Forum | Trust Update re Court Case by swancity |

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread

Trust Update re Court Case 11:41 - Feb 4 with 7626 views

swancity

Any recent news or developments please ?

Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day

Trust Update re Court Case on 14:35 - Feb 4 with 1982 views

vetchonian

Trust Update re Court Case on 14:02 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

The Vetchonian is a fan and is therefore represented by the Trust. He was critical of the US owners pumping money into the club. People like the Vetchonian have regularly stated the US people would never do this. They were wrong. The 'Fans' are owners of Swansea city. 21% owners. Any discussion of "the owners" includes them.

I drew the big Vs attention to the fact that his own people could have joined the CLN but had no money. Its no known if the other Welsh owners joined the CLN. They do have cash and if it is such a good investment they surely would have considered joining the CLN. Again ask the man on the Board. He can tell you.

Yes I am a fan

Where was I critical of of the owners pumping money into the club?

Because they are not pumping money into the club they are loaning the club money and that is the difference.....The monies will be recovered either by redemption of the loan at I think it is quoted 5% interest or via profit from the sales of the additional shares that are converted against that loan.

I personally have never stated that the US people would not invest.....

The sellouts really do have you in a spin........All I was doing was to highlight that the monies being "injected" and yes much needed are in the form of loans...not as in the olden days when philanthropic chairman would throw thousands of their own money at clubs without securing its return.....these loans will be recovered by hook or crook

Poll:

Will CCFC win a game this season?

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:13 - Feb 4 with 1953 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 14:09 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001

The interest rate is on the document that was shared on here a few weeks ago from Companies House.

It’s 5% pa and it’s a 5 year term (also on the filed public document as I said previously).

I note that the ‘just a normal fan’ account continues to spread misinformation at a rate of knots.I particular enjoyed the notion that the Trust can just go and sell their shares (no control, no liquidity) for however many millions it was, as well as the suggestion that the Trust should not have put all its eggs in one basket (the football club it was specifically formed to protect) but should instead have invested in a range of opportunities.

Don’t know what passes for legal behaviour in Resolven, or Ponty, or wherever he’s currently claiming to be posting from, but it would be regarded as pretty much a no go in the real world.

Thank you for yor reply. Please correct anything I say you consider to be wrong. I consider the ascertions made below are all true. If they are not I will accept your corrections.

The Trust can sell their shares for a price of their chosing. True / False

The Trust can sell their shares to whom they chose ? True / False

It is better to sell the Trust's shares in the Premier league. True / False

Forcing someone to buy your shares they do not want is not the best way of selling. True / False

Holding 90% of assetts in a Football club is generally classed as "very high risk". True / False

Swansea city in the Premier league will be worth much more than the 2016 price True / False

The Trust are free to invest on global markets True / False (I am not certain on this)

The Trust are not a charity True / False

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 15:13]

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:26 - Feb 4 with 1934 views

londonlisa2001

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:13 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 15:13]

The first statement is false.
So let’s concentrate on that shall we given it forms the basis of most of your nonsense. And renders subsidiary questions irrelevant.

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:36 - Feb 4 with 1915 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:26 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001
The first statement is false. So let’s concentrate on that shall we given it forms the basis of most of your nonsense. And renders subsidiary questions irrelevant.

Crickey this is wierd. Are you saying this?

The Trust CANNOT sell their shares at a price of their chosing.

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:41 - Feb 4 with 1908 views

londonlisa2001

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:36 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1
Crickey this is wierd. Are you saying this? The Trust CANNOT sell their shares at a price of their chosing.

Of course it can’t.

Bloody hell. Basic stuff here. No one can sell stuff whatever it is at a price of their choosing can they.

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:55 - Feb 4 with 1888 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:41 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001
Of course it can’t. Bloody hell. Basic stuff here. No one can sell stuff whatever it is at a price of their choosing can they.

I sold my last Citreon Xara car at £800. This price was chosen by me and the buyer accepted it. The Trust do not need to go to court to sell their shares. its just a matter of price. Like selling lambs at Carmarthen market. There used to be a hell of a mess on Wednesdays with all that 'liquidity'.

I really think you should answer the other questions for educational purposes while you are on here. I realise you are a volunteer doing your best and perhaps you do not know the answer to the questions or just do not want to. No obligation of course.

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 16:01 - Feb 4 with 1878 views

londonlisa2001

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:55 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

The issue with answering any of it with you is that you genuinely don’t understand or accept why there’s such a flaw in your basic premise.

It’s been explained to you a few times and you refuse to accept it. Or you’re unable to understand even simple concepts.

The answer to your first question is no. If you can get your head round that we may get somewhere. If you continue to refuse to do so the whole exercise is pointless. I may as well talk to the wall. The wall would probably be less patronising as well.

Trust Update re Court Case on 16:08 - Feb 4 with 1853 views

vetchonian

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:55 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

But the court case is not strictly purely about the Trust not being able to sell its shares ..
IT is about the process adopted for the original sale...

The Trust are not going to court in order to get someone to buy their shares though this could be an outcome.

TO say the Trust cna name its price!!!!
What if it said they want £30M who will buy them at their price when there is no controlling interest attached.

Yes people but shares without having control but they are usually investors who play the market looking at good returns....this sort of investor would not "casually" invest in a football club.

Poll:

Will CCFC win a game this season?

Trust Update re Court Case on 16:11 - Feb 4 with 1848 views

Boundy

Trust Update re Court Case on 15:55 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

If I may
can a shareholder sell one share of any stock regardless of the stock market price at t higher price or are you referring to a sell stop limit order ?

"In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master."

Trust Update re Court Case on 17:06 - Feb 4 with 1797 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 16:01 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001

All good forum bluff and bluster. Been here before.

I asked 6 or 7 very basic questions which will not be answered because

a) I am too stupid. or

b) Answering them will make the good lady look foolish.

I do not accept the concept of 'gas lighting'.

Awkward people asking awkward questions. Thats what was needed before. Frank Zappa would have got me sorted with a ban.

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 17:28 - Feb 4 with 1765 views

onehunglow

Trust Update re Court Case on 17:06 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1
All good forum bluff and bluster. Been here before. I asked 6 or 7 very basic questions which will not be answered because a) I am too stupid. or b) Answering them will make the good lady look foolish. I do not accept the concept of 'gas lighting'. Awkward people asking awkward questions. Thats what was needed before. Frank Zappa would have got me sorted with a ban.

I remember an avatar of that overated dopehead and it s scarred me for life

Poll:

Christmas. Enjoyable or not

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:25 - Feb 4 with 1734 views

BillyChong

5%, nice little earner for Silverstein. Was this the cheapest method of finance for the club?

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:29 - Feb 4 with 1728 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 14:17 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001

The London lady can clearly read a public document posted on here, I think you meant to say.

Both the term and the interest rate are included on the document filed.

I’m surprised you didn’t know that given you’ve commented a few times on the interest rate and ‘how low it is’. Surely the only information an ‘ordinary fan account’ could have is by reading the public documents? Or are you saying you are just making everything up? Or something else?

Confused...

I got my information on line. It stated CLN rates are 'generally low'. I do not claim to be an expert. What the rates are from commercial banks at this time is out off my field but I would not be surprised if they were higher than this for a football team in trouble. That is, if they can get a loan at all.

It is something that Mr Winter can inform the fans of in the forthcoming zoom forum. Why was a CLN used instead of a conventional bank loan? I am sure the man on the board knows all this anyway as he is in constant dialogue with the Chairman I am advised by Chief.

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 19:09]

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:31 - Feb 4 with 1717 views

Nortbankboy

Feck me we are second in the league let's not rock the boat now

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:31 - Feb 4 with 1719 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:25 - Feb 4 by BillyChong
5%, nice little earner for Silverstein. Was this the cheapest method of finance for the club?

Ask mr Winter in the zoom call.

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:47 - Feb 4 with 1693 views

Chief

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:29 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 19:09]

You found that one article relating to the government loaning money to struggling companies. You've since been using this CLN term that you learnt from that to describe what happened with us. Although there's no evidence to suggest the terms are the same. Id expect the government one to be of far more favourable terms to the struggling company. Is there any actual evidence that a 'note' was issued anyway?

Winter himself stated that he is in regular dialogue with the trust so not sure why you keep quoting me on that. Quote him.

Is this something Winter would answer anyway? You say he asked the Americans for funds (do you have a link for that by the way?). That doesn't mean they had to loan us their own money and slap 5% interest on it. There were clearly other options available.

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 18:56]

Poll:

Rate the ref's performance today

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:50 - Feb 4 with 1689 views

Chief

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:31 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1
Ask mr Winter in the zoom call.

So you cannot justify the Americans taking 5% interest on the loan then?

Poll:

Rate the ref's performance today

Trust Update re Court Case on 19:25 - Feb 4 with 1650 views

Neath_Jack

Why does anyone give Resloven the time of day? It's clear he's a stooge operating on behalf of the old lot. You'd have thought that they would have used someone that knows you can't sell things for whatever price you want to mind.

Ignore him and he'll go away, like all the stooges they've had knocking about.

	I want a mate like Flashberryjacks, who wears a Barnsley jersey with "Swans are my second team" on the back.
Poll:	Would you support military action against Syria on what we know so far?

Trust Update re Court Case on 19:29 - Feb 4 with 1646 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 18:50 - Feb 4 by Chief
So you cannot justify the Americans taking 5% interest on the loan then?

My understanding (online sources) is that the 5% interest is not paid back if the loan is converted. It is either not paid at all or the 5% interest converted into shares depending on terms. One of the terms could be whether 5% is compounded. 5% seems pretty low to me if it is fixed for 5 years but I am not in the banking business. it was before the Rodon sale and the EPL loan offer as far as I know.

If the other shareholders are at risk of get dilution there may have been an option for other shareholders to join the CLN and share the risk / reward. The man of the board can answer this. Usually when new shares are issured all shareholders get the option to buy as well.

I believe the loan allowed Winter to push up the Rodon price from the initial £7m to the eventual £11M +£4m. He was not obliged to take Levy's £7m 'take or leave' offer. The £5m loan after 5 years will be worth £6.38m an extra £1.38m.

The other benefit of the CLN is that the new US person is bringing his experience to the club and may have been invloved in the arrival of two USA international 'at cost' for as little as £750,000 combined salaries.

Always at your service.

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 19:42]

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 19:53 - Feb 4 with 1626 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 19:25 - Feb 4 by Neath_Jack
Why does anyone give Resloven the time of day? It's clear he's a stooge operating on behalf of the old lot. You'd have thought that they would have used someone that knows you can't sell things for whatever price you want to mind. Ignore him and he'll go away, like all the stooges they've had knocking about.

I do not care a fig about the old lot. They are old enough and tough enough to look after themselves. I am concerned about the ordinary joe who does not appear to have much idea about finance and the possiblities that go with it.

The Trust hold £880,000 in the bank getting about 0.15% interest. About £1200 or so per annum. If I am right and they do have permission to invest on global markets they could over the last five years have invested in a low risk US tracker fund for example. Cheap fees and low risk.

It has returned in 5 years 139% returns. See below. They would have made over £1m profits roughly £15,000 a month.

https://www.trustnet.com/factsheets/o/ls83/lg-us-index-trust-i-acc

I thought the people down the road in the big town were a bit more sophisitcated to be honest.

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 19:57]

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 19:55 - Feb 4 with 1621 views

Chief

Trust Update re Court Case on 19:29 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 19:42]

What online sources? Were those sources referring to this particular transaction?

The trust say they weren't consulted on this loan, so no there was no invite extended to them at least. Not sure about the other shareholders.

He wasn't obliged to take 11mill either but he did. So you don't have that link then?

Is there any evidence of what affect he's having on the club? There's been no mention of his involvement at all ij the deals, while other characters were specifically mentioned. Recent trust updates also state that are still unsure as to what his role entails, and seeing as they attend board meetings, which presumably Silverstein should be attending to, it should be clear by now if he was contributing something.

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 20:03]

Poll:

Rate the ref's performance today

Trust Update re Court Case on 20:14 - Feb 4 with 1607 views

ReslovenSwan1

Trust Update re Court Case on 19:55 - Feb 4 by Chief

[Post edited 4 Feb 2021 20:03]

Just Google CLN and read it. I even put a link up a while back. No reference to this transaction. They all say pretty much rhe same things.

Silverstein said he was going to be 'hands on' bingo., Morris and Arrieola at cost. Somebody over the pond must have done these deals in consutation. I am speculating of course.

No Welsh people have anything good to say for the US owners but I glady will make that exception. Not even Mr Cooper dared to praise them. I really do hope Morris and Arreola rip up this league.

Wise sage since Toshack era

Trust Update re Court Case on 20:19 - Feb 4 with 1596 views

Chief

Trust Update re Court Case on 20:14 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

Yes, as I've alluded to, is there evidence that this particular transaction is subject to a CLN? Has a note even been issued? Do they get issued in every instance of a loan to possible equity transaction? Dont think so.

No need to speculate, we have been told in numerous articles who were the driving forces behind the loans and he wasn't mentioned. Nor is he registering on the trust's radar at board meetings.

I hope Morris and Arriola do too, if he arrives before the MLS restarts.

Poll:

Rate the ref's performance today

Trust Update re Court Case on 07:32 - Feb 5 with 1475 views

Treforys_Jack

Trust Update re Court Case on 19:25 - Feb 4 by Neath_Jack
Why does anyone give Resloven the time of day? It's clear he's a stooge operating on behalf of the old lot. You'd have thought that they would have used someone that knows you can't sell things for whatever price you want to mind. Ignore him and he'll go away, like all the stooges they've had knocking about.

Wise and true words.

Trust Update re Court Case on 10:13 - Feb 5 with 1428 views

onehunglow

Trust Update re Court Case on 20:14 - Feb 4 by ReslovenSwan1

The reason why people are like that with the Americans is simply becaue,like me,they are disappointed in their moving us on to the next level hasnt really been anything of substance.

Poll:

Christmas. Enjoyable or not

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread