| Interesting Trust Email 20:09 - Jun 29 with 141131 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 19:59 - Jul 1 with 1980 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
| Interesting Trust Email on 19:28 - Jul 1 by 3swan |
Mulling over the current 2 situations.
If the offer is accepted.
Things carry on much as today with the Trust having approx £6m plus potential for nearly double in reserve.
Not ideal as HJ and the others still have an impact within the club. The Trust has to hope that the owners will keep involving them in the running and decision making.
What happens if a legal route is taken to me is not so clear.
The Trust will have approx £21m in reserve but any impact within the club will end.
I take it at that point the Trust and ultimately the fans have no recognised route into the club. The Trust basically becomes a supporters club?
Current membership is I think around 1,800. How many will renew when part ownership has gone?
What will be the remit for the Trust if membership does drop dramatically?
Will the current board want to keep going, without the owners having need to keep ongoing contact? If not who will take over? Will the decision of what to do with £25m rely on a few people?
If the owners decide to sell in maybe 2-3 years that £25m won’t be enough without a buying partnership, and that’s if any prospective buyer wants a joint share buy out.
If it’s longer will they sell to the Trust, or only to some other outside group.
All in the future, so anything can happen or change, but to me it does look like a legal win ends up with no fans involvement for many a year, and only a drop in to the lower divisions would that £25m come into play. |
I do not really think there is any fan involvement now. Pearlman may well meet with somebody once a week to keep up appearances, but do you really think the the Trust will have any influence on any key decisions made? |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:08 - Jul 1 with 1966 views | NeathJack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 19:59 - Jul 1 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I do not really think there is any fan involvement now. Pearlman may well meet with somebody once a week to keep up appearances, but do you really think the the Trust will have any influence on any key decisions made? |
Even if there is not any direct influence as such, there is still the seat at the table and the knowledge of what is going on at the club as well as such things as access to the management accounts.
Personally I'm completely torn as to which way to vote and don't see myself deciding for some time yet. |  | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:09 - Jul 1 with 1962 views | Pokerface |
| Interesting Trust Email on 12:34 - Jul 1 by Uxbridge |
It's not a question that I would feel we need to go to a QC for ... legal advice we already have says that it's not relevant.
I'm out of here ... air show beckons. [Post edited 1 Jul 2017 12:35]
|
Phil reckons the QC has seen the offer and gave an opinion -
(conflicting answers being given to most basic of points raised on here).
"Yes he has and no it doesn't. If it did we wouldn't have made a recommendation" |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:11 - Jul 1 with 1952 views | NeathJack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:09 - Jul 1 by Pokerface |
Phil reckons the QC has seen the offer and gave an opinion -
(conflicting answers being given to most basic of points raised on here).
"Yes he has and no it doesn't. If it did we wouldn't have made a recommendation" |
To be fair that's not exactly what Phil said. I believe he said that recommending the offer wouldn't prejudice the Trust in the event of any court case.
I assume this would be the case regardless of what the actual specifics of the offer are. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:44 - Jul 1 with 1902 views | Pokerface |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:11 - Jul 1 by NeathJack |
To be fair that's not exactly what Phil said. I believe he said that recommending the offer wouldn't prejudice the Trust in the event of any court case.
I assume this would be the case regardless of what the actual specifics of the offer are. |
What QC would give an opinion on something he doesn't know the details of.... whilst being paid for it.
QC would not give an opinion unless knows full facts.
Very strange misinformation being given to us fans.
Brexit. Swexit. There are similarities in both campaigns. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:58 - Jul 1 with 1886 views | NeathJack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:44 - Jul 1 by Pokerface |
What QC would give an opinion on something he doesn't know the details of.... whilst being paid for it.
QC would not give an opinion unless knows full facts.
Very strange misinformation being given to us fans.
Brexit. Swexit. There are similarities in both campaigns. |
The point being that he must have said that the recommendation of an offer, regardless of what the offer is, will not prejudice a court case if said offer is then rejected by the members. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:03 - Jul 1 with 1874 views | Vetchfielder |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:58 - Jul 1 by NeathJack |
The point being that he must have said that the recommendation of an offer, regardless of what the offer is, will not prejudice a court case if said offer is then rejected by the members. |
Yes I agree NJ, that's the way I read it too. |  |
| Proud to have been one of the 231 |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:03 - Jul 1 with 1873 views | Flashberryjack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:58 - Jul 1 by NeathJack |
The point being that he must have said that the recommendation of an offer, regardless of what the offer is, will not prejudice a court case if said offer is then rejected by the members. |
There will be no court case. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:11 - Jul 1 with 1855 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 06:19 - Jul 1 by Phil_S |
Just the point of order though "they only take it back with the other" if you - as members - elect that is what you want to do if/when that comes to the table. Will be written into the agreement as such. It's not a guarantee |
Interesting why the Yanks have mentioned it now though - as not a condition of the deal from the Trust's statement.
Why haven't the Yanks waited until this stage is all put to bed and then ask the Trust for a contribution - at the time of stadium expansion. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:13 - Jul 1 with 1847 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 06:25 - Jul 1 by Phil_S |
An interesting point and I think it came up elsewhere yesterday at some point
The offer was a simple "Buy up to half at a fair and reasonable price" - you can make an assumption that is in one go or you can assume it may have had some caveats included that may not be dissimilar to what we have now which is effectively an offer for up to half
We don't know what that offer looked like because we asked for what the fair and reasonable price statement meant.
It could have been lower terms then we have now. |
Thanks once again for the response | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:31 - Jul 1 with 1816 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 19:28 - Jul 1 by 3swan |
Mulling over the current 2 situations.
If the offer is accepted.
Things carry on much as today with the Trust having approx £6m plus potential for nearly double in reserve.
Not ideal as HJ and the others still have an impact within the club. The Trust has to hope that the owners will keep involving them in the running and decision making.
What happens if a legal route is taken to me is not so clear.
The Trust will have approx £21m in reserve but any impact within the club will end.
I take it at that point the Trust and ultimately the fans have no recognised route into the club. The Trust basically becomes a supporters club?
Current membership is I think around 1,800. How many will renew when part ownership has gone?
What will be the remit for the Trust if membership does drop dramatically?
Will the current board want to keep going, without the owners having need to keep ongoing contact? If not who will take over? Will the decision of what to do with £25m rely on a few people?
If the owners decide to sell in maybe 2-3 years that £25m won’t be enough without a buying partnership, and that’s if any prospective buyer wants a joint share buy out.
If it’s longer will they sell to the Trust, or only to some other outside group.
All in the future, so anything can happen or change, but to me it does look like a legal win ends up with no fans involvement for many a year, and only a drop in to the lower divisions would that £25m come into play. |
Largely agree. Particularly the last sentence and I'm surprised how many seem happy just to give up any involvement.
However there is another scenario nobody has even mentioned. What happens if the Trust lost a legal case. Because that's entirely plausible. A strong case is not a guaranteed win. What happens if it goes wrong? |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:33 - Jul 1 with 1801 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 20:11 - Jul 1 by NeathJack |
To be fair that's not exactly what Phil said. I believe he said that recommending the offer wouldn't prejudice the Trust in the event of any court case.
I assume this would be the case regardless of what the actual specifics of the offer are. |
Exactly. The QC wouldn't recommend whether a deal is acceptable or not. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:35 - Jul 1 with 1792 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 11:43 - Jul 1 by NeathJack |
I believe it was mentioned in the meeting on Thursday that the finance for the offer on the table is not being leveraged against the club.
If the case was to go to court and be found in our favour, would the Yanks be allowed to borrow against the club in order to finance the £20m odd they would be forced to pay? |
Depending on whether they have additional follow on funds and then prepared to put further money in - if no - I think they will rely on the warranty that the selling shareholders have given them that no original shareholders agreement existed.
You would think that whether an original shareholders agreement was in place will form part of the legal case.
So if Yanks lost and had to buyout the entire Trust's stake for £21m -
then the Yanks use the warranty to force the selling shareholders to buy the Trust's shares off them for £21m.
So although the Yank's lose the case - the selling shareholders cough up the £21m.
The Trust is then totally bought out - ans the selling Shareholders are left holding the 21% Trust stake.
Interesting if they then have to comply with the new articles given all the power to the Yanks's - which the selling shareholders all signed off. That would be truly ironic.
It would be the sweetest revenge for many posters on here too. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:35 - Jul 1 with 1789 views | swancity |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:31 - Jul 1 by Uxbridge |
Largely agree. Particularly the last sentence and I'm surprised how many seem happy just to give up any involvement.
However there is another scenario nobody has even mentioned. What happens if the Trust lost a legal case. Because that's entirely plausible. A strong case is not a guaranteed win. What happens if it goes wrong? |
What can go wrong? Really. On the basis of what we know it's absolutely clear cut. | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:45 - Jul 1 with 1765 views | morningstar |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:31 - Jul 1 by Uxbridge |
Largely agree. Particularly the last sentence and I'm surprised how many seem happy just to give up any involvement.
However there is another scenario nobody has even mentioned. What happens if the Trust lost a legal case. Because that's entirely plausible. A strong case is not a guaranteed win. What happens if it goes wrong? |
If that happens, then it means we as fans fought for what we believed in, and defeat in the courts would mean the fans still hold 21% of the club, but don't have a meaningless voice on the board that has no direct influence on any major decision making. The fight will go on, and will intensify! Stop acting like a bunch of fvckin trainspotters!  |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:45 - Jul 1 with 1765 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:35 - Jul 1 by swancity |
What can go wrong? Really. On the basis of what we know it's absolutely clear cut. |
That's just naive. The Trust would have its case. The Americans would have theirs, and we have absolutely no idea what it would be. The QC advises it's a strong case. What if the judge thinks the other side is stronger, or the case isn't as strong. People thinking it's a case of rocking up in court and the Trust gets 20+million in the bank need to understand that is far from the reality. It could get messy. It could drag on. It'd be potentially very destabilising for the club, at the very least and potentially for quite some time. And yes, the Trust could lose.
And for the record, I'd be saying all this if there wasn't an offer on the table. Hell I'd probably recommend legal action if there wasn't an acceptable offer on the table. But there is. To me at least. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:48 - Jul 1 with 1754 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 11:54 - Jul 1 by londonlisa2001 |
Actually Ux, the number one aim of the Trust was always to maintain a professional football club in Swansea and to keep it close to the community. The things you've mentioned were assumed to be part of that, but those were the fundamental aims. |
This is the issue the Trust Board doesn't really want to sell - it wants some short term perceived influence - it is not looking at the long term big picture.
£21m is highly likely to enable the Trust to have full control of the club in the future. It would guarantee professional football in Swansea.
Football is a roller coaster and £21m would enable the fans to totally control the club sometime in the future.
As Shaky has said because they are not prepared to walk away - they essentially fear the Trust will win and the whole stake will be sold - this diminishes the current negotiating position. | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:50 - Jul 1 with 1752 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:45 - Jul 1 by morningstar |
If that happens, then it means we as fans fought for what we believed in, and defeat in the courts would mean the fans still hold 21% of the club, but don't have a meaningless voice on the board that has no direct influence on any major decision making. The fight will go on, and will intensify! Stop acting like a bunch of fvckin trainspotters! |
It'll mean the Trust has 21%, little to no relationship with the running of the club, and a stake of questionable worth given the position of the majority shareholding.
As for the last bit, that's just insulting. If you think the Trust board need to act differently then I really do urge you to get your application in before next week's deadline. If this goes down the legal route, we could do with some people on board who think it's a good idea. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:51 - Jul 1 with 1745 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 12:09 - Jul 1 by Uxbridge |
They're both fundamental aims. I don't recall there ever being a pecking order, but it's semantics in some ways ... I believe I'm right when I say that the Trust was set up to protect the interests of its members, which ultimately are to ensure there's a football club in the city, by ensuring the fans have a voice in the running of the football club and as big a stake in that club as possible.
We're in interesting times at the moment, as there's some debate on how best to achieve that. If you'd have asked me this time last year when there was simply no relationship between the Americans and the Trust, then I'd have a lot more sympathy with the view that the Trust have no say and it's best to completely exit the club. Things have moved on considerably since last October though ... true, if it comes down to a direct conflict between the Trust and the Americans, the Trust will be outvoted. However, and I think we've seen that this past season, that the Americans realise they can't work alone. When they did, it didn't go very well for anyone. I actually think this season has spooked them a little.
I think this season has shown why it's important the Trust is around. True, we all need to vigilant that the lines of communication and spirit of cooperation (if not on the hot issue of the chairman, in the views of a substantial section of the members), and it's critical that the existing relationship is enshrined in any subsequent documentation. But for us not to continue that relationship and have that involvement in the club, I just don't get it. The deal's not ideal by any stretch but it ticks enough boxes for me. |
Do you believe in total fan ownership of the club?
Or just a say? | | | |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:55 - Jul 1 with 1728 views | swancity |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:45 - Jul 1 by Uxbridge |
That's just naive. The Trust would have its case. The Americans would have theirs, and we have absolutely no idea what it would be. The QC advises it's a strong case. What if the judge thinks the other side is stronger, or the case isn't as strong. People thinking it's a case of rocking up in court and the Trust gets 20+million in the bank need to understand that is far from the reality. It could get messy. It could drag on. It'd be potentially very destabilising for the club, at the very least and potentially for quite some time. And yes, the Trust could lose.
And for the record, I'd be saying all this if there wasn't an offer on the table. Hell I'd probably recommend legal action if there wasn't an acceptable offer on the table. But there is. To me at least. |
Ok I'll ask you again. What can go wrong? Give me some actual examples? It's as clear cut as they come. Come on you know it, everyone can see it. With everything stacked in your favour the reluctance to attack the problem is a mystery. | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:57 - Jul 1 with 1719 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:48 - Jul 1 by Nookiejack |
This is the issue the Trust Board doesn't really want to sell - it wants some short term perceived influence - it is not looking at the long term big picture.
£21m is highly likely to enable the Trust to have full control of the club in the future. It would guarantee professional football in Swansea.
Football is a roller coaster and £21m would enable the fans to totally control the club sometime in the future.
As Shaky has said because they are not prepared to walk away - they essentially fear the Trust will win and the whole stake will be sold - this diminishes the current negotiating position. |
That first paragraph is nonsense. If you think that protecting the financial value of the remaining value of the stake isn't thinking long term I don't know what is. You're obsessed with this figure of 21m and this potential scenario that it'll all go wrong with the Americans in charge. Well what if it doesn't? What if it goes well. What if they sell for double their money in a few years. I suspect that's the plan. The Trust will have just missed out on a rather healthy payday, either by forcing a sale earlier or not being able to tag along.
This whole idea of a rainy day fund is an excellent idea. 21m is better than 6m. Or 11m. It's not as good as 30-40m though. And in that interim there would have been representation in the running of the club.
As for the last sentence, it's just bollox. If there wasn't an acceptable offer, the Trust board would in every likelihood be recommending the legal option. You make it seem as if the Trust board have just taken the first offer on the table. That's just nonsense.. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:58 - Jul 1 with 1716 views | Joe_bradshaw |
If the Trust lose does it have the means to pay the legal fees? |  |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:00 - Jul 1 with 1712 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:51 - Jul 1 by Nookiejack |
Do you believe in total fan ownership of the club?
Or just a say? |
I'm a fan of the German model.
Is your aversion to accepting any sort of deal because you are looking for the scenario that maximises the Trusts bank account, above all else? | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:00 - Jul 1 with 1694 views | Uxbridge |
| Interesting Trust Email on 21:58 - Jul 1 by Joe_bradshaw |
If the Trust lose does it have the means to pay the legal fees? |
Yes. It's own at the very least. Potentially the other sides. There is insurance that could be taken out, no win no fee type people etc. Expensive business all round though. | |
| |
| Interesting Trust Email on 22:03 - Jul 1 with 1672 views | Nookiejack |
| Interesting Trust Email on 16:45 - Jul 1 by exiledclaseboy |
Ok, no need to be stroppy. I wasn't trying to be. I understand your feelings about Jenkins et al but as has been stated, legal action won't remove him or Dineen. I agree it would be cathartic for us al, but the most likely outcome is that the Trust would sell all its shares as opposed to keeping a stake in the club under the terms of the proposed deal. I don't understand the details of the rest so won't pretend to, there's plenty if others doing that.
I haven't decided how to vote yet but honestly I don't give a f*ck about Jenkins. Fully appreciate why others do and I did feel the same way myself. But whether I'd vote for a legal action that would feel good if won, could cost a fortune if lost, is likely to result in the Trust having no stake in the club and will have no impact on Jenkins' position I don't know.
And if course any court case would be against the buyers, not the sellers. At least as I understand it. [Post edited 1 Jul 2017 16:58]
|
Sellers have given the buyers a warranty though | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
