| Trust statement 20:05 - Jun 13 with 37958 views | Joe_bradshaw |
The court case is happening at last.
Thanks Joe, a little bit from me to everyone.
Hi folks, this is clearly a topic many enjoy commenting on, but please remain consistent in your responses avoiding potential slurs on any characters involved and remain objective.
Thanks ðŸ‘
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| |  |
| Trust statement on 15:40 - Jun 18 with 1294 views | max936 |
Its like those roundabout rides in a kiddies playground here, 9 pages of tedium to go with the probably the other 100 of posts and threads, all the same.
Here's a suggestion why don't posters just ignore and not answer posts that regurgitate the same old posts and threads that have been started.
Its really not healthy to keep this going. |  |
| |
| Trust statement on 15:47 - Jun 18 with 1285 views | Chief |
| Trust statement on 12:29 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Any one suggesting an unexpected bill of around £22m for the parent company of a football club, will have no bearing on the football club is deluded. A Cardiff city fan if he wanted to harm Swansea city would say. "Hit the owners hard in the pocket". Man Utd fan activist want to do this to the Glazers.
Of couse it is not £22m but £14m as the Shares have a value of £8m or so.
Some people on one hand suggest the SCST need protection because the majority owners can very easily dilute their holding "to nothing" with a special resolution or two and a little bit of paperwork and investment. They then suggest on the other hand that extracting cash from the company that has cash is unrealistic. This is spin from the 'in house' team.
The US ownership group will recover the deficit one way or another as descibed by the Doctor P. That is just good business. The SCST supporters will say of course that promotion will immediately clear these debts and the US people will forget about them. This is probably true. They will in this case reflect they have just got £13m or so for an asset worth £40m in that case. Where will the difference £27m go? Thats easy. £8m to the funders a £19m to Uncle Sam. There is a very good chance of Swansea reaching the Premier leaue in the next 10 years in my opinion. Its a 12.5% chance on simple statistical basis every season.
[Post edited 18 Jun 2021 12:34]
|
How the 22mill bill unexpected exactly!? It's no secret that this has been a possibility for a long time. And of course being the savvy business people they are should have known about it even before the purchase. According to you, they've even made offers for the trust's shares previously meaning this money have had already been budgeted for. Any Cardiff fan with half a brain would know that if the Americans had financial issues, there'd be basically no change to us. We are separate entities, with separate bank accounts.
Not sure on your figures there.
Not sure what's spin there? It's reality isn't it? Anything false there? Don't think so.
Yes I'm sure they'll try to recover it. But how it a practical sense, in reality would they actually do it? Scaremongering is easy. Looking at the reality, somewhat different.
Ok so what are moaning about then? If we're going up the Americans will get a bargain? Win win surely? |  |
| |
| Trust statement on 15:52 - Jun 18 with 1274 views | Chief |
| Trust statement on 15:21 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Please answer the question with regard to how the SCST will invest their money in the event of a win in court.
General inflation is 2.1% .Football inflation is probably way higher in terms of TV rights player fees wages etc.
Assuming The SCST have say £14m in the bank how will they invest this money? This question should be vital to the membership. Leaving it in the bank is not sustainable. |
Haha so you can't address the post so you move onto something else.
Deflect deflect deflect. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 16:39 - Jun 18 with 1238 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust statement on 15:52 - Jun 18 by Chief |
Haha so you can't address the post so you move onto something else.
Deflect deflect deflect. |
I adress all points and all arguments. In this case I want to do them one at a time.
What investment plan does the SCST have for the money they might recieve from the legal action. It may be a very large sum. What advice have they taken? There must be an investment plan.? |  |
| |
| Trust statement on 17:04 - Jun 18 with 1213 views | Chief |
| Trust statement on 16:39 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I adress all points and all arguments. In this case I want to do them one at a time.
What investment plan does the SCST have for the money they might recieve from the legal action. It may be a very large sum. What advice have they taken? There must be an investment plan.? |
Patience. They haven't even got to court yet. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 17:07 - Jun 18 with 1212 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust statement on 17:04 - Jun 18 by Chief |
Patience. They haven't even got to court yet. |
Is there an investment plan or not.? How will they use the money? These thing are relevant and need answering. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 17:12 - Jun 18 with 1205 views | Chief |
| Trust statement on 17:07 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Is there an investment plan or not.? How will they use the money? These thing are relevant and need answering. |
I'm sure there is. But probably not wise to release such information even before they go to court. A lot probably depends on the amount of the award (if any) and even when the judgement is given. Probably a lot of options based on a number of outcomes.
You know this. And i don't see why it needs to answered right this minute to be honest. Or even why you care at all. Isn't this a 'divorce'?
Just another example trying to fling cachu at a wall and hoping some sticks. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 17:24 - Jun 18 with 1196 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Trust statement on 15:21 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Please answer the question with regard to how the SCST will invest their money in the event of a win in court.
General inflation is 2.1% .Football inflation is probably way higher in terms of TV rights player fees wages etc.
Assuming The SCST have say £14m in the bank how will they invest this money? This question should be vital to the membership. Leaving it in the bank is not sustainable. |
Why are you so interested in the Trust’s investment strategy?
Earlier in this thread you were hoping the Trust would get its value diluted away.
Bit of an about turn don’t you think? |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust statement on 17:25 - Jun 18 with 1193 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Trust statement on 15:40 - Jun 18 by max936 |
Its like those roundabout rides in a kiddies playground here, 9 pages of tedium to go with the probably the other 100 of posts and threads, all the same.
Here's a suggestion why don't posters just ignore and not answer posts that regurgitate the same old posts and threads that have been started.
Its really not healthy to keep this going. |
Because it’s important not to allow misinformation to turn into accepted fact. | | | |
| Trust statement on 17:26 - Jun 18 with 1192 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust statement on 17:12 - Jun 18 by Chief |
I'm sure there is. But probably not wise to release such information even before they go to court. A lot probably depends on the amount of the award (if any) and even when the judgement is given. Probably a lot of options based on a number of outcomes.
You know this. And i don't see why it needs to answered right this minute to be honest. Or even why you care at all. Isn't this a 'divorce'?
Just another example trying to fling cachu at a wall and hoping some sticks. |
You do not speak for the SCST. Insiders must know what they can invest in after taking legal advice. No point going to court for millions if they cannot invest the money in something that has some growth at least.
I question the logic of this case. The main beneficiaries, it seems to me are for third parties. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 17:35 - Jun 18 with 1184 views | Chief |
| Trust statement on 17:26 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
You do not speak for the SCST. Insiders must know what they can invest in after taking legal advice. No point going to court for millions if they cannot invest the money in something that has some growth at least.
I question the logic of this case. The main beneficiaries, it seems to me are for third parties. |
I'm sure insiders do know. So why you're asking on a public forum I'm not sure.
How can a body that stands to gain millions of pounds not be considered a beneficiary? | |
| |
| Trust statement on 17:36 - Jun 18 with 1184 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Trust statement on 17:26 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
You do not speak for the SCST. Insiders must know what they can invest in after taking legal advice. No point going to court for millions if they cannot invest the money in something that has some growth at least.
I question the logic of this case. The main beneficiaries, it seems to me are for third parties. |
You question the logic because you absolutely refuse to accept the central point which is that the Trust, unprotected, can be diluted away which could leave it with no position in the club AND no ability to step in financially if something went wrong.
Investment strategy is just the latest in the long list of ‘problems with the Trust’s position’ you have raised on this thread, lurching from one to the other as the reality is explained to you. | | | |
| Trust statement on 17:46 - Jun 18 with 1178 views | monmouth |
| Trust statement on 17:26 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
You do not speak for the SCST. Insiders must know what they can invest in after taking legal advice. No point going to court for millions if they cannot invest the money in something that has some growth at least.
I question the logic of this case. The main beneficiaries, it seems to me are for third parties. |
Truly pathetic. Truly.
One minute they have no chance of winning, then legal remedy is one that disadvantaged minority shareholders need to pursue, then you (who have absolutely nothing to do with it at all) are mouthing off about what happens if they win millions.
Get a life. Let's see what happens in court if your lot don't lose their bottle and settle in advance is it? |  |
| |
| Trust statement on 17:49 - Jun 18 with 1175 views | Gwyn737 |
| Trust statement on 17:36 - Jun 18 by londonlisa2001 |
You question the logic because you absolutely refuse to accept the central point which is that the Trust, unprotected, can be diluted away which could leave it with no position in the club AND no ability to step in financially if something went wrong.
Investment strategy is just the latest in the long list of ‘problems with the Trust’s position’ you have raised on this thread, lurching from one to the other as the reality is explained to you. |
The first paragraph is all supporters need to focus on at the present time.
It’s the absolute crux of the matter. | | | |
| Trust statement on 18:05 - Jun 18 with 1160 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Trust statement on 17:49 - Jun 18 by Gwyn737 |
The first paragraph is all supporters need to focus on at the present time.
It’s the absolute crux of the matter. |
Indeed.
And the reality of that means that , in the end, however much everyone would prefer to have an amicable negotiation of how best to move forward, together stronger as it were, the situation as it stands is simply impossible for the Trust. It’s not a matter of revenge, or mistrust, or whatever else people want to mistakenly ascribe as a motivation, it is simply a case of necessity. | | | |
| Trust statement on 18:25 - Jun 18 with 1132 views | max936 |
| Trust statement on 17:25 - Jun 18 by londonlisa2001 |
Because it’s important not to allow misinformation to turn into accepted fact. |
Yes....... but if people ignored the main perpetrator then the threads will die a quick death. All this as been said over and over.
But you get these antagonistic ones who keep posting the same untrue narratives, because it is obvious it suits their agenda. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 18:28 - Jun 18 with 1122 views | onehunglow |
| Trust statement on 18:05 - Jun 18 by londonlisa2001 |
Indeed.
And the reality of that means that , in the end, however much everyone would prefer to have an amicable negotiation of how best to move forward, together stronger as it were, the situation as it stands is simply impossible for the Trust. It’s not a matter of revenge, or mistrust, or whatever else people want to mistakenly ascribe as a motivation, it is simply a case of necessity. |
Im afraid that is not quite correct ma'am;it IS about revenge on those who sold out for their own gain before the best deal for the club. It is about justice and reparation.
Ive read it on these forums so it must be true. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 18:40 - Jun 18 with 1122 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust statement on 17:36 - Jun 18 by londonlisa2001 |
You question the logic because you absolutely refuse to accept the central point which is that the Trust, unprotected, can be diluted away which could leave it with no position in the club AND no ability to step in financially if something went wrong.
Investment strategy is just the latest in the long list of ‘problems with the Trust’s position’ you have raised on this thread, lurching from one to the other as the reality is explained to you. |
The SCST can only be diluted by huge investment or by fake valuations which sounds like fraud to me. The owners have no criminal records and are respected figures. They will not do this.
The SCST needs protection from inflation but appears to have no mechanisms of doing this apparently. Not that any one cares it seems.
£14m in the bank will devalue by 2% a year without protection at todays rate. 3% is the government target on average. This is £420,000 every year or £8,000 a week. Football inflation could be much more than this.
The SCST if it has cash should be investing in Swansea city football club or providing loans to the club, but once outside will not be welcome at the club. This is a huge problem. The number one plus point of the SCST is 'goodwill'. This will be lost by following the matra of the failed leadership of the past.
£14m at a 3% devaluation rate will be £10,33m after 10 years a loss of £3.67m. After 20 years the inflation adjusted value would be around £6m at the HM Government target vlaue. 20 years is not unrealistic. Swansea v Hull seems like yesterday.
If someone had said the SCST have employed 'Bright, Sparkes and Cash, Investment and Business Consultants" I might have some faith in the organisation. I have always supported an independant assessment of the BUSINESS case before pressing the button for going to court.
[Post edited 18 Jun 2021 18:47]
| |
| |
| Trust statement on 18:48 - Jun 18 with 1107 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Trust statement on 18:28 - Jun 18 by onehunglow |
Im afraid that is not quite correct ma'am;it IS about revenge on those who sold out for their own gain before the best deal for the club. It is about justice and reparation.
Ive read it on these forums so it must be true. |
Yes it is.
You can read all sorts on a forum. | | | |
| Trust statement on 18:49 - Jun 18 with 1100 views | onehunglow |
| Trust statement on 15:40 - Jun 18 by max936 |
Its like those roundabout rides in a kiddies playground here, 9 pages of tedium to go with the probably the other 100 of posts and threads, all the same.
Here's a suggestion why don't posters just ignore and not answer posts that regurgitate the same old posts and threads that have been started.
Its really not healthy to keep this going. |
I agree Steve and I will tell you why.
You will see extended verbose posting from those clearly up their own backsides seeing themselves as being right . Res is putting up a stern defence and he must have some substance about him to put up with this relentless bullying as that what it really is. A vulture culture led by lisa herself,aided and abetted by her cadre of experts of absolutely zero.
It is like the last picture show,a grotesque distraction from what we should be concerned about.
For us cynics unwilling to flow along with the current it's compulsive viewing until the new season arrives and we can bitch about more important matters.
Now, when is Steve going?
Are the Owners going to sell ?
That is what should concern us | |
| |
| Trust statement on 19:06 - Jun 18 with 1087 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Trust statement on 18:40 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The SCST can only be diluted by huge investment or by fake valuations which sounds like fraud to me. The owners have no criminal records and are respected figures. They will not do this.
The SCST needs protection from inflation but appears to have no mechanisms of doing this apparently. Not that any one cares it seems.
£14m in the bank will devalue by 2% a year without protection at todays rate. 3% is the government target on average. This is £420,000 every year or £8,000 a week. Football inflation could be much more than this.
The SCST if it has cash should be investing in Swansea city football club or providing loans to the club, but once outside will not be welcome at the club. This is a huge problem. The number one plus point of the SCST is 'goodwill'. This will be lost by following the matra of the failed leadership of the past.
£14m at a 3% devaluation rate will be £10,33m after 10 years a loss of £3.67m. After 20 years the inflation adjusted value would be around £6m at the HM Government target vlaue. 20 years is not unrealistic. Swansea v Hull seems like yesterday.
If someone had said the SCST have employed 'Bright, Sparkes and Cash, Investment and Business Consultants" I might have some faith in the organisation. I have always supported an independant assessment of the BUSINESS case before pressing the button for going to court.
[Post edited 18 Jun 2021 18:47]
|
No one has said anything about ‘fake valuations’.
No one has said anything about criminal records.
But you have absolutely no idea who will own the club in the future. So how can you say what will and won’t happen.
Who says no one cares about inflation? Or investment? You. That’s who.
As an aside, your maths is awful.
£14m (simply using your figure), at a 3% inflation rate is worth £13,592,233.01 In one year ( a ‘cost’ of £407,767), is worth £10,417,314.81 after 10 years, and worth £7,751,460.56 after 20 years.
Not that it is remotely relevant, but just to help and all that.
How much would it be worth if the Trust has been diluted to 5% of the club in 5 years and the club is still worth what the latest valuation used was plus 3% annual inflation? Try to work it out. Then come back to us. | | | |
| Trust statement on 19:09 - Jun 18 with 1083 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Trust statement on 18:49 - Jun 18 by onehunglow |
I agree Steve and I will tell you why.
You will see extended verbose posting from those clearly up their own backsides seeing themselves as being right . Res is putting up a stern defence and he must have some substance about him to put up with this relentless bullying as that what it really is. A vulture culture led by lisa herself,aided and abetted by her cadre of experts of absolutely zero.
It is like the last picture show,a grotesque distraction from what we should be concerned about.
For us cynics unwilling to flow along with the current it's compulsive viewing until the new season arrives and we can bitch about more important matters.
Now, when is Steve going?
Are the Owners going to sell ?
That is what should concern us |
Keith.
Are you going to anything about this constant personal attack from this creep, or shall I?
Let me know. | | | |
| Trust statement on 19:10 - Jun 18 with 1081 views | max936 |
| Trust statement on 18:49 - Jun 18 by onehunglow |
I agree Steve and I will tell you why.
You will see extended verbose posting from those clearly up their own backsides seeing themselves as being right . Res is putting up a stern defence and he must have some substance about him to put up with this relentless bullying as that what it really is. A vulture culture led by lisa herself,aided and abetted by her cadre of experts of absolutely zero.
It is like the last picture show,a grotesque distraction from what we should be concerned about.
For us cynics unwilling to flow along with the current it's compulsive viewing until the new season arrives and we can bitch about more important matters.
Now, when is Steve going?
Are the Owners going to sell ?
That is what should concern us |
I've given up on this, but think the owners are trying to run a tight ship while making us competitive at the same time, so I give them some gratis for that, I didn't want them here in first place, unlike some who welcomed them, whilst I still have some suspicious thoughts, the team has done pretty well, all considered. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 19:13 - Jun 18 with 1074 views | Chief |
| Trust statement on 18:40 - Jun 18 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The SCST can only be diluted by huge investment or by fake valuations which sounds like fraud to me. The owners have no criminal records and are respected figures. They will not do this.
The SCST needs protection from inflation but appears to have no mechanisms of doing this apparently. Not that any one cares it seems.
£14m in the bank will devalue by 2% a year without protection at todays rate. 3% is the government target on average. This is £420,000 every year or £8,000 a week. Football inflation could be much more than this.
The SCST if it has cash should be investing in Swansea city football club or providing loans to the club, but once outside will not be welcome at the club. This is a huge problem. The number one plus point of the SCST is 'goodwill'. This will be lost by following the matra of the failed leadership of the past.
£14m at a 3% devaluation rate will be £10,33m after 10 years a loss of £3.67m. After 20 years the inflation adjusted value would be around £6m at the HM Government target vlaue. 20 years is not unrealistic. Swansea v Hull seems like yesterday.
If someone had said the SCST have employed 'Bright, Sparkes and Cash, Investment and Business Consultants" I might have some faith in the organisation. I have always supported an independant assessment of the BUSINESS case before pressing the button for going to court.
[Post edited 18 Jun 2021 18:47]
|
"The owners have no criminal records and are respected figures"
There we are then. These don't sound like the type of people who'd embezzle funds illegally or dishonestly from the football club do they?
No need to fret. | |
| |
| Trust statement on 19:14 - Jun 18 with 1073 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Trust statement on 19:10 - Jun 18 by max936 |
I've given up on this, but think the owners are trying to run a tight ship while making us competitive at the same time, so I give them some gratis for that, I didn't want them here in first place, unlike some who welcomed them, whilst I still have some suspicious thoughts, the team has done pretty well, all considered. |
Protection for the Trust is a permanent issue, not a matter of the short term only. No one knows who will own us in the future or what their motivations will be.
You have to prepare for the worst while hoping for the best. To do anything else is negligent. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
