| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? 18:19 - Feb 3 with 43503 views | _ |
This is truly shameful as this has been brought up literally hundreds of times since it was first disclosed you couldn't see them.
You've made mugs out of a lot of people and were happy to allow this myth to build and build and be used as another tool for fans not to trust the owners.
The real question is can we trust the Trust
I'm sorry but this is another clear example of why we can't.
It's a sham. |  |
| |  |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 07:48 - Feb 4 with 1817 views | magicdaps10 |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 07:42 - Feb 4 by _ |
Because pretty much none of us thought they were even seeing the accounts.
You've only got to trawl through this site and you'll see poster after poster saying the same thing.
Now it's like it was common knowledge they always did see the accounts.
This can only happen on the Trust Chairman's website.
FFS can't people be honest with themselves. |
Can't people be honest with themselves.
I really cant believe you just posted that. |  |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 07:54 - Feb 4 with 1795 views | 3swan |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 00:07 - Feb 4 by _ |
He's talking of forecasts though so whilst it would be nice to know where we are and for the trust to find out maybe we don't know yet because we don't know where we'll be when it comes to who's still here or not.
I don't think that's the most important aspect here. The most important thing is the Trust see the accounts and there is zero evidence of wrong doing.
Just stop and take that in for a minute |
I see the thread has again moved on since your post but I’ll still give a reply
The thread you started was questioning why the Trust hadn’t told the fans that they do see the accounts.
I thought that I had seen something, which after a couple of minutes, remembered it must have been in the Trust board minutes.
I posted those 2 links to clarify what I had remembered and understood to be the current position, it could be that there had been earlier comments in other minutes, but I didn’t need to look further back.
“Just stop and take that in for a minute”
No idea why you added that bit at the end, I’ve nothing to take in, as I posted based on the opening post of the thread, and not involved in how it went off tangent, clouding the original post of what the content of the information was/is/ should be.
To add again from a non expert, I have been involved in departmental budget preparation in my working life where assumptions are made when producing forward plans. These plans are then monitored as to whether those plans are on or off track by monthly updates.
So imo that’s the information the Trust is requesting as shown below
Items by Stuart McDonald
From the August minutes
Further to my report last month that there would need to be a significant cut in the Player costs for season 2018/19, with us suffering an approximate £65million reduction in revenues, I have been stressing to the Club the need to issue an explanatory statement to fans regarding the full financial implications of our relegation from the Premier League, and the impact on this season’s trading, as it is an area where, lacking any official Club statement, supporter’s are relying on speculation and rumour
From the September minutes
I reported last month on the significant cuts that would be required to the player budget in order for the Club to meet its financial targets. There has been great concern however, amongst the fan base, that the lack of player recruitment ibn both the transfer and loan windows has been too severe, and that the playing squad is too thin with a questioning of the extent of the financial cutbacks. To enable the Trust to have an understanding of, and be comfortable with, the financial budget for the next two season, it had been arranged that a meeting would take place between Trust officials and the Club Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer. This did not take place as initially arranged, due to the restrictive nature of the NDA (non disclosure agreement) that I was faced with signing, and other issues concerning having other Trust Board members in attendance and the sharing of information. We are in discussions with the Club to resolve these issues and are hopeful that a meeting will take place as initially arranged. |  | | |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:38 - Feb 4 with 1700 views | monmouth |
I was one that thought the Trust weren’t seeing the management accounts as I equated that with getting sufficient financial information. I was wrong about the management accounts and right about the non availability of sufficient financial information. It hasn’t changed my life and my initial post stands,
In every company I’ve ever worked for or sat as a non exec on, a board member can get any information they ask for and pronto. It’s a normal part of the board constitution. As is the ability to take advice on that information. I do understand that a private company run by Americans as if they were the ‘sole owners’ - which they are not -may not have the same ideas about Corporate Governance.
Hope that makes my position clear for what it’s worth (nothing, like most of this hot air in my view.
Trust Director needs to keep pushing for it his own sake and protection in my view, but also I think it will be forlorn and just another reason not to trust any mediation ‘deal’ offered as it will be reneged on like the last one. |  |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:40 - Feb 4 with 1693 views | _ |
One thing is very clear and that's communication is just as bad as it ever was with the Trust as posters even within this thread question what the Trust actually sees.
Monmouth got it wrong so I'll be curious to his next post. Cooperman pointed this out to Monmouth. And by the way is Cooper also on some kind of payroll as he often sees my viewpoints but never gets that aimed at him??
Some are talking about a diversion and that is clear within this thread. A subject gets brought up and immediately the person raising the legitimate concern gets rounded on. The one person who defends me gets immediately banned AGAIN by guess who, the Trust Chairman Pill Sumbler, because that's what he does when the pressure turns on him.
Just before the last sale where the Trust watched it happen from beneath their noses after repeated calls from me Shaky, E20 and Spratty (now called Chad)
And guess what, we were ALL BANNED
This is what this site is for, to censor and channel debate in the direction of whatever Pill Sumbler's agenda is.
It stinks as does the level of bullying
People just won't allow the fact that someone has a different view to them so they make vicious lies up about being on the payroll. There's the real diversion. A lot are just too ignorant to look at the bigger picture and think for themselves
We've got to be owned by someone haven't we?
And we haven't got 50m plus to buy them out have we?!
But we've all got our heads in the sand because we think we've got plenty of money
Well the Trust know we haven't and now we're actually talking about them seeing reasonably detailed accounts and there being ZERO evidence that any wrongdoing is occurring.
This should be welcome news but instead it's brushed under the carpet because fans want blood.
We wanted EPL football, we wanted big signings,we wanted success, well we had all that but it came with a price, and not many of you are willing to let that sink in.
Now the same handful of posters will jump all over this instead of debating civilly our situation as a whole. | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:46 - Feb 4 with 1669 views | _ |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:38 - Feb 4 by monmouth |
I was one that thought the Trust weren’t seeing the management accounts as I equated that with getting sufficient financial information. I was wrong about the management accounts and right about the non availability of sufficient financial information. It hasn’t changed my life and my initial post stands,
In every company I’ve ever worked for or sat as a non exec on, a board member can get any information they ask for and pronto. It’s a normal part of the board constitution. As is the ability to take advice on that information. I do understand that a private company run by Americans as if they were the ‘sole owners’ - which they are not -may not have the same ideas about Corporate Governance.
Hope that makes my position clear for what it’s worth (nothing, like most of this hot air in my view.
Trust Director needs to keep pushing for it his own sake and protection in my view, but also I think it will be forlorn and just another reason not to trust any mediation ‘deal’ offered as it will be reneged on like the last one. |
Respect for admitting you didn't know, but you had no choice really did you after stating this on so many occasions.
You've now found out they do see them, analyse them and have found no wrongdoing.
That's a lot different to what so, so many fans have thought since June last year. And I can trawl through any thread on here or other sites where that is mentioned repeatedly.
The detail the Trust are asking for is the bit that's not clear and you and others can talk all you want about the Board's you've sat on but not one of them is a football club with two transfer windows every season where anything and everything can be expected. | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:48 - Feb 4 with 1660 views | Chief |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:40 - Feb 4 by _ |
One thing is very clear and that's communication is just as bad as it ever was with the Trust as posters even within this thread question what the Trust actually sees.
Monmouth got it wrong so I'll be curious to his next post. Cooperman pointed this out to Monmouth. And by the way is Cooper also on some kind of payroll as he often sees my viewpoints but never gets that aimed at him??
Some are talking about a diversion and that is clear within this thread. A subject gets brought up and immediately the person raising the legitimate concern gets rounded on. The one person who defends me gets immediately banned AGAIN by guess who, the Trust Chairman Pill Sumbler, because that's what he does when the pressure turns on him.
Just before the last sale where the Trust watched it happen from beneath their noses after repeated calls from me Shaky, E20 and Spratty (now called Chad)
And guess what, we were ALL BANNED
This is what this site is for, to censor and channel debate in the direction of whatever Pill Sumbler's agenda is.
It stinks as does the level of bullying
People just won't allow the fact that someone has a different view to them so they make vicious lies up about being on the payroll. There's the real diversion. A lot are just too ignorant to look at the bigger picture and think for themselves
We've got to be owned by someone haven't we?
And we haven't got 50m plus to buy them out have we?!
But we've all got our heads in the sand because we think we've got plenty of money
Well the Trust know we haven't and now we're actually talking about them seeing reasonably detailed accounts and there being ZERO evidence that any wrongdoing is occurring.
This should be welcome news but instead it's brushed under the carpet because fans want blood.
We wanted EPL football, we wanted big signings,we wanted success, well we had all that but it came with a price, and not many of you are willing to let that sink in.
Now the same handful of posters will jump all over this instead of debating civilly our situation as a whole. |
Don't you find it suspicious at all that the Americans have insisted on a NDA before sharing more information with the trust? |  |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:57 - Feb 4 with 1623 views | _ |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:48 - Feb 4 by Chief |
Don't you find it suspicious at all that the Americans have insisted on a NDA before sharing more information with the trust? |
They have insisted on an NDA that
Stu doesn't go back to the likes of
Phil Sumbler who will, as usual, find a way of getting messages out on this site.
Can you really blame them?
Stu MacDonald has the ability to get all he wants. | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:59 - Feb 4 with 1613 views | _ |
Just look at this thread from last night where fans are literally clueless as to what the Trust sees....
Where has the money gone? by mattyboy32 3 Feb 2019 3:01This is my first post on this site and with recent evens wanted to know where fans think the money we have earned from are transfer dealings over the years have gone. Personally I think this little quote about mr.leviens acquisition sums it all up.
“In 2012, Erick Thohir and Jason Levien purchased the club and its holding company, with Chang remaining as a minority investor. Their efforts are primarily focused on getting United a new stadium and enhancing the four-time MLS champions”
We were never the club going to the next level we were just the piggy bank in this scheme. Their new stadium would cost over $400 million with them funding about $100million and rest would be loaned to them by city of dc. These talks for this deal started in January 2015 so how would a club loitering round the lower end of the mls afford this. So Levien got some investors to help get a relatively cheap club in the richest league in the world and then feed them lies for a tidy income machine
The yanks have always wanted money they got data analysis to help them find players to flip for profit so it could be used through loopholes in the system to benefit dc united. Now we have been relegated thy are just asset stripping to fund dc united. Is it a coincidence in August this year Levien bought the rest of thonirs ownership and appointed Kaplan as a co-chairman and announced that theonsortium that bought us as the new ownership group.
It seems so funny how this has all happened in a short period of 4 years and we never seen any high profile signings like Wayne Rooney or investment in the stadium to the level of dc united and no signs or messages from the owners because they don’t give a monkey about us.
I think we should not chant to get rid of these owners next saturday we need to chant for our money back that belongs to us not some other team that wants to get better by milking a smaller more profitable team of its hard earned cash that should have reinvested into itself. Rant over what are your thoughts?😂
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:59 - Feb 4 with 1610 views | jasper_T |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:48 - Feb 4 by Chief |
Don't you find it suspicious at all that the Americans have insisted on a NDA before sharing more information with the trust? |
Given that the Trust is essentially an open house (anyone with a tenner can join) I can certainly understand concerns that might arise in sharing privileged/sensitive information with it compared to the average independent shareholder who can be more easily controlled by non-disclosure obligations.
The majority owners essentially have to have faith that the Trust's internal management structure is sufficient to protect any information they wish to remain within the organisation, and prevent exposing themselves to the public at large.
Little good can come from revealing exactly how poor the club's financial situation might be (see the low low offers we've already been receiving for players from clubs that believe we're struggling). | | | |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:00 - Feb 4 with 1605 views | Chief |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:57 - Feb 4 by _ |
They have insisted on an NDA that
Stu doesn't go back to the likes of
Phil Sumbler who will, as usual, find a way of getting messages out on this site.
Can you really blame them?
Stu MacDonald has the ability to get all he wants. |
Come on now, you're more intelligent than that, don't act dull now. The reason for them insisting on the NDA must for far greater fear of something more than a few fans discussing it on an internet forum? | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:17 - Feb 4 with 1550 views | monmouth |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:46 - Feb 4 by _ |
Respect for admitting you didn't know, but you had no choice really did you after stating this on so many occasions.
You've now found out they do see them, analyse them and have found no wrongdoing.
That's a lot different to what so, so many fans have thought since June last year. And I can trawl through any thread on here or other sites where that is mentioned repeatedly.
The detail the Trust are asking for is the bit that's not clear and you and others can talk all you want about the Board's you've sat on but not one of them is a football club with two transfer windows every season where anything and everything can be expected. |
I don’t really get the first point. I didn’t know. Why wouldn’t I ‘admit’ in Claseys words I don’t have a dog in this fight. Other than wanting the best for the football club I support.
I don’t think the Americans are committing any financial wrongdoing. Certainly not in a legal sense. As investment managers they would be finished if they did. I do expect them to be trying to maximise returns or minimise losses for their investors as that will be part of their investment prospectus. They have to. That’s why they can’t give a toss about the football club as anything other than a managed financial asset. If they think the best strategy is growth (in this case a return to the PL) and flipping they will pursue that. If they think that income sustainability and find a buyer (writing off investor losses) is the best strategy they will do that. If they think selling everything they can when they can, they will do that. Whatever it is, it will be for the good of the investors ,not the ambitions and wishes of supporters like yourself and myself, whatever those are.
I don’t know what their plans are, neither do you, but I bloody well expect the Supporter Director to know, and to represent our interests. In the end they will do what they want anyway as they have the horses in terms of votes. That is why not sharing the information makes it difficult not to think that the plans are very unpalatable for supporters. Yes, you can assume the opposite if you want, but it feels a lot less intuitive to me. But everyone can have their own opinion on that. The proof of the pudding and all that.
I think it’s entirely appropriate for the supporters trust, who are the only shareholders that don’t exclusively have returns to investors as an overriding objective to want to see and challenge the strategy being followed on behalf of supporters . Don’t you?
As for all the other stuff, I’m not really aware of any Company in the uk public or private where a main board director can’t get any information he wants and get advice on it and it would be considered acceptable. It’s the job. The directors have duties under CA2006 to promote the success of the company. No one can challenge what ‘success’ should mean without all the required information and plans. [Post edited 4 Feb 2019 9:26]
| |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:20 - Feb 4 with 1534 views | _ |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:00 - Feb 4 by Chief |
Come on now, you're more intelligent than that, don't act dull now. The reason for them insisting on the NDA must for far greater fear of something more than a few fans discussing it on an internet forum? |
Absolutely. Not at all. See Jasper's post above. | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:26 - Feb 4 with 1503 views | swan65split |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 00:56 - Feb 4 by chad |
You are worried you underestimated him !!!
Dear god this is surreal you talk like you politely disagreed with him
Scoffed? You and E20 totally ripped him apart. You were just massively abusive and childishly insulting about his figures.
Now you are referring people to those same figures. |
Dont start me off on the being bullied crap...i"ll just leave this top post here . |  | | |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:29 - Feb 4 with 1481 views | _ |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:17 - Feb 4 by monmouth |
I don’t really get the first point. I didn’t know. Why wouldn’t I ‘admit’ in Claseys words I don’t have a dog in this fight. Other than wanting the best for the football club I support.
I don’t think the Americans are committing any financial wrongdoing. Certainly not in a legal sense. As investment managers they would be finished if they did. I do expect them to be trying to maximise returns or minimise losses for their investors as that will be part of their investment prospectus. They have to. That’s why they can’t give a toss about the football club as anything other than a managed financial asset. If they think the best strategy is growth (in this case a return to the PL) and flipping they will pursue that. If they think that income sustainability and find a buyer (writing off investor losses) is the best strategy they will do that. If they think selling everything they can when they can, they will do that. Whatever it is, it will be for the good of the investors ,not the ambitions and wishes of supporters like yourself and myself, whatever those are.
I don’t know what their plans are, neither do you, but I bloody well expect the Supporter Director to know, and to represent our interests. In the end they will do what they want anyway as they have the horses in terms of votes. That is why not sharing the information makes it difficult not to think that the plans are very unpalatable for supporters. Yes, you can assume the opposite if you want, but it feels a lot less intuitive to me. But everyone can have their own opinion on that. The proof of the pudding and all that.
I think it’s entirely appropriate for the supporters trust, who are the only shareholders that don’t exclusively have returns to investors as an overriding objective to want to see and challenge the strategy being followed on behalf of supporters . Don’t you?
As for all the other stuff, I’m not really aware of any Company in the uk public or private where a main board director can’t get any information he wants and get advice on it and it would be considered acceptable. It’s the job. The directors have duties under CA2006 to promote the success of the company. No one can challenge what ‘success’ should mean without all the required information and plans. [Post edited 4 Feb 2019 9:26]
|
The Supporters Director has the ability to receive any info he damn well wants. They've said that's fine.
But they insisted on it not going any further.
Personally I think that is more than fair and prudent.
The last thing any of us should want is leaks on this message board.
I agree about who they are and why they acquired the club but we all saw how much they invested (in terms of club money) in an attempt to stay at the top table. That gamble failed and we're not even given their next strategy a chance.
Stu MacDonald should sign the NDA and he should be fully in the picture. If there's stuff he thinks is unpalatable, to use your word, he can resign.
But nonetheless, so many fans didn't have the slightest clue a whole sub group saw the monthly management accounts. Now you can play that down all you like due to your friendship with Clase or Ux or you can be honest with yourself and say well yeah, I didn't know, but it doesn't matter anyway, because of, hmm... How shall I defuse this here....
The fans had no clue. You read this message board, you know that. | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:31 - Feb 4 with 1470 views | jackrmee |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 23:57 - Feb 3 by _ |
Precisely.
But why would some posters want to derail that important aspect?
Also, why would the Trust make a big statement in the December's minutes if it were common knowledge that everyone knew.
Also, it says the whole sub group have access to the accounts and they are pretty bloody detailed..
Not just the Trust Director who's under the Nda? Unless I've read that wrong Monmouth? |
Didn't the trust refuse an NDA?
Doesn't that snapshot with the green around it have more writing underneath which explains that there are not detailed enough, and that is the issue? |  |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:35 - Feb 4 with 1448 views | jackrmee |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 00:16 - Feb 4 by _ |
What is the conspiracy theory then?
And yes, our very own Trust director is trying to tell everyone they see the accounts, which let's face it, most of us all thought they didn't, and that there's no suggestion of wrong doing.
The more detail is probably something the Americans can't even answer because the Trust want to know what's the forecast for the next couple of seasons.... We've just got rid of Bony and saved 2m, the forecast has already changed to a few days ago.
Be realistic here. [Post edited 4 Feb 2019 0:17]
|
If "most of us" thought the trust didn't see the accounts, maybe they should have attended the meetings and heard what SMcD said in the first place, instead of reading something on here or on Twitter ffs and believing it to be true and then spreading that around.
That's called rumours. | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:39 - Feb 4 with 1434 views | _ |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:31 - Feb 4 by jackrmee |
Didn't the trust refuse an NDA?
Doesn't that snapshot with the green around it have more writing underneath which explains that there are not detailed enough, and that is the issue? |
The bit with the green underneath is the bit the Americans say Stu MacDonald can receive but only if he signs an NDA as they are clearly concerned that our sensitive financial situation maybe leaked and become public information.
That's a particularly valid reason, especially the way Phil Sumbler has used and abused this website to leak previous information out or derail conversation. | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:42 - Feb 4 with 1424 views | _ |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:35 - Feb 4 by jackrmee |
If "most of us" thought the trust didn't see the accounts, maybe they should have attended the meetings and heard what SMcD said in the first place, instead of reading something on here or on Twitter ffs and believing it to be true and then spreading that around.
That's called rumours. |
So it's back down to communication.
And let's face it, The subject of not seeing the accounts is brought up every day on every platform.
That's incorrect. It seems most people are pointing to the December's minutes so was that the first time this was discussed in more detail? | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:44 - Feb 4 with 1415 views | monmouth |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:29 - Feb 4 by _ |
The Supporters Director has the ability to receive any info he damn well wants. They've said that's fine.
But they insisted on it not going any further.
Personally I think that is more than fair and prudent.
The last thing any of us should want is leaks on this message board.
I agree about who they are and why they acquired the club but we all saw how much they invested (in terms of club money) in an attempt to stay at the top table. That gamble failed and we're not even given their next strategy a chance.
Stu MacDonald should sign the NDA and he should be fully in the picture. If there's stuff he thinks is unpalatable, to use your word, he can resign.
But nonetheless, so many fans didn't have the slightest clue a whole sub group saw the monthly management accounts. Now you can play that down all you like due to your friendship with Clase or Ux or you can be honest with yourself and say well yeah, I didn't know, but it doesn't matter anyway, because of, hmm... How shall I defuse this here....
The fans had no clue. You read this message board, you know that. |
I fully understand the logic of the NDA as long as it doesn’t prevent him taking adequate technical professional advice.i said so a couple of nights ago. If the Trust has a financial sub group I assume they are his professional technical advisers, so yeah, put those all under a legL duty of confidentiality. I totally agree that confidential company strategy should not be shared with the Trust board as a whole. If nothing else for their own protection. Only the Club Board and their advisers should see strategy. That’s why we have a Board Director who must make up his own mind about the way he wishes to pursue supporter interest.
But I’ve lost track of where this thread is going now. The Trust did publish that they see the mgmt accounts. I didn’t know and thought they didn’t and I was annoyed that they didn’t do the f*ckers could have told me.. Not sure what we are arguing about now. I don’t have any friendships with Trust Board members by the way - never met them - but I do respect them based on what I’ve seen on here. I was seriously fed up with Phil and Ux for arguing so strongly against legal routes last time, and I thought I made that pretty clear at the time. [Post edited 4 Feb 2019 9:51]
| |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:46 - Feb 4 with 1407 views | Elmo |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 22:50 - Feb 3 by ScottishEddie |
This thread is being derailed... the main point here is:
 |
Great news that the Trust believes there's no financial wrongdoing and is now sharing that information.
So the bit missing is for Forecasting purposes. Nothing fiduciary ?
The real bit missing is sufficient clout from the Trust on the Board. Anyone with >20% shareholding should be totally all over the financials at Board level. The Trust board director should be doing just that right now (regardless of NDA). Anything less is amateurish.
Whilst waiting for the additional detail to make a judgement on the 2 Yr Forecasts (including opinion and suggestions on cuts), I hope the Trust has sufficient knowledge and expertise on the team to prepare their own Forecasts and analysis. | | | |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 10:03 - Feb 4 with 1363 views | monmouth |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:46 - Feb 4 by Elmo |
Great news that the Trust believes there's no financial wrongdoing and is now sharing that information.
So the bit missing is for Forecasting purposes. Nothing fiduciary ?
The real bit missing is sufficient clout from the Trust on the Board. Anyone with >20% shareholding should be totally all over the financials at Board level. The Trust board director should be doing just that right now (regardless of NDA). Anything less is amateurish.
Whilst waiting for the additional detail to make a judgement on the 2 Yr Forecasts (including opinion and suggestions on cuts), I hope the Trust has sufficient knowledge and expertise on the team to prepare their own Forecasts and analysis. |
Fiduciary doesn’t mean financial.
All the club Board directors need to see the club forecasts and strategy. The forecasts can’t be guessed without the strategy. That’s what Boards are for, when you strip things away. Setting, monitoring and controlling strategy. | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 10:05 - Feb 4 with 1349 views | jackrmee |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 08:46 - Feb 4 by _ |
Respect for admitting you didn't know, but you had no choice really did you after stating this on so many occasions.
You've now found out they do see them, analyse them and have found no wrongdoing.
That's a lot different to what so, so many fans have thought since June last year. And I can trawl through any thread on here or other sites where that is mentioned repeatedly.
The detail the Trust are asking for is the bit that's not clear and you and others can talk all you want about the Board's you've sat on but not one of them is a football club with two transfer windows every season where anything and everything can be expected. |
I've been following the Swans for many years, but have only just become a trust member and have only been to 2 meetings ever.
I know fuk all about account or how they work, but even I knew what SMcD said and I thought that although they do see some accounts and could see no wrongdoing, they needed to see more detailed accounts in order to be sure of no wrongdoing. He would have been allowed to see them, but had to sign an NDA so he couldn't even discuss them with the rest of the trust board, let alone us.
The Trust aren't happy with that, so (may be wrong on this bit) it's part of the pending court action along with how the trust got tucked up in the sale of the club?
Seems quite simple to me, and I'm reasonably thick.
Even though the monthly accounts are "reasonably detailed" and the Trust have no reason to think anything is dodgy, the mere mention of an NDA when more detail is requested suggests something dodgy right? Isn't that where we are? That's all the details we have right?
I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of the club.
The way I see it, if I knew this by going to 2 Trust meetings, why are some people who claim to know so much and care so much about the club, basing their anger upon a tweet they see, or a post on here? That's even thicker than me.
ps. I just saw your last post. Quite possibly didn't get discussed in more detail before December's meeting, as that's the first one I went to . | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 10:07 - Feb 4 with 1343 views | _ |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 09:44 - Feb 4 by monmouth |
I fully understand the logic of the NDA as long as it doesn’t prevent him taking adequate technical professional advice.i said so a couple of nights ago. If the Trust has a financial sub group I assume they are his professional technical advisers, so yeah, put those all under a legL duty of confidentiality. I totally agree that confidential company strategy should not be shared with the Trust board as a whole. If nothing else for their own protection. Only the Club Board and their advisers should see strategy. That’s why we have a Board Director who must make up his own mind about the way he wishes to pursue supporter interest.
But I’ve lost track of where this thread is going now. The Trust did publish that they see the mgmt accounts. I didn’t know and thought they didn’t and I was annoyed that they didn’t do the f*ckers could have told me.. Not sure what we are arguing about now. I don’t have any friendships with Trust Board members by the way - never met them - but I do respect them based on what I’ve seen on here. I was seriously fed up with Phil and Ux for arguing so strongly against legal routes last time, and I thought I made that pretty clear at the time. [Post edited 4 Feb 2019 9:51]
|
Were not arguing but I'm sure you'll agree there's a huge misconception among fans as to what the Trust actually does or doesn't know.
Now, as with everything, this can be spun and twisted to suit most agendas, but what we do know is....
1. The Trust - a sub group of I would guess 3 or 4 including Lisa and Ux - receive detailed monthly management accounts.
2. These are forensically analysed and there is no evidence of wrongdoing.
3. Which up to this point proves no money has left our football club other than what is documented - no assets have been stripped.
4. The Trust know that cost cutting was the only option this season. That we had a huge black hole to fill and that we were unable to shift huge earners off the wage bill
What they don't know is...
1. If the cost cutting was too severe
2. What do the Americans forecast the next couple of seasons to be.
Now, if the above was communicated as it should have been, not hidden in mixed messages, or briefly spoken about in a Trust forum, then I'm sure most fans would be in a better position to evaluate their thoughts, instead of just jumping on bandwagons screaming for blood.
The communication is awful, but my problem is, is that it's awful for a reason, because it suited the Trust to garner support on the back of mass hysteria as a result of mis-communication.
Poor show, but now we know the full details let me ask this question...
If it were a simple choice of selling Dan James or going into administration, what would fans want to happen?
Sensible replies only?! | |
| |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 10:15 - Feb 4 with 1316 views | swan65split |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 10:07 - Feb 4 by _ |
Were not arguing but I'm sure you'll agree there's a huge misconception among fans as to what the Trust actually does or doesn't know.
Now, as with everything, this can be spun and twisted to suit most agendas, but what we do know is....
1. The Trust - a sub group of I would guess 3 or 4 including Lisa and Ux - receive detailed monthly management accounts.
2. These are forensically analysed and there is no evidence of wrongdoing.
3. Which up to this point proves no money has left our football club other than what is documented - no assets have been stripped.
4. The Trust know that cost cutting was the only option this season. That we had a huge black hole to fill and that we were unable to shift huge earners off the wage bill
What they don't know is...
1. If the cost cutting was too severe
2. What do the Americans forecast the next couple of seasons to be.
Now, if the above was communicated as it should have been, not hidden in mixed messages, or briefly spoken about in a Trust forum, then I'm sure most fans would be in a better position to evaluate their thoughts, instead of just jumping on bandwagons screaming for blood.
The communication is awful, but my problem is, is that it's awful for a reason, because it suited the Trust to garner support on the back of mass hysteria as a result of mis-communication.
Poor show, but now we know the full details let me ask this question...
If it were a simple choice of selling Dan James or going into administration, what would fans want to happen?
Sensible replies only?! |
Just joined.......reason,,,sale of the club and the state we are in now
Thats my agenda now stop smokescreening | | | |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 10:16 - Feb 4 with 1306 views | _ |
| FAO Ux and the Trust. Why have you not told everyone it sees the Accounts?? on 10:03 - Feb 4 by monmouth |
Fiduciary doesn’t mean financial.
All the club Board directors need to see the club forecasts and strategy. The forecasts can’t be guessed without the strategy. That’s what Boards are for, when you strip things away. Setting, monitoring and controlling strategy. |
Not fair at all to use that terminology there Monmouth
Strip things away. You know what our fans are like | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
