| Interesting Trust Email 20:09 - Jun 29 with 139484 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 22:36 - Jul 6 with 2465 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:27 - Jul 6 by vetchonian |
Why would the yanks sell at a loss? Or even for a few pence.....they are here to make money
I have earlier asked what stops the yanks selling to a new co once the initial £5m is paid the new co having the yanks at the helm
The yanks will want to get at least a 10% return so unless they end up siphoning monies then they need the club attractive to sell and the trust will benefit then surely |
What happens if they start losing money - losses mount - they throw good money after bad.
What about the Venky's they were supposedly great business people?
We have also slipped down the PL since the Yank's have been in charge - they haven't improved performance and came close to wrecking the club under Bob Bradley? |  | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 23:06 - Jul 6 with 2433 views | swancity |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:05 - Jul 6 by vetchonian |
Yes many on here keep saying we should go to court and get the money that is owed....the purpose of the trust was never to make money it was about and is about ensuring our football club survives and that our city always has a football league club.
All of a sudden the focus is we we were robbed so give us our £21/£23m
Yes we know the sale was a shady deal orchestrated by those so called fans who are the sell outs. As a result potentially the value both financially and of influence of the Trusts stake have been wiped out /reduced. The Trust has been negotiating a deal which perhaps is a compromise but could hamper the new investors taking money out of the club which is why I asked those in the know anout such matters.
Listening to some on here we are becoming as bad as the sell outs as its all money the money
And just for the record recent Slaes of championship clubs Wolves 45m , Charlton reputedly bought for 14m are rumoured to be up for sale circa 40m and that price excludes the Valley so how people think if we take the coin and sellout we could one day own the club outright need to wake up and smell the coffee |
Well it's clearly not all about the money. No one is suggesting that it is. But over £20 m is at stake which means it's a vital issue. The Trust has to do everything possible to get what they're owed and if that means a legal route then so be it. | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 00:18 - Jul 7 with 2385 views | Starsky |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:40 - Jul 6 by vetchonian |
So it's all about the money then we are as bad as the sell outs |
Oh FFS |  |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 07:07 - Jul 7 with 2316 views | vetchonian |
| Interesting Trust Email on 00:18 - Jul 7 by Starsky |
Oh FFS |
Just an opinion starsky that how I felt reading some of the posts.....and it was also posted tonque in cheek | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 07:09 - Jul 7 with 2315 views | vetchonian |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:32 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
Why did Randy Lerner sell at a loss? |
Maybe because he bought a basket case in the first place .....but did he make a loss?
BOught for £68M sold 10 years later for £60M how much did he take out of the club in the meantime? | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 07:16 - Jul 7 with 2312 views | vetchonian |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:36 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
What happens if they start losing money - losses mount - they throw good money after bad.
What about the Venky's they were supposedly great business people?
We have also slipped down the PL since the Yank's have been in charge - they haven't improved performance and came close to wrecking the club under Bob Bradley? |
What if profitabilty increases through improved commercial actitivities....some stabilisation in the managerial merry go round
We know why we slipped down the PL its not just down to the Yanks and the reasons you give to me are why more so the Trust should be at the table bleating in their ears.
I hope they have learnt from the Bradley debacle and as most on here agree HJ 's influence has contributed to performance and that is a legacvy of the last 5 years!
You can use data to argue either way and we will all have our own points of view. I am just attempting to get my head around various scenarios to decide what is best for the club. I do not share your optimism that a significant holding could be bought with the £21M . Even if we were relegated to the Championship I am sure some Chinese investor would take a punt for around £40m.....they may not wish to have a partner....and the Trust could not raise those sorts of funds? | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 09:25 - Jul 7 with 2256 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 07:16 - Jul 7 by vetchonian |
What if profitabilty increases through improved commercial actitivities....some stabilisation in the managerial merry go round
We know why we slipped down the PL its not just down to the Yanks and the reasons you give to me are why more so the Trust should be at the table bleating in their ears.
I hope they have learnt from the Bradley debacle and as most on here agree HJ 's influence has contributed to performance and that is a legacvy of the last 5 years!
You can use data to argue either way and we will all have our own points of view. I am just attempting to get my head around various scenarios to decide what is best for the club. I do not share your optimism that a significant holding could be bought with the £21M . Even if we were relegated to the Championship I am sure some Chinese investor would take a punt for around £40m.....they may not wish to have a partner....and the Trust could not raise those sorts of funds? |
Leaving aside the moral issue that the Trust should have been made the same offer as all other shareholders (you don't seem to have an issue with this).
The choice in my view is do you back the Yanks to turn around the way we have slipped down the PL over the last couple of seasons
We are now very close to relegation similar to how Villa, Newcastle slipped down and then went through the trap door.
The Yanks didn't tuen tbings around last season and made things worse with the Bradley appointment.
They might be experienced in operating US sports franchises where you don't have relegation.
The PL is a different beast with relegation. It is cut throat. You have to keep improving to stand still. For a club of our size int view all returns have to be reinvested for us to compete.
You have said the Yanks are targeting a 10% return - I don't know whether that is 10% return on £68m = £6.8m or 10% per annum return over thei 5 year plan - which would then be 5 x £6.8m = £34m.
You will argue they will look to achieve the £34m through capital gain (so no cash leaves the club) and not through dividends (when the club makes distributable profits) and management fees which will weaken the club's ability to compete.
In comparison with fan ownership of the club all returns will be reinvested in the club.
I would rather the bird in the hand all safetly banked - ready for a dip in our fortunes. You seem to be erring on backing the Yanks.
Don't forget the moral issue though that the Yanks have disrespected the Fans in not making the same offer to the Trust as they made to the other shareholders? Why didn't they do this? These are the people you appear to want to back going forward? | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 09:57 - Jul 7 with 2230 views | Spratty |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:40 - Jul 6 by vetchonian |
So it's all about the money then we are as bad as the sell outs |
For goodness sake how desperate must you be to bow down to the new majority shareholders poor offer before saying a thing like that? It is pretty outrageous given you are fully aware that the sellouts did it for personal greed whilst lying and trying to openly cheat the trust and supporters, to line their own pockets.
On the other hand those in favour of legal action and fair price sale are trying to achieve funds to best achieve the fundamental objectives of the Trust, to ensure the ongoing survival of professional football in Swansea (with no personal advantage whatsoever).
Believe me in the early days I was very much against a full/majority sale of our shares and thought it went against what we stood for. I have come to see it is one of the only ways forward now. Whilst the new majority shareholders progress the club, brilliant it is all we want, when things go downhill and they put their get out plan into action (which rest assured they will have) then we can step in, the significant funds giving us the best possible chance of saving the club.
Any recent mirage of power for the Trust created by the new majority owners will evaporate with approval of the offer, which removes all our actual power and gives the majority owners total power to do as they wish - including totally sell the Trust out of the club at a time and price of their choosing. Know people by their past actions, they will not hesitate when we have already shown our total lack of resolve in this matter. We will end up backing away or futilely using the few mil they have thrown our way to prevent them diluting our shares further; or as suggested by a board member to create legal challenge to fight their future actions, which they will know we have not the balls to follow up, as we will have demonstrated to them here if we do not stand firm in light of a strong legal case.
A beautiful side effect of legal action is it seems our only chance to throw formal light of day and put onto public record the very apparent lying cheating divisive self-interested greed of the sellouts. Can you also imagine how the majority shareholders will feel towards Sir Huw et al who will have told them from the outset we would just roll over for a few crumbs, as they thought we would when they tried to get us to declare the shareholder agreement invalid.
Remember most cases are settled out of court but we must show resolve and that we are not to be fussed with. We should stand firm for a full settlement. How much more will allowing them to walk over us unsettle the club when they learn they can do just as they like and will continue to do so at whatever cost so long as it furthers their aim of profit.
I do however fear your tongue is far removed from your cheek |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:07 - Jul 7 with 2212 views | E20Jack |
So nobody has answered the scenario where the judge rules in our favour and we allow them to pay us £5m less and get to keep our position in the flub and on the board?
If our biggest fear is losing the entire stake and theirs is paying the whole £21m - then why would this not be an option? |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:14 - Jul 7 with 2206 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:07 - Jul 7 by E20Jack |
So nobody has answered the scenario where the judge rules in our favour and we allow them to pay us £5m less and get to keep our position in the flub and on the board?
If our biggest fear is losing the entire stake and theirs is paying the whole £21m - then why would this not be an option? |
It is an option - if the Trust is then to keep 5% stake (to keep a seat on the Board) then no drag Rights should then be held over that 5%.
The only issue is once a shareholder holds 90% can't they then force a compulsory purchase of the remaining shares at market value? I am not an expert but I recall reading this somewhere. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:18 - Jul 7 with 2196 views | E20Jack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:14 - Jul 7 by Nookiejack |
It is an option - if the Trust is then to keep 5% stake (to keep a seat on the Board) then no drag Rights should then be held over that 5%.
The only issue is once a shareholder holds 90% can't they then force a compulsory purchase of the remaining shares at market value? I am not an expert but I recall reading this somewhere. |
Thanks Nookie. I am sure they wont insist on drag rights for 5%, as such a small stake is not likely to scupper any future sale of their then 80+%.
The Americans only own 67% now. Assuming they agree and allow the Trust to keep 5% then they only buy 16% - taking their stake to 83%.
This is back of a postage stamp stuff too as I am no expert in the field, only the basics. But on a basic level it seems to cover everyones bases. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:32 - Jul 7 with 2175 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:14 - Jul 7 by Nookiejack |
It is an option - if the Trust is then to keep 5% stake (to keep a seat on the Board) then no drag Rights should then be held over that 5%.
The only issue is once a shareholder holds 90% can't they then force a compulsory purchase of the remaining shares at market value? I am not an expert but I recall reading this somewhere. |
If the Trust only has 5% the Americans don't need drag rights. In the event of a sale the purchaser can use squeeze out provisions to acquire the 5%. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:34 - Jul 7 with 2172 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:19 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
Lisa previously posted the club can only pay a dividend out of distributable profits. The club isn't making any distributable profits at the moment. So probably not relevant to the decision.
The Trust could receive more under the Drag rights if the Yanks are successful - however if it all goes pear shaped - a really worst case sceanrio would be that the Yanks sell for a few pence and the Trust is dragged along at that price I.e. Close to Nil.
You therefore have to make your decision on likelihood of Yanks succeeding v likelihood of relegation and downward spiral (as we could always bounce back soon after being relegated). Trouble is in relegation scenario Trust will have circa £5m but probably have then given up of ever achieving long term control. |
Just a point of clarification here ... distributable profits are not limited to the profits of the current year. Broadly speaking, it's the accumulated net profit, not the current set of accounts.
Rest is accurate though, and I do agree that if you're judging this purely on what is the best financial result for the Trust with no other factors in play, you're looking at the chances of a legal challenge being successful and compelling a full sale vs. the offer now and any future sale valuation. I'm sure this isn't the only consideration for most, but it will be for some. |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:34 - Jul 7 with 2166 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 09:57 - Jul 7 by Spratty |
For goodness sake how desperate must you be to bow down to the new majority shareholders poor offer before saying a thing like that? It is pretty outrageous given you are fully aware that the sellouts did it for personal greed whilst lying and trying to openly cheat the trust and supporters, to line their own pockets.
On the other hand those in favour of legal action and fair price sale are trying to achieve funds to best achieve the fundamental objectives of the Trust, to ensure the ongoing survival of professional football in Swansea (with no personal advantage whatsoever).
Believe me in the early days I was very much against a full/majority sale of our shares and thought it went against what we stood for. I have come to see it is one of the only ways forward now. Whilst the new majority shareholders progress the club, brilliant it is all we want, when things go downhill and they put their get out plan into action (which rest assured they will have) then we can step in, the significant funds giving us the best possible chance of saving the club.
Any recent mirage of power for the Trust created by the new majority owners will evaporate with approval of the offer, which removes all our actual power and gives the majority owners total power to do as they wish - including totally sell the Trust out of the club at a time and price of their choosing. Know people by their past actions, they will not hesitate when we have already shown our total lack of resolve in this matter. We will end up backing away or futilely using the few mil they have thrown our way to prevent them diluting our shares further; or as suggested by a board member to create legal challenge to fight their future actions, which they will know we have not the balls to follow up, as we will have demonstrated to them here if we do not stand firm in light of a strong legal case.
A beautiful side effect of legal action is it seems our only chance to throw formal light of day and put onto public record the very apparent lying cheating divisive self-interested greed of the sellouts. Can you also imagine how the majority shareholders will feel towards Sir Huw et al who will have told them from the outset we would just roll over for a few crumbs, as they thought we would when they tried to get us to declare the shareholder agreement invalid.
Remember most cases are settled out of court but we must show resolve and that we are not to be fussed with. We should stand firm for a full settlement. How much more will allowing them to walk over us unsettle the club when they learn they can do just as they like and will continue to do so at whatever cost so long as it furthers their aim of profit.
I do however fear your tongue is far removed from your cheek |
Yes Vetchonian's post to try to spin that is is about the money was totally outrageous.
No one on hear is making any money. The only people who have made the money is the selling shareholders who Vetchonian is spinning for.
What comes to mind is total disrespect and contempt for the fans.
You see underneath it all is - they think they are better than the fans - total sense of entitlement. Fans can be walked over. That's the only way they can sleep at night.
Justice? Fairness? | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:44 - Jul 7 with 2149 views | LeonWasGod |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:03 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
With the concession of the Drag rights a new buyer can buy 100% of the shares. The Trust will be dragged along with the Yanks. The Trust will not be left with any shares.
In the litigation scenario it is similarly most likely the whole of the Trust's stake will be bought out.
A stake in the club only has value if you can demonstrate that you have influence. Otherwise you are just holding the stake for the sake of holding it.
For the last circa 14 years up to the sale the club operated as a quasi partnership - no one shareholder had control - no shareholder held more than 25% of the shares. There were a number of shareholders with similar stakes.
At the point of the sale - this all changed - the Trust was left in a Minority position with the Yanks 68% stake and holding the voting rights over residual 11% stake. The Company Articles were changed in favour of the Yanks without the Trust being notified.
The Yanks still have not offered the Trust the same offer for their shares as the seliing shareholders received. This is morally wrong - it shows no respect to the fans at worst contempt. If you hold the stake just for the sake of holding it - you accept this.
It is not the case that by selling now - the Trust gives up its stake in the club forever. By taking litigation - if we win - substantial funds will be banked. There are various ups and downs in football. The Yanks can take us to the next level - hopefully another up.
However as soon as there is another down - the Trust will be in a position to take a controlling stake In the club. Not just influence but control.
Yes it might take time but then the club won't be sold on from one VC to another or Vincent Tan type characters and people we don't even know. ( who owns the Yanks holding company?). |
Thanks for that (and to Mon and longlost too). My only concern with the selling up is that there is absolutely no guarantee that the Trust would be in a position to buy a controlling stake at any time in the future. It may work out that the club drops through the leagues and the share value plummets, but presumably it would have to go a long way for the Trust's cash holding to be enough to buy a controlling stake. And they'd have to fight off competition from whoever else was interested.
With the drag along rights of the Yanks, is it a certainty that they'd use them? Who knows whether a new buyer would be open to Trust also retaining some ownership (they may see it as a publicity benefit). And even if we were forced to sell all shares, that would still give us a rainy day pot (but yes, as discussed elsewhere, we may get a lower share price when they sell).
So many variables and uncertainties to each option. Taking up the offer of a sale now seems the longest end- game and with the most uncertainties. Not that that means it's the wrong choice of course.
Sounds like the decision is to pick the least worse option. I'm struggling with it tbf. |  | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:45 - Jul 7 with 2148 views | vetchonian |
| Interesting Trust Email on 09:57 - Jul 7 by Spratty |
For goodness sake how desperate must you be to bow down to the new majority shareholders poor offer before saying a thing like that? It is pretty outrageous given you are fully aware that the sellouts did it for personal greed whilst lying and trying to openly cheat the trust and supporters, to line their own pockets.
On the other hand those in favour of legal action and fair price sale are trying to achieve funds to best achieve the fundamental objectives of the Trust, to ensure the ongoing survival of professional football in Swansea (with no personal advantage whatsoever).
Believe me in the early days I was very much against a full/majority sale of our shares and thought it went against what we stood for. I have come to see it is one of the only ways forward now. Whilst the new majority shareholders progress the club, brilliant it is all we want, when things go downhill and they put their get out plan into action (which rest assured they will have) then we can step in, the significant funds giving us the best possible chance of saving the club.
Any recent mirage of power for the Trust created by the new majority owners will evaporate with approval of the offer, which removes all our actual power and gives the majority owners total power to do as they wish - including totally sell the Trust out of the club at a time and price of their choosing. Know people by their past actions, they will not hesitate when we have already shown our total lack of resolve in this matter. We will end up backing away or futilely using the few mil they have thrown our way to prevent them diluting our shares further; or as suggested by a board member to create legal challenge to fight their future actions, which they will know we have not the balls to follow up, as we will have demonstrated to them here if we do not stand firm in light of a strong legal case.
A beautiful side effect of legal action is it seems our only chance to throw formal light of day and put onto public record the very apparent lying cheating divisive self-interested greed of the sellouts. Can you also imagine how the majority shareholders will feel towards Sir Huw et al who will have told them from the outset we would just roll over for a few crumbs, as they thought we would when they tried to get us to declare the shareholder agreement invalid.
Remember most cases are settled out of court but we must show resolve and that we are not to be fussed with. We should stand firm for a full settlement. How much more will allowing them to walk over us unsettle the club when they learn they can do just as they like and will continue to do so at whatever cost so long as it furthers their aim of profit.
I do however fear your tongue is far removed from your cheek |
This is a reply to you and Nookie
I am not desperate to bow down to the new owners....I care about my football club...I am not looking at this from the moral perspective nut from a business one. Sometimes it is better to be on the inside as this "poor" deal which is sort of recomended by thr Trust?
We all have our opinions and at the moment I am not fixed either way if you check my posts I ahve posed several questions around what if scenarios.
I do not believe the legal action will do anything to the sellouts.....if there is someone who is more informed please pm me to let me know.
I also do not believe that the £21M will sufficient to secure control of the club when the Yanks bail out.
I also believe if taken the court action will further destabilise the club and potentially increase our chances of relegation. and yes Nookie I follow what you say re VIlla, Newcastle et al. I have discussed this off here with many that we need to do something this season otherwise like Sunderland who finally dropped out this year after a couple of seasons flirting with relegation.
I am no way happy with the situation we find ourselves in but there is a saying "keep your friends close and your enemies closer still " wlaking away from the table puts us away from those enemies.
My tongue was in my cheek as when you read some posts it does sound like its all about the money .....thats not what the trust is there for....and yes if paid out £21M is achink of money but not enough to get control or a controlling stake for a very long timeEven if we get relegated it would cost more than £21M to buy us in the championship
At the end of the day I am disgusted with how the sellouts treated the trust,the Yanks are hard nosed business men .....why offer the trust money for something they didnt need to buy albeit immoral and not in line with the SHA which the sellouts ignored but I also think the Yanks were involved with that as I am not sure the sellouts are that savvy to be able to have cooked up the complete deal. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:54 - Jul 7 with 2138 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:45 - Jul 7 by vetchonian |
This is a reply to you and Nookie
I am not desperate to bow down to the new owners....I care about my football club...I am not looking at this from the moral perspective nut from a business one. Sometimes it is better to be on the inside as this "poor" deal which is sort of recomended by thr Trust?
We all have our opinions and at the moment I am not fixed either way if you check my posts I ahve posed several questions around what if scenarios.
I do not believe the legal action will do anything to the sellouts.....if there is someone who is more informed please pm me to let me know.
I also do not believe that the £21M will sufficient to secure control of the club when the Yanks bail out.
I also believe if taken the court action will further destabilise the club and potentially increase our chances of relegation. and yes Nookie I follow what you say re VIlla, Newcastle et al. I have discussed this off here with many that we need to do something this season otherwise like Sunderland who finally dropped out this year after a couple of seasons flirting with relegation.
I am no way happy with the situation we find ourselves in but there is a saying "keep your friends close and your enemies closer still " wlaking away from the table puts us away from those enemies.
My tongue was in my cheek as when you read some posts it does sound like its all about the money .....thats not what the trust is there for....and yes if paid out £21M is achink of money but not enough to get control or a controlling stake for a very long timeEven if we get relegated it would cost more than £21M to buy us in the championship
At the end of the day I am disgusted with how the sellouts treated the trust,the Yanks are hard nosed business men .....why offer the trust money for something they didnt need to buy albeit immoral and not in line with the SHA which the sellouts ignored but I also think the Yanks were involved with that as I am not sure the sellouts are that savvy to be able to have cooked up the complete deal. |
Fair enough and understand your position that you don't think £21m would be enough to control the club. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 11:59 - Jul 7 with 2068 views | swancity |
| Interesting Trust Email on 09:57 - Jul 7 by Spratty |
For goodness sake how desperate must you be to bow down to the new majority shareholders poor offer before saying a thing like that? It is pretty outrageous given you are fully aware that the sellouts did it for personal greed whilst lying and trying to openly cheat the trust and supporters, to line their own pockets.
On the other hand those in favour of legal action and fair price sale are trying to achieve funds to best achieve the fundamental objectives of the Trust, to ensure the ongoing survival of professional football in Swansea (with no personal advantage whatsoever).
Believe me in the early days I was very much against a full/majority sale of our shares and thought it went against what we stood for. I have come to see it is one of the only ways forward now. Whilst the new majority shareholders progress the club, brilliant it is all we want, when things go downhill and they put their get out plan into action (which rest assured they will have) then we can step in, the significant funds giving us the best possible chance of saving the club.
Any recent mirage of power for the Trust created by the new majority owners will evaporate with approval of the offer, which removes all our actual power and gives the majority owners total power to do as they wish - including totally sell the Trust out of the club at a time and price of their choosing. Know people by their past actions, they will not hesitate when we have already shown our total lack of resolve in this matter. We will end up backing away or futilely using the few mil they have thrown our way to prevent them diluting our shares further; or as suggested by a board member to create legal challenge to fight their future actions, which they will know we have not the balls to follow up, as we will have demonstrated to them here if we do not stand firm in light of a strong legal case.
A beautiful side effect of legal action is it seems our only chance to throw formal light of day and put onto public record the very apparent lying cheating divisive self-interested greed of the sellouts. Can you also imagine how the majority shareholders will feel towards Sir Huw et al who will have told them from the outset we would just roll over for a few crumbs, as they thought we would when they tried to get us to declare the shareholder agreement invalid.
Remember most cases are settled out of court but we must show resolve and that we are not to be fussed with. We should stand firm for a full settlement. How much more will allowing them to walk over us unsettle the club when they learn they can do just as they like and will continue to do so at whatever cost so long as it furthers their aim of profit.
I do however fear your tongue is far removed from your cheek |
That's a nice summary of things. I fear though that the likes of Uxbridge are trying their best to steer things away from legal action. And isn't it strange that the Trust bods seem to be in agreement with each other on this?
I'm telling you now Uxbridge and Co you're making a serious error of judgement here. Please rethink your views and stance. It's too stubborn to start with. | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 12:46 - Jul 7 with 2008 views | Dewi1jack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:32 - Jul 6 by Nookiejack |
Why did Randy Lerner sell at a loss? |
Because he accepted the fact that if it appears you'll never make a profit you have to minimise your losses.
Cut and run as a bad deal in other words.
Businesses succeed and they fail.
Most football clubs, even non-league, are bottomless money pits. |  |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 12:47 - Jul 7 with 2004 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 11:59 - Jul 7 by swancity |
That's a nice summary of things. I fear though that the likes of Uxbridge are trying their best to steer things away from legal action. And isn't it strange that the Trust bods seem to be in agreement with each other on this?
I'm telling you now Uxbridge and Co you're making a serious error of judgement here. Please rethink your views and stance. It's too stubborn to start with. |
It's strange that the Trust board have a recommendation? It'd be stranger if it didn't. Is it strange that a group, involved in the same process over a considerable period of time and having access to the same information, came to the same conclusion? Not really IMO.
And it's just that. It's a recommendation. I have my personal view, which I've expressed along with my rationale for it. Some people may have a different rationale but come to the same conclusion. Many other members will think the same way but come to a different conclusion - some towards legal action, some towards neither selling nor suing and retaining the existing stake. That's cool too. I assume we all have the interests of the Trust and the club at heart, so I'm not judging.
1 Member, 1 Vote ... as it should be. Whatever direction the members vote in favour of, that's what will happen. I've got no interest in trying to convince anyone to vote in one particular direction, although just like everyone else in this thread I will question spurious facts and assertions when they come up. And I'm certainly not going to tell people they're making a serious error of judgement or urge them to go one way or the other. That'd be terribly hypocritical. I'm away for the weekend soon enough anyway.
As I've said a few times now. Read the facts, question everything and come to your own conclusions. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 13:14 - Jul 7 with 1963 views | monmouth |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:44 - Jul 7 by LeonWasGod |
Thanks for that (and to Mon and longlost too). My only concern with the selling up is that there is absolutely no guarantee that the Trust would be in a position to buy a controlling stake at any time in the future. It may work out that the club drops through the leagues and the share value plummets, but presumably it would have to go a long way for the Trust's cash holding to be enough to buy a controlling stake. And they'd have to fight off competition from whoever else was interested.
With the drag along rights of the Yanks, is it a certainty that they'd use them? Who knows whether a new buyer would be open to Trust also retaining some ownership (they may see it as a publicity benefit). And even if we were forced to sell all shares, that would still give us a rainy day pot (but yes, as discussed elsewhere, we may get a lower share price when they sell).
So many variables and uncertainties to each option. Taking up the offer of a sale now seems the longest end- game and with the most uncertainties. Not that that means it's the wrong choice of course.
Sounds like the decision is to pick the least worse option. I'm struggling with it tbf. |
Least worse is where I am too.
Deal is poor, legal action is final.
For me, it comes down to my total lack of any belief that those running the club 9not the Trust) would play fair in any way without the threat of legal action. The total skewness of the deal (which is apparently better than previous ones - jesus) shows that they have no interest in an equitable outcome. Do the Trust Board think the deal they are recommending is a good one? Really? If not, the recommendation becomes "we believe this to be well below the deal that should be on the table but the counter party will not budge but we still recommend it over legal action". Bollocks to that. The minute legal threat is removed anything that can be watered down or is not set in stone will disappear. the very deal offered shows that the counterparty cannot be trusted in my eyes.
That's why I think least worst is to take the action, get the whole can of worms in front of a court of law, and keep our self respect whatever the outcome. [Post edited 7 Jul 2017 13:58]
|  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 14:02 - Jul 7 with 1921 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:34 - Jul 7 by Uxbridge |
Just a point of clarification here ... distributable profits are not limited to the profits of the current year. Broadly speaking, it's the accumulated net profit, not the current set of accounts.
Rest is accurate though, and I do agree that if you're judging this purely on what is the best financial result for the Trust with no other factors in play, you're looking at the chances of a legal challenge being successful and compelling a full sale vs. the offer now and any future sale valuation. I'm sure this isn't the only consideration for most, but it will be for some. |
The best financial result will achieve all the other Trust aims.
It will actually achieve more as it will give the Trust the long term opportunity of controlling the club - rather than just influence (Yanks now controlling 79% of the voting rights? and when the legal action is withdrawn?).
The difference is time - it is a longer term play.
Legal action, if we win, gives the Trust the long term opportunity of taking control of the club.
Accepting the Yank's offer (less than the selling shareholders received) will mean keeping a stake in short-term (until the Drag rights are taken up) but risks a downward spiral and then giving up long term opportunity of Trust controlling the club.
Do people think the Yanks can turn around our slide in PL over last few seasons (Bob Bradley decision comes to mind). I don't so it is a bird in the hand for me. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 14:10 - Jul 7 with 1917 views | Starsky |
| Interesting Trust Email on 09:57 - Jul 7 by Spratty |
For goodness sake how desperate must you be to bow down to the new majority shareholders poor offer before saying a thing like that? It is pretty outrageous given you are fully aware that the sellouts did it for personal greed whilst lying and trying to openly cheat the trust and supporters, to line their own pockets.
On the other hand those in favour of legal action and fair price sale are trying to achieve funds to best achieve the fundamental objectives of the Trust, to ensure the ongoing survival of professional football in Swansea (with no personal advantage whatsoever).
Believe me in the early days I was very much against a full/majority sale of our shares and thought it went against what we stood for. I have come to see it is one of the only ways forward now. Whilst the new majority shareholders progress the club, brilliant it is all we want, when things go downhill and they put their get out plan into action (which rest assured they will have) then we can step in, the significant funds giving us the best possible chance of saving the club.
Any recent mirage of power for the Trust created by the new majority owners will evaporate with approval of the offer, which removes all our actual power and gives the majority owners total power to do as they wish - including totally sell the Trust out of the club at a time and price of their choosing. Know people by their past actions, they will not hesitate when we have already shown our total lack of resolve in this matter. We will end up backing away or futilely using the few mil they have thrown our way to prevent them diluting our shares further; or as suggested by a board member to create legal challenge to fight their future actions, which they will know we have not the balls to follow up, as we will have demonstrated to them here if we do not stand firm in light of a strong legal case.
A beautiful side effect of legal action is it seems our only chance to throw formal light of day and put onto public record the very apparent lying cheating divisive self-interested greed of the sellouts. Can you also imagine how the majority shareholders will feel towards Sir Huw et al who will have told them from the outset we would just roll over for a few crumbs, as they thought we would when they tried to get us to declare the shareholder agreement invalid.
Remember most cases are settled out of court but we must show resolve and that we are not to be fussed with. We should stand firm for a full settlement. How much more will allowing them to walk over us unsettle the club when they learn they can do just as they like and will continue to do so at whatever cost so long as it furthers their aim of profit.
I do however fear your tongue is far removed from your cheek |
Well said Spratty. Welcome back | |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 14:21 - Jul 7 with 1905 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 10:18 - Jul 7 by E20Jack |
Thanks Nookie. I am sure they wont insist on drag rights for 5%, as such a small stake is not likely to scupper any future sale of their then 80+%.
The Americans only own 67% now. Assuming they agree and allow the Trust to keep 5% then they only buy 16% - taking their stake to 83%.
This is back of a postage stamp stuff too as I am no expert in the field, only the basics. But on a basic level it seems to cover everyones bases. |
You may have to assume that Huw Jenkins and Martin Morgan/ ex wife have negotiated an exit route for their residual shares - circa 10% in total.
This might be through Tag rights and they also might have given the Yanks Drag rights in return as well.
They might also be able to sell their residual shares to the Yanks - on the basis of some performance criteria such as staying in the PL for a number of seasons.
This could take the Yanks holding or new owner above the 90%.
It is an alternative option though. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 14:57 - Jul 7 with 1884 views | swancity |
| Interesting Trust Email on 12:47 - Jul 7 by Uxbridge |
It's strange that the Trust board have a recommendation? It'd be stranger if it didn't. Is it strange that a group, involved in the same process over a considerable period of time and having access to the same information, came to the same conclusion? Not really IMO.
And it's just that. It's a recommendation. I have my personal view, which I've expressed along with my rationale for it. Some people may have a different rationale but come to the same conclusion. Many other members will think the same way but come to a different conclusion - some towards legal action, some towards neither selling nor suing and retaining the existing stake. That's cool too. I assume we all have the interests of the Trust and the club at heart, so I'm not judging.
1 Member, 1 Vote ... as it should be. Whatever direction the members vote in favour of, that's what will happen. I've got no interest in trying to convince anyone to vote in one particular direction, although just like everyone else in this thread I will question spurious facts and assertions when they come up. And I'm certainly not going to tell people they're making a serious error of judgement or urge them to go one way or the other. That'd be terribly hypocritical. I'm away for the weekend soon enough anyway.
As I've said a few times now. Read the facts, question everything and come to your own conclusions. |
Your error of judgement relates to your lack of desire to adequately confront the predicament. You don't seems to be too perturbed by the actions of the previous owners, so called fans, and consequently want to accept the scraps being tossed to you. That's not the approach one would expect from a Supporters Trust. One that has been treated with contempt and tossed away like a worthless rag doll. Come on mun get some action and positivity. There's more life in a bottle of flat lemonade. That's the error of judgement I'm referring to.... | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
