By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
The QC will be on very big bucks. What I quoted is typical. He will only have recieved information from the Trust which would have been one eyed. He told them legal action was a last resort.
The legal funders have to have a 'no win no fee' arrangement as the Trust do not have enough money theselves. The legal fees will be around £1.5m and the Trust ony has £880k.
The new cash call in the Silverstein loan potentiall to be converted into new shares. The local shareholders will have to cough up to retain their 5% rights prorata as I understand it. What people like yourself fail to iunderstand is the stupendous job HJ and others did 2002 -2016 when no one was asked to invest anything as the club grew. This is not normal.
HJ was not removed from his job he resigned. He stated if he could not turn around the clubs fortunes he would step down. That is what he did giving up a well paid job.
Any sensible organisation woud take independent professional advice at this critical stage.
- Yea agreed, going to court is the last resort, the trust have tried everything to resolve the issue. - well we have no idea if there will be a 'cash call'. As far as we know Silverstein & co could pull out their loans with interest tomorrow. - why do you think I've forgotten what Huw did? Where have I criticized his job as chairman? He was a fantastic chairman for the club. - oh right so complete coincidence that Huw left days ad yes defying the Americans by scuppering their ludicrous Dan James deal then? - The trust have taken advice - that's what the QC has been providing
- Yea agreed, going to court is the last resort, the trust have tried everything to resolve the issue. - well we have no idea if there will be a 'cash call'. As far as we know Silverstein & co could pull out their loans with interest tomorrow. - why do you think I've forgotten what Huw did? Where have I criticized his job as chairman? He was a fantastic chairman for the club. - oh right so complete coincidence that Huw left days ad yes defying the Americans by scuppering their ludicrous Dan James deal then? - The trust have taken advice - that's what the QC has been providing
The Trust have not tried everything to resolve the issue. For example they did not show up for mediation and admitted it.
The Rodon sale may see the loan repaid. Given that Silverstein has been given a place on the Board this seems unlikely. The Trust s board member needs to do his job and find out the terms etc.
HJ was not sacked he stood down after taking a decsion in the best interests of the club. He did not agree with the other owners and resigned.
The QC is a vested interest that will profit from any legal action. The trust needs independant advice in my opinion.
Lets give Winter a chance - lets judge him 6-8 months into the job. He has been in the job a couple of weeks - some of which were during the international break so not too surprised he has little to say/update on.
As for Huw Jenkins leaving - wasn't it over the Daniel James Leeds fiasco?
The Winter chap, on 17:56 - Oct 21 by QJumpingJack
Lets give Winter a chance - lets judge him 6-8 months into the job. He has been in the job a couple of weeks - some of which were during the international break so not too surprised he has little to say/update on.
As for Huw Jenkins leaving - wasn't it over the Daniel James Leeds fiasco?
Had a lot to do with it I reckon, but fair play to him.
The Trust have not tried everything to resolve the issue. For example they did not show up for mediation and admitted it.
The Rodon sale may see the loan repaid. Given that Silverstein has been given a place on the Board this seems unlikely. The Trust s board member needs to do his job and find out the terms etc.
HJ was not sacked he stood down after taking a decsion in the best interests of the club. He did not agree with the other owners and resigned.
The QC is a vested interest that will profit from any legal action. The trust needs independant advice in my opinion.
- The trust went tried their best to get relevant people to mediation. We have no idea who the Americans sent, but it appears they weren't anyone particularly relevant. Other requests were ignored by the Americans. - Do you don't think the trust hasn't already asked about the terms of the loan? The American's themselves could tell us mind, the trust aren't their media&communications department. - Ah so he doesn't think the American's have the best interests of the club? But you say he's still on good terms with them? - what vested interest would the QC have? They'll get paid whether the case goes to court or not.
Well back to the purpose of the thread (before it got derailed by random and needless trust bashing):
I read the lengthy interview and he speaks a lot without saying much but few points: - Says hes in communication with the trust which is a good thing. - only 1 meeting with board in a month sounded a bit strange? Would that be normal frequency? - Says the recent loan is 'small'. - Says we are in good financial shape but then does explicitly mention January. Are we to read into this that more sales are imminent? - Addresses the boardroom changes but doesn't actually say why or what these new members bring but nothing much will change. Why bother then? & also why the need to not comment to the press.
- The trust went tried their best to get relevant people to mediation. We have no idea who the Americans sent, but it appears they weren't anyone particularly relevant. Other requests were ignored by the Americans. - Do you don't think the trust hasn't already asked about the terms of the loan? The American's themselves could tell us mind, the trust aren't their media&communications department. - Ah so he doesn't think the American's have the best interests of the club? But you say he's still on good terms with them? - what vested interest would the QC have? They'll get paid whether the case goes to court or not.
You are arguing with the guy that said Silverstein’s cash would allow us to play hardball when it came to selling Joe. £11m.
Pretty pointless from Winter, nothing much of substance. Got a long way to go before winning much of the fan base over. As above, he took the time to namecheck those people but didn’t explain what they do. Sounds as though he’s already getting comfy with McDonald at games. Surprised he didn’t suggested a virtual trust fans forum when mentioning communication. Very wary of him so far.
Well back to the purpose of the thread (before it got derailed by random and needless trust bashing):
I read the lengthy interview and he speaks a lot without saying much but few points: - Says hes in communication with the trust which is a good thing. - only 1 meeting with board in a month sounded a bit strange? Would that be normal frequency? - Says the recent loan is 'small'. - Says we are in good financial shape but then does explicitly mention January. Are we to read into this that more sales are imminent? - Addresses the boardroom changes but doesn't actually say why or what these new members bring but nothing much will change. Why bother then? & also why the need to not comment to the press.
But at least he's said something.
He's a puppet Chief.
Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
Birch was very, very good at his job, which is why Daniel Levy hired him. We'll be fortunate to get two in a row that capable.
If he has budgeted for no fans all season he's got a bit of common sense at least.
Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.
But as I said, it is early days, this communication is a start.
The club is wheeling and dealing again with good promising signing to kick of the Andy Scott era. The Potter signings were disasterous. McKay, Celina, John and Asoro. John will hve to be paid up. Lucky the US owners thought better of coughing up £6m for Woods.
You will have noticed it was Winter that reported good communication with the Trust not the other way around.
The club is wheeling and dealing again with good promising signing to kick of the Andy Scott era. The Potter signings were disasterous. McKay, Celina, John and Asoro. John will hve to be paid up. Lucky the US owners thought better of coughing up £6m for Woods.
You will have noticed it was Winter that reported good communication with the Trust not the other way around.
Indeed, and you've been trying to claim the trust are bad at networking.
And of course the trust&Winter may well have differing views of what 'good communication' constitutes.
The trust repeatedly praised Birch on this matter so if Winter is similar I'm sure they'll do the same with him.
I get the feeling that the Trust are a nightmare to deal with for all concerned. No one actually knows what they want because it has too many factions and opinions. I sense a political angle where their simple, thouroughly inefficient existence, as a 'not for profit' committee of ordinary working people is enough. This goes down well with Guardian journalists for example. The logic is mind numbingly simple. A community owned club with local owners = success. US asset strippers = failure. You know what 18 year olds are like.
They have suddenly reasoned that after 18 years of existence and living the good life under the loathed 'sell outs' that there is a very risky world out there. They are now likely to have to either get out completely or actually contribute to the club. As they did not sell any of their holding in the PL ( seven long seasons, wht were they doing?) they cannot contribute and therefore will see their holding dilluted. They clearly did not consider this in the PL. If the club performs badly their holding will shrink. Therefore they must bale out even it it means giving half their holding away. The 18 years old has grown up and bottled at the idea of working for his Dad's firm. This is 'the Prince Harry syndrome'.
They are now negiociating to give away upto half of the wealth created for them by Huw Jenkins and others, in a massively risky "last resort" court case Their associates are the very antithesis of what they stand for namely public school financial institution 'ambulance chasers' looking for a quick buck. (from a not for profit organisation) . If it is not illegal it should be.
Given the it is well establish US owned clubs cannot be successful there is no point trying. (Liverpool perhaps?) They can only work with good similarly minded people like the 'sell outs' before money corrupted them. Those people were never interested in money before Uncle Sam turned up. (Two were Venture capitalists).
SCST oh deary me. The new board should call on the services of a renound business strategy advisor to assess their performance and strategy before the confused 18 year old does something crasy.
I get the feeling that the Trust are a nightmare to deal with for all concerned. No one actually knows what they want because it has too many factions and opinions. I sense a political angle where their simple, thouroughly inefficient existence, as a 'not for profit' committee of ordinary working people is enough. This goes down well with Guardian journalists for example. The logic is mind numbingly simple. A community owned club with local owners = success. US asset strippers = failure. You know what 18 year olds are like.
They have suddenly reasoned that after 18 years of existence and living the good life under the loathed 'sell outs' that there is a very risky world out there. They are now likely to have to either get out completely or actually contribute to the club. As they did not sell any of their holding in the PL ( seven long seasons, wht were they doing?) they cannot contribute and therefore will see their holding dilluted. They clearly did not consider this in the PL. If the club performs badly their holding will shrink. Therefore they must bale out even it it means giving half their holding away. The 18 years old has grown up and bottled at the idea of working for his Dad's firm. This is 'the Prince Harry syndrome'.
They are now negiociating to give away upto half of the wealth created for them by Huw Jenkins and others, in a massively risky "last resort" court case Their associates are the very antithesis of what they stand for namely public school financial institution 'ambulance chasers' looking for a quick buck. (from a not for profit organisation) . If it is not illegal it should be.
Given the it is well establish US owned clubs cannot be successful there is no point trying. (Liverpool perhaps?) They can only work with good similarly minded people like the 'sell outs' before money corrupted them. Those people were never interested in money before Uncle Sam turned up. (Two were Venture capitalists).
SCST oh deary me. The new board should call on the services of a renound business strategy advisor to assess their performance and strategy before the confused 18 year old does something crasy.
Here we go again, randomly taking jabs against the trust despite them not being the subject of the thread (i do find that very telling) but ok: - What gives you that impression? They worked fine under the previous ownership&seemed to with Birch also. If the Americans think the supporters trust of the football club they own are a 'nightmare' then 1- that's an indictment on the way they are running the club and 2- the trust are doing their job. - What factions? You're just making this stuff up with no basis aren't you? - Are you saying the Americans are asset strippers? - For 7 seasons, the trust were doing exactly what they were designed to do- be a supporters trust. Why the need to sell? You still fail to grasp that they aren't and never were an investment group / fund. - Dilution will only occur if the loan is converted. This didn't sound imminent by Winters comments. The Americans may have to have had to buy the trust's shares by then anyway. - Any tidy 'Dad' wouldn't have sold the firm behind their backs. - more random figures guessing - I see you've taken the tally back up to 50% now. - why do you think it's risky exactly? The QC has said it's a good case&there's of course the potential of it being no win no fee. - So you're criticising them for not selling while in the prem, but now there's a chance they can sell some / all of their shares at prem prices, you are not happy with that either. - Not sure what you're getting at in that last paragraph? More random bashing with no basis. - they've engaged a QC. But of course that's not good enough for you.
Again, if you think the trust are so terrible, don't worry about it. By your theories they'll be out of the club soon forever anyway.
Here we go again, randomly taking jabs against the trust despite them not being the subject of the thread (i do find that very telling) but ok: - What gives you that impression? They worked fine under the previous ownership&seemed to with Birch also. If the Americans think the supporters trust of the football club they own are a 'nightmare' then 1- that's an indictment on the way they are running the club and 2- the trust are doing their job. - What factions? You're just making this stuff up with no basis aren't you? - Are you saying the Americans are asset strippers? - For 7 seasons, the trust were doing exactly what they were designed to do- be a supporters trust. Why the need to sell? You still fail to grasp that they aren't and never were an investment group / fund. - Dilution will only occur if the loan is converted. This didn't sound imminent by Winters comments. The Americans may have to have had to buy the trust's shares by then anyway. - Any tidy 'Dad' wouldn't have sold the firm behind their backs. - more random figures guessing - I see you've taken the tally back up to 50% now. - why do you think it's risky exactly? The QC has said it's a good case&there's of course the potential of it being no win no fee. - So you're criticising them for not selling while in the prem, but now there's a chance they can sell some / all of their shares at prem prices, you are not happy with that either. - Not sure what you're getting at in that last paragraph? More random bashing with no basis. - they've engaged a QC. But of course that's not good enough for you.
Again, if you think the trust are so terrible, don't worry about it. By your theories they'll be out of the club soon forever anyway.
Winter bashing Trust bashing fukcing tedious if you ask me.
Winter has been in the job no time and made a reasonable enough start.
The trust are volunteers working for the good of the club.
Winter has said he will engage the Trust have said they would like to talk as well.
So hear is an idea stop trying to stir the pot for the sake of it when there is no argument to be had.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
