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.
It has been a couple of months since the Swans Trust’s AGM where, during his address, our Chairman Phil Sumbler outlined the timetable and actions to be taken within which the Trust will seek to resolve the long-standing legal issues regarding the Trust’s shareholding in the football club.
As communicated to our members a few weeks later, we were disappointed to announce that the proposed mediation, planned for the end of February, was not going to proceed.
This was for two reasons. Firstly, the legal representatives of the selling shareholders informed our legal representatives that he had been instructed not to provide a detailed response to the claim letter, demonstrating that his clients had no intention of complying with the Practice Direction. Mediation cannot sensibly take place without that response/defence and the Trust cannot commit to wasting the funds of our members whilst the selling shareholders concerned refuse to properly engage in the pre-action process.
Secondly, it became clear prior to the mediation dates that neither of the managing partners of the majority shareholders, Steve Kaplan or Jason Levien, were planning to attend the proposed February mediation dates either, despite the Trust having made it clear that the attendance of one of them was vital if the Trust was to commit to spending thousands of pounds on a mediation. Although alternative attendees were suggested, a mediation is much less likely to be productive while the managing partners of the club’s owners are not prepared to fully engage.
At the time of that announcement, the Trust noted the willingness that had been shown by the majority owners to at least engage in the process to try to seek a mediated settlement. It is therefore disappointing to confirm that no progress has been made in that regard. The Trust has communicated our willingness to proceed with further dialogue, however we have not received any response.
In terms of next steps, as previously outlined, the Trust had planned to proceed with the members consultation on all available options during March. Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, such as the changing circumstances, required legal activities taking longer than anticipated and the need to provide our members with information that is as comprehensive and accurate as we can, this has not been possible.
We apologise for any disappointment this causes to our members, however the Trust board is of the view that it is critical that we clarify all options for our members, where at all possible, prior to that consultation. The Trust board is still very much of the view that the members consultation will occur as soon as possible, and we will publish the timeline for this as soon as possible.
Football Club Update
Since our AGM, there have been some significant changes in the running of the football club. February saw the departure of Huw Jenkins from the role.
Huw deserves considerable credit for his part in the Swans’ rise to the Premier League and for that the Trust thanks him. However, we must also point out, once again, his involvement in the way the sale of the football club to its current owners was conducted, as well as the continuing negative impact of that sale. It is also important to remember Mr. Jenkins’s culpability for the disastrous transfer dealings of the past three seasons, which are the main reason the club is in its current position. For these reasons, change was inevitable and necessary.
Moving forward, it is accurate to say that the Trust has been keep informed by the club in terms of plans to find a replacement chairman, with the preferred candidate of the majority owners being Trevor Birch. As previously communicated, the Trust were informed that Mr. Birch was the majority owners’ preferred candidate in advance of his appointment and have met him both prior to, and after, his appointment. He brings wide experience and expertise to the role.
We are aware of the concerns raised by our members regarding the remit and targets he has been set by the majority owners, which ties in to the press reports regarding members of staff being notified of a consultation period regarding potential redundancies at the club. The Trust is acutely aware of the financial challenges which life in the Championship brings, but it is disappointing that jobs are at risk primarily due to the poor management of the football club in the past. However, we have been told that his focus is on stabilising the club rather than preparing the club for a sale. The Trust, through our supporter director, will be strongly representing the views of our members to the new chairman and the club board that any decisions made are taken with the best long-term interests of the football club at heart.
We should once again note that the Trust has previously communicated our concerns regarding some aspects of his remuneration package, which we have been informed contains an equity element. The details and conditions of this are unclear but, if true, would potentially dilute the Trust’s shareholding and further prejudice our position as a minority shareholder in the football club. The Trust raised our objections to the majority owners prior to the appointment but, to date, we have not received a response.
Welsh Baccalaureate Project
Frequent readers of our article in the matchday programme and website will be aware of the Enterprise and Employability Challenge that the Trust has worked with the WJEC to offer to schools as part of the Welsh Baccalaureate qualification. This challenge requires pupils to develop a product or service that will enhance the matchday experience for young people.
During the summer of 2018, pupils in Dwr-y-Felin Comprehensive School in Neath were our pilot school for this initiative and we are now starting to see practical applications of the excellent ideas being put forward by pupils.
Before the FA Cup game with Brentford the pupils offered face painting in the Family Stand. They worked in two groups and raised £125 for their school charities such as TÅ· Hafan and Great Ormond St Hospital. At £1 at time, that took some doing! Our thanks go to the Club for its support and to all fans who contributed to these excellent causes.
The Trust is pleased to say that this initiative continues to develop strongly, with a number of other schools taking up the challenge. As an example, Gowerton School were recently ready to present their ideas and, while they were expecting to present to the teacher and Trust representatives, on the day they were delighted to find themselves explaining their ideas to Swans legends and club ambassadors Lee Trundle and Leon Britton who were excellent in the way they engaged with the initiative.
To date, nearly 400 pupils in the local area have been introduced to the recent history of the football club and the Supporters’ Trust through this initiative. Early indications are that those schools are keen to continue repeat the experience with their next year groups. The Trust hopes to expand this initiative even further, and we have already signed up Dyffryn Taf School in Whitland, Carmarthenshire for the first time in the coming months. If your school is interested in participating, then please contact the Trust as soon as possible!
Disabled Supporters Association (DSA) Update
As part of Level Playing Fields’ week of action, the DSA approached the club with an idea of taking some of our members for a tour around Fairwood and we are please to confirm this happened last week. The DSA offered this opportunity to all our DSA members, with the lucky winners being drawn at random.
As a result, 23 of our members had the chance of watching the first team train, getting to looking around the facilities and also getting the opportunity to meet many of the first team.
The DSA would like to thank the club, players and management. We’d especially like to thank Suzanne and Mike Eames for the way they engaged with the members and kindly gave everyone a spare shirt.
The first ever recipient of a Planet Swans Lifetime Achievement Award.
So as I said, no one has ever said that a win was guaranteed. “Winnable” means capable of being won, which the case is, not guaranteed to be won, which no case ever is.
Think about this episode in the history of Swansea City
I think it’s remembered as black Wednesday
First of all Glan Letheran snd Glan Walton was sacked
Then later in the day 7 Swansea players were shown the door
A day later or was it two days a further 2 was shown the door as well
Eventually this landed up in court and if I’m correct wasn’t the PFA that took Petty and Swansea City to Court
Now everybody that was around at that time thought the players would win the case easily
But what happened
It was a Petty that won that case
So for a case that everybody thought that the players had a strong case to answer
And Counsel have said that the Trust has a strong case
I suppose Counsel also told them to dictate who they wanted to meet in mediation talks as well.
Knowing they didn’t have a chance in hell that was going to succeed
So mediation as failed
So what next
This is what I have been told by a Lawyer mate of mine
There is no such thing as an un-winnable case. And equally no case is guaranteed to win
At best a lawyer will tell his client that he has an 80% chance of winning or at worst he will say you have 1% chance of winning
So where in between those percentages above as the Trust Counsel given
I would think it’s towards the latter end of the percentages
Even if it’s at the top end of the percentages
There 29% adrift from winning
I think Counsel were only advising on the viability of the case.
More than enough flexibility has been shown in repeated attempts at coming to an out of court settlement. Which was even agreed and subsequently unilaterally withdrawn from by the majority owners, such was their bad faith, even in a deal that massively advantaged them. Even in this round when given another opportunity (in my view undeserved) they failed to meet prescribed response timescales, so they have their chance and then some.
I am unaware that anyone has ever said any case is guaranteed (I certainly have not, despite false claims on here of same by current Trust Vice Chair).
There is no guarantee you will not be killed in your car but most people are confident to get in one, day after day.
I am unsure where you get your figures but they seem way of beam to me. I think it is fairly clear, given no case is guaranteed, that when experienced Counsel puts their considerable reputation on saying you have a strong case, then you could expect little better assurance.
I think I would trust experienced legal Counsel who has been consulted to look at the case in detail and consider its viability in relation to the relevant laws and against other similar case judgements, rather than off the cuff comments by your lawyer friend or general opinion.
You also fail to take into account the high number of cases settled on the court steps when it is realised those taking the case mean business and the potential serious limitations on selling the business whilst the case continues.
You mentioned previously issues re the shareholder agreement, whilst from what I understand at least one party denied signing it, that matters little in a situation where it can be considered agreed by mutual enactment. You might ask yourself why Jinx in a last minute pre sale desperate attempt tried to bribe the Trust to sign away their rights to this or why Jason stuttered and stumbled giving contradictory denials when repeatedly questioned on his pre sale knowledge of said agreement, even though the Trust said they had supplied them with a copy.
But fear not, as from all I understand, whilst the SHA related failures forms part of the issues, it is not central to the primary case.
Think about this episode in the history of Swansea City
I think it’s remembered as black Wednesday
First of all Glan Letheran snd Glan Walton was sacked
Then later in the day 7 Swansea players were shown the door
A day later or was it two days a further 2 was shown the door as well
Eventually this landed up in court and if I’m correct wasn’t the PFA that took Petty and Swansea City to Court
Now everybody that was around at that time thought the players would win the case easily
But what happened
It was a Petty that won that case
So for a case that everybody thought that the players had a strong case to answer
Then didn’t did they
Have you completely lost your mind? There was no such court case and no players were 'sacked' due to Petty winning in court! The only time Petty was taken to court was a winding up petition by Mel Nurse, as he had bought the clubs debt from ninth floor. The court gave Petty a stay of execution as he stated funds had been promised (bullshite obviously), but there was NEVER a court case involving the PFA which Petty won, as many of the players 'sacked' played for us for quite a few years after, including Roger Freestone, and Nick Cusack who went on to manage us! What planet are you posting from man!
It was making a point about winnable cases not who was taking it on.
The civil courts balance of probabilities is obviously lower than beyond all reasonable doubt of the criminal courts, but any case taken to a court of law is a very expensive gamble.
If mediation could be made to work it should be tried and court should be the last resort.
Have you completely lost your mind? There was no such court case and no players were 'sacked' due to Petty winning in court! The only time Petty was taken to court was a winding up petition by Mel Nurse, as he had bought the clubs debt from ninth floor. The court gave Petty a stay of execution as he stated funds had been promised (bullshite obviously), but there was NEVER a court case involving the PFA which Petty won, as many of the players 'sacked' played for us for quite a few years after, including Roger Freestone, and Nick Cusack who went on to manage us! What planet are you posting from man!
Glan Walton.
The first ever recipient of a Planet Swans Lifetime Achievement Award.
What do you expect from a fan with a foot in two South Wales clubs.
We should call him Bandy
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.
Have you completely lost your mind? There was no such court case and no players were 'sacked' due to Petty winning in court! The only time Petty was taken to court was a winding up petition by Mel Nurse, as he had bought the clubs debt from ninth floor. The court gave Petty a stay of execution as he stated funds had been promised (bullshite obviously), but there was NEVER a court case involving the PFA which Petty won, as many of the players 'sacked' played for us for quite a few years after, including Roger Freestone, and Nick Cusack who went on to manage us! What planet are you posting from man!
Have you completely lost your mind? There was no such court case and no players were 'sacked' due to Petty winning in court! The only time Petty was taken to court was a winding up petition by Mel Nurse, as he had bought the clubs debt from ninth floor. The court gave Petty a stay of execution as he stated funds had been promised (bullshite obviously), but there was NEVER a court case involving the PFA which Petty won, as many of the players 'sacked' played for us for quite a few years after, including Roger Freestone, and Nick Cusack who went on to manage us! What planet are you posting from man!
Must be one of these plastic supporters that supporter have often talked about. That don’t know much about the history of Swansea City
Perhaps it’s you that’s off your head or is a case of dementia. Or is it you trying to air brush a part you don’t like about Swansea City
Liked you tried to do with what you said about Cooze
To make it clear you said he was taken to court because he sacked players, he was not. He was taken to court in an effort to force him out with a winding up order. This was done by Mel Nurse.
What if they continue to refuse to attend mediation? Court? This would be much further along the line by now if the trust hadn’t pushed members not to vote for legal action in the original ballot. A decision I’ll never understand.
To make it clear you said he was taken to court because he sacked players, he was not. He was taken to court in an effort to force him out with a winding up order. This was done by Mel Nurse.
[Post edited 6 Apr 2019 3:08]
I wonder where we would be now had Mel Nurse been more involved and not sold/gifted his shares
The Yanks have enough voting rights to do what they want with the club
If anything I can see the Yanks decreasing the share value of the Trust
The only thing the 21.1% of the shares that the Trust own. Will be to get any dividends that may come if Swansea is making any profit
Somehow I can’t see that happening for a long yet
I'm sure I heard someone say in the AGM that intentionally diluting the trust's shares at this point can be construed by the courts as deliberately hurting the minority shareholders in a situation where they are being taken to court for doing that exact thing in the first place by ignoring the shareholders agreement?
YOu really are a bellend. A "strong case" is obviously towards the higher ends of percentages
So you have seen Counsels advice have you???
What makes you think it’s towards the high end of the percentages???
I could say a lot more, but it could be implicating someone that’s been giving advice to the Trust
Remember I have been around nearly 40 years following Swansea regularly, and in that time got to know a lot of posters in high performing professions.
All I will say for now
That things are not as straight forward as it seems with the Trust case and as I have said. I don’t think it will land up in court or even on the steps of a court as one poster suggested
What makes you think it’s towards the high end of the percentages???
I could say a lot more, but it could be implicating someone that’s been giving advice to the Trust
Remember I have been around nearly 40 years following Swansea regularly, and in that time got to know a lot of posters in high performing professions.
All I will say for now
That things are not as straight forward as it seems with the Trust case and as I have said. I don’t think it will land up in court or even on the steps of a court as one poster suggested
Well it's pretty clear that a 20% chance would never be described as a strong case ffs. It's common sense that a strong case would be a high fuking percentage.
ie. there's a strong case you're a kunt. I'd put that as high as 99-100% tbh A 20% chance of you having a qualification in english would insinuate a weak case/chance.
Well it's pretty clear that a 20% chance would never be described as a strong case ffs. It's common sense that a strong case would be a high fuking percentage.
ie. there's a strong case you're a kunt. I'd put that as high as 99-100% tbh A 20% chance of you having a qualification in english would insinuate a weak case/chance.
So what you are saying is that you haven’t seen Counsels advice or even the faintest idea in how they give advice
No Counsel would give advice of 90% certain of winning any case in a Court of Law and yes only the dullest wouldn’t think that the higher the percentage the better chance of winning
Just imagine that Counsel gave say a 99% chance of winning and then the case is lost in court
You would then find that Counsel would be next in court for misleading his client
That’s why Counsel are not that daft other than to give just the 80% figure
Nope. They were reinstated.as Petty was told he could not sack them. i've told you once already, but several of those players were still with us the season after Petty had left including Steve Watkin, John Williams, Nick Cusack, Roger Freestone and Jason Smith.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
