| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... 18:10 - Mar 22 with 4745 views | Loyal |
Appoint Trevor Birch on a remuneration package that dilutes the trust shares and nothing can be done ?
Fcking serious ? |  |
| Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows.
The official inventor of the tit w@nk. | | Poll: | Who should be Swansea number 1 |
| |  |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 18:22 - Mar 22 with 4706 views | monmouth |
They should have already had them in court. They have no power to do anything else. Haven’t had since 2016. All the pissing about has become ridiculous. F*ck ‘Trevor’, F*ck ‘Steve’, F*ck Jason’. They are laughing at supporters and their Trust.
Since the articles were changed the Trust could have been diluted at any time. The only commitment given by the yanks as I remember was not to do it until this season, so hardly a bloody surprise. |  |
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 20:53 - Mar 22 with 4538 views | builthjack |
Get them in court quick. Just do it, no more talk. |  |
| 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.
|
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 21:06 - Mar 22 with 4488 views | Jonathans_coat |
Were the Trust advised in advance of the intention to include equity in the new Chairman’s remuneration? Or did they try to sneak the dilution of their shareholding through the back door? |  | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 09:07 - Mar 23 with 4281 views | BillyChong |
What’s the runumeration package consist of? |  | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 09:28 - Mar 23 with 4248 views | Badlands |
Issuing more shares was an option announced in January and first mentioned by the press, not the club, in 2017 (generating finances for stadium expansion).
'The club's owners, Steve Kaplan and Jason Levien, are considering a "cash injection in the form of equity" and the possibility of buying or diluting more shares.' Chris Pearlman.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46924899
So if the Trust were not aware of the possibility where have they been? |  |
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 11:51 - Mar 23 with 4134 views | chad |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 18:22 - Mar 22 by monmouth |
They should have already had them in court. They have no power to do anything else. Haven’t had since 2016. All the pissing about has become ridiculous. F*ck ‘Trevor’, F*ck ‘Steve’, F*ck Jason’. They are laughing at supporters and their Trust.
Since the articles were changed the Trust could have been diluted at any time. The only commitment given by the yanks as I remember was not to do it until this season, so hardly a bloody surprise. |
Whilst I totally agree with the logic of your post in relation to the current (and ongoing) position, and all your similar posts over a long period, do be careful or Ux will be on accusing you of absolute bias and using lies against you to detract from the absolute validity of your opinion.
Oh no as you were, given it is you saying these things rather than me, no problem. |  | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 12:08 - Mar 23 with 4104 views | chad |
We have known, even before the sale, that dilution was a real issue and meant we had no real security for our shares, as we could be diluted to a level where we could be forcibly bought out of the club.
Presumably however they still need to consult with us re dilution if my understanding is correct that we still need to be given the opportunity to buy a number of shares pro rata to our current % holding, to give us the chance (if we have the funds) to retain the same % holding after the new share issue. | | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 12:47 - Mar 23 with 4049 views | Badlands |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 12:08 - Mar 23 by chad |
We have known, even before the sale, that dilution was a real issue and meant we had no real security for our shares, as we could be diluted to a level where we could be forcibly bought out of the club.
Presumably however they still need to consult with us re dilution if my understanding is correct that we still need to be given the opportunity to buy a number of shares pro rata to our current % holding, to give us the chance (if we have the funds) to retain the same % holding after the new share issue. |
This shows the difference between professional and amateurs.
Whether or not you agree with the Consortium they are, without even trying, making the Trust look exactly what it is - a committee of well meaning amateurs but completely out of their depth. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 12:52 - Mar 23 with 4033 views | leighton1318 |
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/washoutround.asp
Question is whether the Trust board member has any say in the terms of a new share issue. A proper shareholders agreement would give minority protections but we all know there isn’t a shareholders agreement, is there. [Post edited 23 Mar 2019 12:54]
| | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 14:25 - Mar 23 with 3940 views | Loyal |
Clearly due to the ineffective management of the trust over time to deal with these fcking scumbags they now believe they can get away with anything.
As I said fcking scum. | |
| Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows.
The official inventor of the tit w@nk. | | Poll: | Who should be Swansea number 1 |
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 17:57 - Mar 23 with 3807 views | londonlisa2001 |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 09:28 - Mar 23 by Badlands |
Issuing more shares was an option announced in January and first mentioned by the press, not the club, in 2017 (generating finances for stadium expansion).
'The club's owners, Steve Kaplan and Jason Levien, are considering a "cash injection in the form of equity" and the possibility of buying or diluting more shares.' Chris Pearlman.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46924899
So if the Trust were not aware of the possibility where have they been? |
Who said the Trust were unaware of the possibility?
I haven’t seen that said anywhere? | | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 18:38 - Mar 23 with 3758 views | Garyjack |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 17:57 - Mar 23 by londonlisa2001 |
Who said the Trust were unaware of the possibility?
I haven’t seen that said anywhere? |
That's dgt for you. He assumes a lot in life, and therefore assumes that everyone else does as well. |  | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 20:08 - Mar 23 with 3689 views | valleyboy |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 18:22 - Mar 22 by monmouth |
They should have already had them in court. They have no power to do anything else. Haven’t had since 2016. All the pissing about has become ridiculous. F*ck ‘Trevor’, F*ck ‘Steve’, F*ck Jason’. They are laughing at supporters and their Trust.
Since the articles were changed the Trust could have been diluted at any time. The only commitment given by the yanks as I remember was not to do it until this season, so hardly a bloody surprise. |
Of course Trevor, Steve and Jasonare laughing at the Trust and the supporters
Wouldn’t you if you were in the same position and that if you were in a dispute and saw the opposition so pathetic and weak
What have the supporters done to show they are not accepting what’s happening
And then there’s the Trust
A complete waste of time and where their complacency for so many years have showed what they are
I’ve never understood this “shareholders agreement” only as much that if anyone was selling their shares. They had to be offered equally to the other shareholders
If you read Company Law that says that if one shareholder owns 75% of the shares. Then that person has full control of that company | | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 00:36 - Mar 24 with 3565 views | DJack |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 20:08 - Mar 23 by valleyboy |
Of course Trevor, Steve and Jasonare laughing at the Trust and the supporters
Wouldn’t you if you were in the same position and that if you were in a dispute and saw the opposition so pathetic and weak
What have the supporters done to show they are not accepting what’s happening
And then there’s the Trust
A complete waste of time and where their complacency for so many years have showed what they are
I’ve never understood this “shareholders agreement” only as much that if anyone was selling their shares. They had to be offered equally to the other shareholders
If you read Company Law that says that if one shareholder owns 75% of the shares. Then that person has full control of that company |
 Well done you...for pointing out what has already previously stated. You know , one of the many reasons, why people were unhappy at Jenkins ignoring the Shareholders agreement and going behind the Trust's back.
Then the Trust, realising that the remedies under the law were insufficient to "properly" deal with the scenario in a way that would suit the fans/Trust and not the egregious party, chose to negotiate - this reminder is from somebody who voted for legal action the first time round.
So thank you for your pointless, point scoring, smugness...now go bother sheep. |  |
| It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan |
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 00:45 - Mar 24 with 3557 views | valleyboy |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 12:47 - Mar 23 by Badlands |
This shows the difference between professional and amateurs.
Whether or not you agree with the Consortium they are, without even trying, making the Trust look exactly what it is - a committee of well meaning amateurs but completely out of their depth. |
A few definitions of a committee whish is very apt for the Trust
1. To get something done a committee should consist of no more than three people, two of whom are constantly absent
2. A committee is a group that takes minutes but waste hours
3. To kill time, a committee is a perfect weapon
Three of those quotes some up the Trust to a tee | | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 01:00 - Mar 24 with 3550 views | majorraglan |
The fans anger shouldn’t just be directed at the new owners, the previous Board/owners may also have a part to play. If the Trust gets its case off the ground, all these issues must surely strengthen its claims? [Post edited 24 Mar 2019 1:01]
| | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 01:17 - Mar 24 with 3530 views | valleyboy |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 00:36 - Mar 24 by DJack |
Well done you...for pointing out what has already previously stated. You know , one of the many reasons, why people were unhappy at Jenkins ignoring the Shareholders agreement and going behind the Trust's back.
Then the Trust, realising that the remedies under the law were insufficient to "properly" deal with the scenario in a way that would suit the fans/Trust and not the egregious party, chose to negotiate - this reminder is from somebody who voted for legal action the first time round.
So thank you for your pointless, point scoring, smugness...now go bother sheep. |
Not smugness
Just stating how it is
That posters like you don’t like to hear | | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 01:41 - Mar 24 with 3524 views | DJack |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 01:17 - Mar 24 by valleyboy |
Not smugness
Just stating how it is
That posters like you don’t like to hear |
Incorrect, my issue is your current anti Swansea stance. As I stated in my post, it was mentioned before (the new boards actions) and it was not liked and then you come along way after the fact and claim that we accepted it.
Whilst I agree that we were not forthright in our views we changed the make up of the Trust board to re-envigor the Trust and push for action. As mentioned by those linked with the Trust any legal action is very slow and very limited in it's redress so careful (and tactful) actions are required leading up to the eventual time in court.
I await this with a sense of impatience but have to temper my feelings with deference to legal sensibilities looking for the best chance of a "best outcome". I, surprisingly, will listen to all views so please feel free to add to the conversation but don't regurgitate pointless barbs/old positions, particularly, whilst not allowing the Trust time to cover all bases to facilitate a positive outcome.
I will also add that i'm a little touchy as the Swans fate is important to me though I understand that it is not quite so important to you. | |
| It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan |
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 02:38 - Mar 24 with 3515 views | chad |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 01:41 - Mar 24 by DJack |
Incorrect, my issue is your current anti Swansea stance. As I stated in my post, it was mentioned before (the new boards actions) and it was not liked and then you come along way after the fact and claim that we accepted it.
Whilst I agree that we were not forthright in our views we changed the make up of the Trust board to re-envigor the Trust and push for action. As mentioned by those linked with the Trust any legal action is very slow and very limited in it's redress so careful (and tactful) actions are required leading up to the eventual time in court.
I await this with a sense of impatience but have to temper my feelings with deference to legal sensibilities looking for the best chance of a "best outcome". I, surprisingly, will listen to all views so please feel free to add to the conversation but don't regurgitate pointless barbs/old positions, particularly, whilst not allowing the Trust time to cover all bases to facilitate a positive outcome.
I will also add that i'm a little touchy as the Swans fate is important to me though I understand that it is not quite so important to you. |
Interesting though that the Trust, after our previous negotiations that led to the recommendation for the shockingly weak deal, saw us, all that time ago, as ready to immediately initiate legal action (if the vote had gone that way). What has changed.
I agree we should do our utmost to show we have been willing to negotiate, but we had already done that at length last time. However that does not imply the need to accept any deal that is not close to what we could reasonably expect from the likely success of our strong legal case.
The Trust also at the last meeting promised a vote this month (although did not see the members as fit to briefly review the consultation document to check for balance / omissions to help circumvent a repeat of the last biased cock up)
The Trust actually stated almost from the outset that they could not deal with the new majority owners without reassurances on share dilution. However they backed down from this stance without any long term reassurances, as they came to realise that was not a tenable position, given new share issue is a valid vehicle to raise finance for the club
P.S. thought barbs always had points ;) | | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 02:58 - Mar 24 with 3510 views | DJack |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 02:38 - Mar 24 by chad |
Interesting though that the Trust, after our previous negotiations that led to the recommendation for the shockingly weak deal, saw us, all that time ago, as ready to immediately initiate legal action (if the vote had gone that way). What has changed.
I agree we should do our utmost to show we have been willing to negotiate, but we had already done that at length last time. However that does not imply the need to accept any deal that is not close to what we could reasonably expect from the likely success of our strong legal case.
The Trust also at the last meeting promised a vote this month (although did not see the members as fit to briefly review the consultation document to check for balance / omissions to help circumvent a repeat of the last biased cock up)
The Trust actually stated almost from the outset that they could not deal with the new majority owners without reassurances on share dilution. However they backed down from this stance without any long term reassurances, as they came to realise that was not a tenable position, given new share issue is a valid vehicle to raise finance for the club
P.S. thought barbs always had points ;) |
...and I thought barbs gave you a prick. :-0 | |
| It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan |
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 06:54 - Mar 24 with 3465 views | Autophagy |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 17:57 - Mar 23 by londonlisa2001 |
Who said the Trust were unaware of the possibility?
I haven’t seen that said anywhere? |
The trust these days are about as effective as an ashtray on a motorbike. | | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 17:30 - Mar 24 with 3273 views | valleyboy |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 01:41 - Mar 24 by DJack |
Incorrect, my issue is your current anti Swansea stance. As I stated in my post, it was mentioned before (the new boards actions) and it was not liked and then you come along way after the fact and claim that we accepted it.
Whilst I agree that we were not forthright in our views we changed the make up of the Trust board to re-envigor the Trust and push for action. As mentioned by those linked with the Trust any legal action is very slow and very limited in it's redress so careful (and tactful) actions are required leading up to the eventual time in court.
I await this with a sense of impatience but have to temper my feelings with deference to legal sensibilities looking for the best chance of a "best outcome". I, surprisingly, will listen to all views so please feel free to add to the conversation but don't regurgitate pointless barbs/old positions, particularly, whilst not allowing the Trust time to cover all bases to facilitate a positive outcome.
I will also add that i'm a little touchy as the Swans fate is important to me though I understand that it is not quite so important to you. |
Where have I said
“That we accepted it”
All I have said that Swansea supporters have accepted what’s happening to their club. Because they have done nothing against what’s happening. Only to have a silly walk from the middle of Swansea to the stadium with only about 250 there | | | |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 12:25 - Mar 25 with 3106 views | Badlands |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 01:41 - Mar 24 by DJack |
Incorrect, my issue is your current anti Swansea stance. As I stated in my post, it was mentioned before (the new boards actions) and it was not liked and then you come along way after the fact and claim that we accepted it.
Whilst I agree that we were not forthright in our views we changed the make up of the Trust board to re-envigor the Trust and push for action. As mentioned by those linked with the Trust any legal action is very slow and very limited in it's redress so careful (and tactful) actions are required leading up to the eventual time in court.
I await this with a sense of impatience but have to temper my feelings with deference to legal sensibilities looking for the best chance of a "best outcome". I, surprisingly, will listen to all views so please feel free to add to the conversation but don't regurgitate pointless barbs/old positions, particularly, whilst not allowing the Trust time to cover all bases to facilitate a positive outcome.
I will also add that i'm a little touchy as the Swans fate is important to me though I understand that it is not quite so important to you. |
Coherent
(Apologies to DJack for the premeditated version) [Post edited 25 Mar 2019 21:23]
| |
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 13:01 - Mar 25 with 3073 views | JackSomething |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 12:25 - Mar 25 by Badlands |
Coherent
(Apologies to DJack for the premeditated version) [Post edited 25 Mar 2019 21:23]
|
He's responding to a post from an acknowledged Cardiff fan, so how is that 'shabby'? |  |
| You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocket ship underpants don't help. |
| |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 21:21 - Mar 25 with 2899 views | Badlands |
| A majority shareholder is allowed to ... on 13:01 - Mar 25 by JackSomething |
He's responding to a post from an acknowledged Cardiff fan, so how is that 'shabby'? |
Apologies and removal. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
