| fao Phil Sumbler 16:45 - Oct 23 with 39291 views | Rancid |
Is it true that the trust is preventing us from being taken over by an American consortium for 95 million? And the rest of the board want it to go through? I'm not expecting a straight answer btw but I've heard from a very good source at the club. |  | | |  |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:26 - Oct 23 with 2273 views | Uxbridge |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:25 - Oct 23 by outtolunch |
Phil. Are you saying that some other shareholder or shareholders have an agenda then because thats how i read it behind the question mark. Who knows perhaps its a member of the trust board talking. It wouldnt be the first time in the last few months. It seems quite alot of sensitive information finds its way into the public domain if it is all to beleived and plenty points to the trust.
Lets not hide behind our members as an excuse. Are the club talking to potential purchasers irrelavant of whether an offer has been made. ? . We don't need to vote on that do we ? |
Hi Leigh. |  |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:28 - Oct 23 with 2265 views | jackonicko |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:26 - Oct 23 by Uxbridge |
Hi Leigh. |
You bu66er. I was going to post exactly the same thing when I read outtolunch.
*waves to Leigh too* |  | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:30 - Oct 23 with 2255 views | Uxbridge |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:26 - Oct 23 by Rancid |
I was asking Phil who's far more influential at the club than myself.What I think is irrelevant but what Phil thinks matters. |
Phil will be one vote. I know what you mean though.
You can't expect the Trust to comment on every rumour or every theoretical situation. However if there is an actual offer on the table you can guarantee that the Trust will have a view and the Trust members a voice. The rest is just speculation. | |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:33 - Oct 23 with 2235 views | skippyjack |
I was wondering..
Morgan 22.5%
Katzen 20%
Trust 20%
Huw 12.5%
Davies 10%
I'm not sure about the others
Let's say the trust were to sell their shares at 20%… but reinvest and buy Huw and Davies shares.. 22.5%… give Huw and Davies increased salaries within the club... give them power within the trust.. we'll have a wealthy backer with 20% and a Trust with 22.5%… that's if they're all willing.. Huw and Davies get a pay day.. with incentives and still have a big part in what should happen.. it's just an idea. |  |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:35 - Oct 23 with 2213 views | Uxbridge |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:33 - Oct 23 by skippyjack |
I was wondering..
Morgan 22.5%
Katzen 20%
Trust 20%
Huw 12.5%
Davies 10%
I'm not sure about the others
Let's say the trust were to sell their shares at 20%… but reinvest and buy Huw and Davies shares.. 22.5%… give Huw and Davies increased salaries within the club... give them power within the trust.. we'll have a wealthy backer with 20% and a Trust with 22.5%… that's if they're all willing.. Huw and Davies get a pay day.. with incentives and still have a big part in what should happen.. it's just an idea. |
Er, no. | |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:36 - Oct 23 with 2196 views | Rancid |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:22 - Oct 23 by jackonicko |
No. I'm suggesting Phil is not the Trust, and the Trust is not Phil.
He has a view, and as Chairman his view is persuasive, but he's not the only person who decides.
If Leigh wants the trust to sell, he will need to persuade more than Phil. Indeed, it should go to a vote of the members. |
It's the whole trust that is objecting to this not just Phil.That's what I was told.The Trust in general is against it whilst the board is keen for it to go ahead.I was also told that each member of the board would pocket 9 million each if the deal went through.
If someone else had started this thread other than myself then I'd have treated it with the contempt that many have also.But the fella who told me I believe 100%.He's in his 60's and a very successful business man connected to the club so i tend to believe what he said.
There was no way Phil was going to come on here and say 'yes, you're right'.I'm aware of that and fully expected it but when I was told earlier and by this certain person then I fully believed it to be true.I'm sorry if that upsets people and I've made quite a statement by saying so but I've posted what I was told whether it be true or not. | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:38 - Oct 23 with 2176 views | skippyjack |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:35 - Oct 23 by Uxbridge |
Er, no. |
I know it's never going to happen.. but I'm trying to find a positive if people want to sell up.. | |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:40 - Oct 23 with 2149 views | Uxbridge |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:36 - Oct 23 by Rancid |
It's the whole trust that is objecting to this not just Phil.That's what I was told.The Trust in general is against it whilst the board is keen for it to go ahead.I was also told that each member of the board would pocket 9 million each if the deal went through.
If someone else had started this thread other than myself then I'd have treated it with the contempt that many have also.But the fella who told me I believe 100%.He's in his 60's and a very successful business man connected to the club so i tend to believe what he said.
There was no way Phil was going to come on here and say 'yes, you're right'.I'm aware of that and fully expected it but when I was told earlier and by this certain person then I fully believed it to be true.I'm sorry if that upsets people and I've made quite a statement by saying so but I've posted what I was told whether it be true or not. |
Return would be based on shareholding and they are very unequal. If your source doesn't realise that he doesn't sound too clued in. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:41 - Oct 23 with 2137 views | Uxbridge |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:38 - Oct 23 by skippyjack |
I know it's never going to happen.. but I'm trying to find a positive if people want to sell up.. |
It's not that, it's just your scenario makes no sense. There are always positives or opportunities though. | |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler (n/t) on 20:42 - Oct 23 with 2127 views | outtolunch |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:26 - Oct 23 by Uxbridge |
Hi Leigh. |
|  | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:43 - Oct 23 with 2113 views | jackonicko |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:36 - Oct 23 by Rancid |
It's the whole trust that is objecting to this not just Phil.That's what I was told.The Trust in general is against it whilst the board is keen for it to go ahead.I was also told that each member of the board would pocket 9 million each if the deal went through.
If someone else had started this thread other than myself then I'd have treated it with the contempt that many have also.But the fella who told me I believe 100%.He's in his 60's and a very successful business man connected to the club so i tend to believe what he said.
There was no way Phil was going to come on here and say 'yes, you're right'.I'm aware of that and fully expected it but when I was told earlier and by this certain person then I fully believed it to be true.I'm sorry if that upsets people and I've made quite a statement by saying so but I've posted what I was told whether it be true or not. |
Your question was whether Phil stand in the way of it.
Your source may well be right. But some of your stats are awry. The 'board' won't each pocket 9m. It is the shareholders will pocket the money if they sell their shares. They all own different amounts so they won't each get an equal share.
A £100m offer for 100% of the equity would mean outtolunch would get £5m for his 5% stake. | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:47 - Oct 23 with 2074 views | Rancid |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:40 - Oct 23 by Uxbridge |
Return would be based on shareholding and they are very unequal. If your source doesn't realise that he doesn't sound too clued in. |
Well he's a millionaire himself so I think he might know his way around a pound coin or 2.He was very specific too which made it all the more plausible.If you believe this or not then that's upto you.
And yes, we all know Vincent Tan is a very rich man too  | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:49 - Oct 23 with 2048 views | Uxbridge |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:47 - Oct 23 by Rancid |
Well he's a millionaire himself so I think he might know his way around a pound coin or 2.He was very specific too which made it all the more plausible.If you believe this or not then that's upto you.
And yes, we all know Vincent Tan is a very rich man too |
I believe you. I'm just questioning his detail. | |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:50 - Oct 23 with 2037 views | Rancid |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:43 - Oct 23 by jackonicko |
Your question was whether Phil stand in the way of it.
Your source may well be right. But some of your stats are awry. The 'board' won't each pocket 9m. It is the shareholders will pocket the money if they sell their shares. They all own different amounts so they won't each get an equal share.
A £100m offer for 100% of the equity would mean outtolunch would get £5m for his 5% stake. |
My stats aren't 'awry' at all.The chap who told me could well be though.Let's wait and see what happens yeah. | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:53 - Oct 23 with 2010 views | Phil_S |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 19:55 - Oct 23 by Rancid |
If there is an offer on the table, Phil and it was 100million and diligent, would you stand in the way of it? |
I've watched this debate unfold whilst I was filling my ample belly with more food itching to respond but not wanting to get food on my keyboard!
Anyway, I digress.
As others have said it is not for me to stand in the way, I am one voice on the Trust board (albeit the casting vote if needed) but without an offer I couldn't even give you my view. the £100m you refer to I assume would be to persuade the shareholders to sell so that isn't money into the club so it would depend on what they wanted to do once they have the club and whether there was further investment or whether they would take money out every year when the TV money comes in. Financially the club is only attractive really in the Premier League so you would assume that people would want us to stay there but you just never know. Without that detail then I really cannot comment whether I would even consider casting my vote for or against
You may class that as a cop out but my view in this is - to make reference to one of your later posts in the thread - not that relevant. It becomes more relevant than yours if an offer was to ever be made because I will probably be privy to more information on that offer |  | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:53 - Oct 23 with 1836 views | Joe_bradshaw |
How can the trust in general be against it when the trust is the full membership of the trust?
The full membership would have to be against it (or, more accurately, a majority of the full membership) and the full membership haven't been consulted. |  |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:57 - Oct 23 with 1785 views | Phil_S |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:25 - Oct 23 by outtolunch |
Phil. Are you saying that some other shareholder or shareholders have an agenda then because thats how i read it behind the question mark. Who knows perhaps its a member of the trust board talking. It wouldnt be the first time in the last few months. It seems quite alot of sensitive information finds its way into the public domain if it is all to beleived and plenty points to the trust.
Lets not hide behind our members as an excuse. Are the club talking to potential purchasers irrelavant of whether an offer has been made. ? . We don't need to vote on that do we ? |
No I am not saying anything, I am asking a question as to why someone would say something about something that isn't true. Unless of course you know that there is an offer for the club and the Trust have blocked it. Which is interesting because I would have hoped that if we had blocked a sale I would have known about it somewhere?
There is much sensitive information in the public domain - some of it has been posted on here by some people but that could be leaked from anywhere - a board member, a Trust board member or someone that maybe a potential investor knows. It is a pretty powerful accusation to say that it has been leaked by the Trust - all I can say is that I haven't leaked it so therefore my conscience is clear.
I don't need to hide behind any members, the Chairman has already stated in a public forum that the club are exploring (I think this was his wording) areas of commercial investment. | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:58 - Oct 23 with 1777 views | outtolunch |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:26 - Oct 23 by Uxbridge |
Hi Leigh. |
You would be close if i was a he and i make no excuse that i knew him from years back. I am merely pointing out that we assume that some stakeholders have an agenda . There is no reason why we shouldnt also assume that there are agendas at trust board level as well. It would be dangerous if we didnt. There are positions to protect. That is the financial playground our club now find itself in and we are deluded if we think differently. | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:58 - Oct 23 with 1777 views | Rancid |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 16:50 - Oct 23 by Phil_S |
Your very good source has turned out to be a not very good source
If there had been an offer for the club then the fans (or more exactly our members) would have to be notified
The fact that they haven't been gives you the answer that you need |
Again, i don't expect you to divulge too much on here (you'd be nuts too, obviously), but whats the relationship like with the trust and the board nowadays.Is it as good as it's always been?
Probably a silly question I know but the board are businessmen after all and the trust are what it says on the tin.Just curious , that's all. | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:58 - Oct 23 with 1771 views | Phil_S |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:36 - Oct 23 by Rancid |
It's the whole trust that is objecting to this not just Phil.That's what I was told.The Trust in general is against it whilst the board is keen for it to go ahead.I was also told that each member of the board would pocket 9 million each if the deal went through.
If someone else had started this thread other than myself then I'd have treated it with the contempt that many have also.But the fella who told me I believe 100%.He's in his 60's and a very successful business man connected to the club so i tend to believe what he said.
There was no way Phil was going to come on here and say 'yes, you're right'.I'm aware of that and fully expected it but when I was told earlier and by this certain person then I fully believed it to be true.I'm sorry if that upsets people and I've made quite a statement by saying so but I've posted what I was told whether it be true or not. |
Board members or shareholders would pocket £9m??
If the latter then seems unfair that those who own more than four times the others pocket the same
If the former then who the hell agreed that?? And why should Huw Cooze get £9m?? | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 21:02 - Oct 23 with 1748 views | tomdickharry |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:53 - Oct 23 by Joe_bradshaw |
How can the trust in general be against it when the trust is the full membership of the trust?
The full membership would have to be against it (or, more accurately, a majority of the full membership) and the full membership haven't been consulted. |
Cast our minds back to the Laudrup sacking were the ful membership consulted. | | | |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 21:02 - Oct 23 with 1748 views | Uxbridge |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:58 - Oct 23 by outtolunch |
You would be close if i was a he and i make no excuse that i knew him from years back. I am merely pointing out that we assume that some stakeholders have an agenda . There is no reason why we shouldnt also assume that there are agendas at trust board level as well. It would be dangerous if we didnt. There are positions to protect. That is the financial playground our club now find itself in and we are deluded if we think differently. |
I totally agree there are stakeholders with agendas. That has been clear for a long time. | |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 21:02 - Oct 23 with 1742 views | skippyjack |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 20:53 - Oct 23 by Joe_bradshaw |
How can the trust in general be against it when the trust is the full membership of the trust?
The full membership would have to be against it (or, more accurately, a majority of the full membership) and the full membership haven't been consulted. |
Well I presume 20m will be shared between the trust members if 100m is on offer.. the longer you've been in it.. the more you get?.. | |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 21:02 - Oct 23 with 1740 views | Uxbridge |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 21:02 - Oct 23 by tomdickharry |
Cast our minds back to the Laudrup sacking were the ful membership consulted. |
Heh. Why on earth would they? | |
| |
| fao Phil Sumbler on 21:04 - Oct 23 with 1724 views | jackonicko |
Seeing as we are posting hypothetical questions.
Imagine a scenario where you are a club board member with a significant and important day to day executive role. You are asked to represent the club at a fans forum event, and let's say for the sake of argument it is in London. And, for the sake of argument, it's the night before a Swans away game, also in London.
Do you:
A) recognise you are the vice chairman and attend the event, particularly as you haven't attended other Q&As recently; or
B) decline as you have a prior obligation with the Baglan U10s. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.