from the limited knowledge I have, you usually call it a rant or propoganda or some other harsh words. Its the way you work. Discredit the poster and at all cost have the last word. |
Haha don't get ratty now because your ridiculously unbalanced, biased slant on anything associated with the trust has been truly exposed.
And due to your traits as listed above I'm only too happy to discredit you.
So are you actually going to answer my question or just pretend i didn't ask anything!? | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 22:11 - Apr 9 with 874 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 17:53 - Apr 9 by Chief |
Haha don't get ratty now because your ridiculously unbalanced, biased slant on anything associated with the trust has been truly exposed.
And due to your traits as listed above I'm only too happy to discredit you.
So are you actually going to answer my question or just pretend i didn't ask anything!? |
Your questions when answered are followed up with sneering contempt and more questions. I saw your little spat with someone the other day about Giggs I think. Its was never ending cycle of ignorance and niggle.
I have given my opinion that the Trust will lose the legal case and it is better for the members to put their faith and money into their footballing team rather than their legal team. Members at least understand the mechanisms principles and risks on the pitch. The odds of winning are in my opinion a lot better on the field over the long term than in the courts. The time taken to build a case adds fuel to that conviction. | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 22:33 - Apr 9 with 870 views | Chief |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 22:11 - Apr 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Your questions when answered are followed up with sneering contempt and more questions. I saw your little spat with someone the other day about Giggs I think. Its was never ending cycle of ignorance and niggle.
I have given my opinion that the Trust will lose the legal case and it is better for the members to put their faith and money into their footballing team rather than their legal team. Members at least understand the mechanisms principles and risks on the pitch. The odds of winning are in my opinion a lot better on the field over the long term than in the courts. The time taken to build a case adds fuel to that conviction. |
Haha I think you need to look at the other individual involved in that discussion. Extremely perverse viewpoint. I seem remember even you agreeing with me on it.
What you are basing your opinion that they'll lose the case on then? By your diversionary tactics i sense now its been spelt out to you, you know there is no use disputing the sellouts conduct surrounding the shareholders agreement. Probably just too stubborn to admit it.
Then of course there's a QC saying that the trust has a strong case.... [Post edited 9 Apr 2021 22:42]
| |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 12:58 - Apr 10 with 838 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 22:33 - Apr 9 by Chief |
Haha I think you need to look at the other individual involved in that discussion. Extremely perverse viewpoint. I seem remember even you agreeing with me on it.
What you are basing your opinion that they'll lose the case on then? By your diversionary tactics i sense now its been spelt out to you, you know there is no use disputing the sellouts conduct surrounding the shareholders agreement. Probably just too stubborn to admit it.
Then of course there's a QC saying that the trust has a strong case.... [Post edited 9 Apr 2021 22:42]
|
I am now focussing on your impolite arguing style. Politely asking questions then accusing me of ranting and obsessiveness. You do on occasion come up with some good points but suffer from the forum afflicion of targeting traits of the poster rather than attending to the actual argument. Your warning band is designed to enorouge others less bright people not to engage in debate. I was routinely called a liar after all my posts on another lesser forum that was not commirteed to free speach.
This suggests to me you are struggling with the concepts. Your get out of jail card is the QC who aparently said they had a good case. This would be based on the information at hand. He also said it was a 'last resort'. Last resoert to me is 'eating the family pet' and should be avoided if there are other alternatives. There clearly are other alternatives. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 13:29 - Apr 10 with 835 views | Chief |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 12:58 - Apr 10 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I am now focussing on your impolite arguing style. Politely asking questions then accusing me of ranting and obsessiveness. You do on occasion come up with some good points but suffer from the forum afflicion of targeting traits of the poster rather than attending to the actual argument. Your warning band is designed to enorouge others less bright people not to engage in debate. I was routinely called a liar after all my posts on another lesser forum that was not commirteed to free speach.
This suggests to me you are struggling with the concepts. Your get out of jail card is the QC who aparently said they had a good case. This would be based on the information at hand. He also said it was a 'last resort'. Last resoert to me is 'eating the family pet' and should be avoided if there are other alternatives. There clearly are other alternatives. |
You should probably look to getting a better handle on your convulsions Resolven. You've resorted to typing this regurgitated nonsense while the team is actually playing live on TV!
1st paragraph - says the someone who literally will not debate a point which invalidates his viewpoint and refuses to engage, but goes to the defence mechanism of personally attacking the poster's style instead of the content.
I'm not surprised that you'd lean towards that opinion. But considering the circumstances its purely standard, sound advice from a professional who knows the business well. The trust have followed this advice. All other alternatives to remedy this specific disagreement have been exhausted. If the reality of the situation was your interpretation of the QCs words they wouldn't have said anything about a strong case.
There is of course still time, but as of yet the Americans haven't backed up their words with actions. [Post edited 10 Apr 2021 13:42]
| |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 14:51 - Apr 10 with 825 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 13:29 - Apr 10 by Chief |
You should probably look to getting a better handle on your convulsions Resolven. You've resorted to typing this regurgitated nonsense while the team is actually playing live on TV!
1st paragraph - says the someone who literally will not debate a point which invalidates his viewpoint and refuses to engage, but goes to the defence mechanism of personally attacking the poster's style instead of the content.
I'm not surprised that you'd lean towards that opinion. But considering the circumstances its purely standard, sound advice from a professional who knows the business well. The trust have followed this advice. All other alternatives to remedy this specific disagreement have been exhausted. If the reality of the situation was your interpretation of the QCs words they wouldn't have said anything about a strong case.
There is of course still time, but as of yet the Americans haven't backed up their words with actions. [Post edited 10 Apr 2021 13:42]
|
'Last resort' and they do not even show up for mediation. Who speaks for the Ownership group is none of their business when all said and done.
You want me to debate on the merits of a shareholders agreement that I have never seen and have to take your word for, as to its contents. Bizarre.
You will then nonce about saying "Look he does not my answer questions". Another Trust showboater. | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 15:55 - Apr 10 with 810 views | Chief |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 15:51 - Apr 10 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I have no vendetta against the Trust as such and I am hopeful their will leave the failed ways of the past and cut all links with the failed past management which has done such harm to the club.
The Trust have no right to select the ownship groups representatives in meidation. |
What harm exactly!?
Its exactly their right as the instigator of mediation. [Post edited 10 Apr 2021 15:57]
| |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 16:53 - Apr 10 with 801 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 15:55 - Apr 10 by Chief |
What harm exactly!?
Its exactly their right as the instigator of mediation. [Post edited 10 Apr 2021 15:57]
|
Another day another question.
Whats next "why will you not answer my simple queston?". | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 17:41 - Apr 10 with 794 views | Chief |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 16:53 - Apr 10 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Another day another question.
Whats next "why will you not answer my simple queston?". |
When you make random unsubstantiated points, expect to be prompted for clarification.... | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 18:43 - Apr 10 with 786 views | jack_lord |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 15:51 - Apr 10 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I have no vendetta against the Trust as such and I am hopeful their will leave the failed ways of the past and cut all links with the failed past management which has done such harm to the club.
The Trust have no right to select the ownship groups representatives in meidation. |
Harm to the club?
The Swans were in the Premier when the club were sold. The club was sold to venture capitalists. The club are now scraping by. Even you could not blame that on the trust Mr Resloven?
Do you want to blame the financial errors on the trust too? |  |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 19:06 - Apr 10 with 782 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 18:43 - Apr 10 by jack_lord |
Harm to the club?
The Swans were in the Premier when the club were sold. The club was sold to venture capitalists. The club are now scraping by. Even you could not blame that on the trust Mr Resloven?
Do you want to blame the financial errors on the trust too? |
The club was not sold to Venture capitalists. It was sold to established long term respected Sports investors just as Huw Jenkins stated.
It is true that the club has dropped from a top 20 club to a top 30 club but these things happen. It is professional sport. The Swansea methodology has been copied by others with ex Swansea managers in charge of Belgium, Poland, Brighton and Liecester.
I blame the Trust for turning on the other club owners once the performances on the field declined and relegation. The treatment of the ex Chairman is beyond my comprehension. Even his final act of rejecting the Jmaes transfer was honourable and to the benefit of he club.
Compare Swansea and Stoke. Swansea own £10m in the convertible loan note. Stoke owe £180m to their owners. Swansea are well above them in the league. After this season all players will be on Championship money with fans returning. What you call 'scrapping by'. This will see players ike Benda, Brandon Cooper, Garrick, Ollie Cooper, Cullen come to the fore. I am looking forard to it. | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 19:22 - Apr 10 with 779 views | jack_lord |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 19:06 - Apr 10 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The club was not sold to Venture capitalists. It was sold to established long term respected Sports investors just as Huw Jenkins stated.
It is true that the club has dropped from a top 20 club to a top 30 club but these things happen. It is professional sport. The Swansea methodology has been copied by others with ex Swansea managers in charge of Belgium, Poland, Brighton and Liecester.
I blame the Trust for turning on the other club owners once the performances on the field declined and relegation. The treatment of the ex Chairman is beyond my comprehension. Even his final act of rejecting the Jmaes transfer was honourable and to the benefit of he club.
Compare Swansea and Stoke. Swansea own £10m in the convertible loan note. Stoke owe £180m to their owners. Swansea are well above them in the league. After this season all players will be on Championship money with fans returning. What you call 'scrapping by'. This will see players ike Benda, Brandon Cooper, Garrick, Ollie Cooper, Cullen come to the fore. I am looking forard to it. |
I'm sure everyone of those players has a glittering career ahead in the Premier league.
Venture capitalists
They have dropped from a top 20 club because they were relegated. We were relegated because of decisions made within the club and not by the trust. I think it is laughable that you think that Sousa is part of the Swansea methodology. It remains to be seen whether Potter is a success but Martinez is a gem, there is no argument there. Part of the resurrection of the club when the trust were more involved. | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 19:34 - Apr 10 with 776 views | Chief |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 19:06 - Apr 10 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The club was not sold to Venture capitalists. It was sold to established long term respected Sports investors just as Huw Jenkins stated.
It is true that the club has dropped from a top 20 club to a top 30 club but these things happen. It is professional sport. The Swansea methodology has been copied by others with ex Swansea managers in charge of Belgium, Poland, Brighton and Liecester.
I blame the Trust for turning on the other club owners once the performances on the field declined and relegation. The treatment of the ex Chairman is beyond my comprehension. Even his final act of rejecting the Jmaes transfer was honourable and to the benefit of he club.
Compare Swansea and Stoke. Swansea own £10m in the convertible loan note. Stoke owe £180m to their owners. Swansea are well above them in the league. After this season all players will be on Championship money with fans returning. What you call 'scrapping by'. This will see players ike Benda, Brandon Cooper, Garrick, Ollie Cooper, Cullen come to the fore. I am looking forard to it. |
"I blame the Trust for turning on the other club owners once the performances on the field declined and relegation"
Haha yea it was the trust who made Huw spend money on ridiculous signings like Clucas. I thought you said relegation was 'one of those things'. Funny when it suits you you pin that on the trust too. A shocking lack of awareness of what ultimately instigated this whole issue on behalf.
I note you are deliberately choosing to ignore the time the trust agreed to actively halt negotiations and dialogue surrounding the sale until after one of our seasons in the Prem had finished.
You can blame your American buddies for sacking your beloved Huw. They didn't take kindly to him defying them. [Post edited 10 Apr 2021 19:38]
| |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 00:10 - Apr 11 with 763 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 19:34 - Apr 10 by Chief |
"I blame the Trust for turning on the other club owners once the performances on the field declined and relegation"
Haha yea it was the trust who made Huw spend money on ridiculous signings like Clucas. I thought you said relegation was 'one of those things'. Funny when it suits you you pin that on the trust too. A shocking lack of awareness of what ultimately instigated this whole issue on behalf.
I note you are deliberately choosing to ignore the time the trust agreed to actively halt negotiations and dialogue surrounding the sale until after one of our seasons in the Prem had finished.
You can blame your American buddies for sacking your beloved Huw. They didn't take kindly to him defying them. [Post edited 10 Apr 2021 19:38]
|
I look at things holistically. I look at where Swansea were when Huw took over and where they were when he left. Everything the Trust may or my not gain from the court case will come fron his and Morgan's sweat and blood. This sadly will include the 40 % commisions demanded by the posh boy English ambulance chasers. The target for the club was the Championship. The 7 years in the PL was a bonus.
He made some big mistakes for sure a few of them in fact all within a short period. Of his 15 years 14 were highly sucessful and pretty much on an upward trajectory. The PL debts have been cleared by selling players developed in the academy (Set up and masterminded by Huw Jenkins).
He took the club into the air and when the plane engine stalled provided a parachute and a safe landing.
The Trust are irrelevant as they have no cash and little means of helping the club. It was their cash raising in 2002 that helped the club. The owners do not need to negiociate anything with the Trust im my opinion. They have lost their way and their reeason for existance.
Circumstances and underhand negiocaiting by Leeds cost HJ his job. I thought he actually resigned. He said if he could not do his work and make a real differnce he would resign and he did. Another little inaccuracy from you majic box of spin and mis information.
HJ was the god father of Swansea's famous passing game having delivered 5 world class managers into the hot seat. Martinez, Sousa, Bendan, Laudrup and Potter. All on a restricted budget and solid accounts His was Swansea's second great golden era easily surpassing the first under Toshack. His legacy lives on.
Twelve seasons in the top 30 clubs and a world class infrastructure. | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 00:19 - Apr 11 with 761 views | BillyChong |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 19:06 - Apr 10 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The club was not sold to Venture capitalists. It was sold to established long term respected Sports investors just as Huw Jenkins stated.
It is true that the club has dropped from a top 20 club to a top 30 club but these things happen. It is professional sport. The Swansea methodology has been copied by others with ex Swansea managers in charge of Belgium, Poland, Brighton and Liecester.
I blame the Trust for turning on the other club owners once the performances on the field declined and relegation. The treatment of the ex Chairman is beyond my comprehension. Even his final act of rejecting the Jmaes transfer was honourable and to the benefit of he club.
Compare Swansea and Stoke. Swansea own £10m in the convertible loan note. Stoke owe £180m to their owners. Swansea are well above them in the league. After this season all players will be on Championship money with fans returning. What you call 'scrapping by'. This will see players ike Benda, Brandon Cooper, Garrick, Ollie Cooper, Cullen come to the fore. I am looking forard to it. |
LOL. How many clubs have you now tried to compare to the Swans scenario? No one is that gullible. Fool. |  | | |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 08:10 - Apr 11 with 748 views | Chief |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 00:10 - Apr 11 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I look at things holistically. I look at where Swansea were when Huw took over and where they were when he left. Everything the Trust may or my not gain from the court case will come fron his and Morgan's sweat and blood. This sadly will include the 40 % commisions demanded by the posh boy English ambulance chasers. The target for the club was the Championship. The 7 years in the PL was a bonus.
He made some big mistakes for sure a few of them in fact all within a short period. Of his 15 years 14 were highly sucessful and pretty much on an upward trajectory. The PL debts have been cleared by selling players developed in the academy (Set up and masterminded by Huw Jenkins).
He took the club into the air and when the plane engine stalled provided a parachute and a safe landing.
The Trust are irrelevant as they have no cash and little means of helping the club. It was their cash raising in 2002 that helped the club. The owners do not need to negiociate anything with the Trust im my opinion. They have lost their way and their reeason for existance.
Circumstances and underhand negiocaiting by Leeds cost HJ his job. I thought he actually resigned. He said if he could not do his work and make a real differnce he would resign and he did. Another little inaccuracy from you majic box of spin and mis information.
HJ was the god father of Swansea's famous passing game having delivered 5 world class managers into the hot seat. Martinez, Sousa, Bendan, Laudrup and Potter. All on a restricted budget and solid accounts His was Swansea's second great golden era easily surpassing the first under Toshack. His legacy lives on.
Twelve seasons in the top 30 clubs and a world class infrastructure. |
Yes, you'll notice i do not ever criticise Huws performance as chairman as a whole. He was a fantastic chairman for the club. But he (terrible transfer policy at that time) and the Americans (Bob Bradley) did make several questionable decisions that led to our eventually relegation (not that relegation for a club like Swansea is actually any disgrace).
To suggest the trust got us relegated is absolutely ridiculous. Again, not sure why you've got a bee in your bonnet about how the trust spend their money and what nationality the professionals they engage are. Just a random vain attempt to discredit them. Extremely desperate.
Oh i thought the trust were a disaster, a hinderence, a danger etc etc etc. Now they're just an irrelevance! They have enough relevance to you for you to constantly write posts about them. This should also mean you have no issue with them getting what they are trying to achieve and leaving the shareholding structure.
Oh come on Resolven. What's the chances Huw decides to suddenly resign mid season a few days after he very publicly and obviously defies the Americans!? Read between the lines.
You're barking up the wrong tree with me. I do not ever criticise Huws time as chairman. He and the whole board including the trust did a superb job during their time in Swansea.
In a way it makes the way he and the sellouts conducted themselves during the sale all that more deplorable. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 8:11]
| |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 21:26 - Apr 11 with 708 views | BillyChong |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 08:10 - Apr 11 by Chief |
Yes, you'll notice i do not ever criticise Huws performance as chairman as a whole. He was a fantastic chairman for the club. But he (terrible transfer policy at that time) and the Americans (Bob Bradley) did make several questionable decisions that led to our eventually relegation (not that relegation for a club like Swansea is actually any disgrace).
To suggest the trust got us relegated is absolutely ridiculous. Again, not sure why you've got a bee in your bonnet about how the trust spend their money and what nationality the professionals they engage are. Just a random vain attempt to discredit them. Extremely desperate.
Oh i thought the trust were a disaster, a hinderence, a danger etc etc etc. Now they're just an irrelevance! They have enough relevance to you for you to constantly write posts about them. This should also mean you have no issue with them getting what they are trying to achieve and leaving the shareholding structure.
Oh come on Resolven. What's the chances Huw decides to suddenly resign mid season a few days after he very publicly and obviously defies the Americans!? Read between the lines.
You're barking up the wrong tree with me. I do not ever criticise Huws time as chairman. He and the whole board including the trust did a superb job during their time in Swansea.
In a way it makes the way he and the sellouts conducted themselves during the sale all that more deplorable. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 8:11]
|
The bit where he claimed to have no vendetta against the trust was the best | | | |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 22:07 - Apr 11 with 702 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 08:10 - Apr 11 by Chief |
Yes, you'll notice i do not ever criticise Huws performance as chairman as a whole. He was a fantastic chairman for the club. But he (terrible transfer policy at that time) and the Americans (Bob Bradley) did make several questionable decisions that led to our eventually relegation (not that relegation for a club like Swansea is actually any disgrace).
To suggest the trust got us relegated is absolutely ridiculous. Again, not sure why you've got a bee in your bonnet about how the trust spend their money and what nationality the professionals they engage are. Just a random vain attempt to discredit them. Extremely desperate.
Oh i thought the trust were a disaster, a hinderence, a danger etc etc etc. Now they're just an irrelevance! They have enough relevance to you for you to constantly write posts about them. This should also mean you have no issue with them getting what they are trying to achieve and leaving the shareholding structure.
Oh come on Resolven. What's the chances Huw decides to suddenly resign mid season a few days after he very publicly and obviously defies the Americans!? Read between the lines.
You're barking up the wrong tree with me. I do not ever criticise Huws time as chairman. He and the whole board including the trust did a superb job during their time in Swansea.
In a way it makes the way he and the sellouts conducted themselves during the sale all that more deplorable. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 8:11]
|
I do not believe the Trust were treated deplorably. They were perfectly happy doing whatever they do with a 21% holding. A buyer showed up in 2015 and they were chased away with the Trust saying their shares "were not for sale".
I do not even think they wanted to sell any of their shares when they met the US peole in March 2016. They had 4 months to be invloved if that was their wish.
Their own consitutional issues are their concern and no concern for the other shareholders as far as I can see. The US buyers went out of their way and gave the Trust time to arrange their ducks and get a mandate. From what i have read a good deal was offered at the same rate they did not accept in good time. | |
| |
| Ground hog day 2010.. 11 year cycle. on 22:15 - Apr 11 with 698 views | NotLoyal |
Jenkins resigned because of the Dan James deal it was a bit like him leaving us a legacy and he did. I think he probably made us around about 8 or 9 million. Not sure Jenkins should be as demonized as he is, there are other things he did which made us not too bad. I think we all would make a number of mistakes if we ran the club with our heart instead of our head, and of course there was his ego. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
