| Trust Position Revisited 09:28 - Nov 7 with 11621 views | Shaky |
Now that some of the takeover hysteria has at least temporarily died down, I think it is time to go back and take another look at the Trust's statement last week issued when I was on holiday with my family over halfterm.
I have already mentioned how I think it generally makes the Trust's position look weak and marginalised; if you have to make your views known to fellow shareholders via what is in effect an open letter it just shows that ordinary channels of communication have completely broken down. This, for example, potentially offers an explanation why the Trust has been so unsuccessful in addressing some of the fans' widespread complaints over a whole range of ticketing issues with the club. To me it is a damning indictment of the whole focus and approach of a body that is within whisker of being the largest shareholder and represents substantially all of the club's customer base. Huge fail.
But going back to specifics of the statement I take particular exception to the following bit which in essence stakes out the Trust position: " . . .given the current strong position of the team and the club we do not believe that this is the correct time for the ownership or set up of the club to change."
The strong position of the club and the team could imply 2 things: the league position and/or the financial position.
If Phil meant the league position I think few outside the club would disagree this represents such an extreme short-sighted view that it must me satirical or some sort of wind-up. In other words if you think the club has now found its natural and permanent position in the prem within the top 6 you are delusional. Furthermore, if you glance at the bottom 6 in the championship you will see Wigan, Fulham, and Bolton, all clubs that have been considered well established in the prem within the last 4 or 5 years, illustrating how rapidly fortunes can reverse.
If he was referring to the financial position as strong, that is simply not true objectively. Certainly the club is currently self financing and the recent improvement in the TV money should help that, but at the same time investment in club infrastructure is required and operating costs are rising rapidly with the club's playing staff strategy - both in terms of wages and sign-on fees - already seemingly out of the window. Furthermore from what I can gather organisationally the club is understaffed and possibly underpaid, and that may be one of the reasons for subpar off-field performance in various areas.
Coping under the circumstances is not a "strong position". And as I have already argued in the past, the fact that none of the shareholders really have deep pockets and the ability to put new capital into the club in the event of a slide out of the prem is a serious potential weakness.
The time to raise capital is when you are strong and everybody is clamouring for a piece of you, not when you are seriously on the slide or the floor. Ask any capital raising expert and they will tell you this is likely to be the best time in the current market cycle to raise financing. ". . not. . .the correct time" as Phil claims is again objectively speaking nonsense. In terms of financial management the idea that now is the ideal time to strengthen the capital position represents sound, prudent management, whereas the opposing view that everything is fine does not.
That said do either of the proposals seemingly on the table from rival groups represent the right way forward? I am not an insider and have no clue whatsoever, but the alarming thing is that the Trust don't seem to have much in the way of hard facts either, and if they do now it seems to be knowledge that has only been acquired within the last week or so, reinforcing my criticism that the Trust is marginalised.
Even so the Trust and their representatives have been whipping up emotions, spouting slogans, etc. Now maybe there are leaks being orchestrated by potential selling shareholders but now is a time for cool heads to prevail, particularly when the real - voting - power of the Trust to affect the outcome of the current situation is so limited.
My advice is to calm down, boys, and maybe go and read a book or something. In the present circumstances I suggest this one:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Extraordinary-Popular-Delusions-Confusin-Confusiones/dp/ |  |
| |  |
| Trust Position Revisited on 23:08 - Nov 7 with 1058 views | tomdickharry |
| Trust Position Revisited on 22:52 - Nov 7 by Uxbridge |
You're not seriously comparing the two are you? |
Both £SD. Am sure the Trust will receive the best advice. |  | | |
| Trust Position Revisited on 23:25 - Nov 7 with 1039 views | DJack |
| Trust Position Revisited on 15:10 - Nov 7 by Shaky |
Irrelevant?
Did you listen to it? "Came outta nowhere....and then he disappeared" It was so relevant it was almost prophetic.
And a sample - FWIW - that wasn't used in the Sasha mix on the B side. which is the version that used to take the roof off in all the big clubs.
On another note, you're a busy little note taker too, aren't ya Lisa? Interesting. |
"On another note, you're a busy little note taker too, aren't ya Lisa? Interesting."
Unfortunately, mate I think this is a more accurate description of yourself. I am certain that you have a good level of intellect but your bullshit levels far outweigh that intellect.
Please use your brain power to "good use". |  |
| It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 23:42 - Nov 7 with 1024 views | Davillin |
| Trust Position Revisited on 21:55 - Nov 7 by tomdickharry |
Tell me why did the Trust accept the Dividends,the bowling nights et al. money. |
Because in order to protect our interest in the safety of the club in the long term, it has been from day one the aim to acquire, save, and prepare for the bad times.
People who in their thousands wanted a supporters trust remembered all too well the near-fatal developments that almost led to the end of the club, and intended the Trust to be the shield against that. And money is the framework of that shield.
Furthermore, the Trust put good hard cash into the club in the formation of the new ownership structure [plus the most generous contribution from Gareth Keene], and since then, and earned those shares. Yes, the Trust didn't do it for the money, but that's no reason to not have accepted what those shares earned. |  |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 23:42 - Nov 7 with 1024 views | longlostjack |
| Trust Position Revisited on 21:09 - Nov 7 by Uxbridge |
A strategy rather counterintuitive to the very principles and reason d'etre of the Trust I would argue. The Trust is there to ensure our club is run in the best interests of the fans and the future, not make money. 25% is key I agree, and 21% is a damn sight closer than 10%. |
Yep - and even with a potential dilution we should still be comfortably above the 10% and not be forced to sell unlike some poor Man Utd fans when the Glaziers took over !! |  |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 00:07 - Nov 8 with 999 views | DJack |
| Trust Position Revisited on 23:42 - Nov 7 by Davillin |
Because in order to protect our interest in the safety of the club in the long term, it has been from day one the aim to acquire, save, and prepare for the bad times.
People who in their thousands wanted a supporters trust remembered all too well the near-fatal developments that almost led to the end of the club, and intended the Trust to be the shield against that. And money is the framework of that shield.
Furthermore, the Trust put good hard cash into the club in the formation of the new ownership structure [plus the most generous contribution from Gareth Keene], and since then, and earned those shares. Yes, the Trust didn't do it for the money, but that's no reason to not have accepted what those shares earned. |
Dav, as always I will make a similar/familiar statement... I disagree with you on many subjects but once again I thank you for your input in this matter. | |
| It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 00:10 - Nov 8 with 997 views | longlostjack |
| Trust Position Revisited on 00:07 - Nov 8 by DJack |
Dav, as always I will make a similar/familiar statement... I disagree with you on many subjects but once again I thank you for your input in this matter. |
Seconded | |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 08:22 - Nov 8 with 949 views | Uxbridge |
| Trust Position Revisited on 23:08 - Nov 7 by tomdickharry |
Both £SD. Am sure the Trust will receive the best advice. |
On the latter we can agree. |  |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 08:36 - Nov 8 with 940 views | MattG |
| Trust Position Revisited on 23:05 - Nov 7 by tomdickharry |
Buy at the bottom sell at the top,the trick is waiting and judging the top,common sense really.It does work I promise you. |
I thought the Trust raised funds (and took dividends) so that it was in a better position to buy more shares as and when they became available. As Ux has said, selling shares would be a complete u-turn. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust Position Revisited on 12:52 - Nov 8 with 893 views | westx |
| Trust Position Revisited on 08:36 - Nov 8 by MattG |
I thought the Trust raised funds (and took dividends) so that it was in a better position to buy more shares as and when they became available. As Ux has said, selling shares would be a complete u-turn. |
This is it for me - why they would consider selling shares at all at this point in time is beyond me. they would have no say in the running of the club which is majorly important for me
What I would like to see is the Trust raise its own share to 25% of the club and that all shareholders insist on various forms of protection for the club moving forward that would prevent long term damage for the club
Surely the likes of Dineen who went on camera saying how much he loved and saved the club wouldn't just sell us down the river in a style more suited to Petty?
Oh and by the way Shakes I am not Moscow Jack and the amount of time I have posted on here is not relevant | |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 12:58 - Nov 8 with 887 views | Shaky |
| Trust Position Revisited on 12:52 - Nov 8 by westx |
This is it for me - why they would consider selling shares at all at this point in time is beyond me. they would have no say in the running of the club which is majorly important for me
What I would like to see is the Trust raise its own share to 25% of the club and that all shareholders insist on various forms of protection for the club moving forward that would prevent long term damage for the club
Surely the likes of Dineen who went on camera saying how much he loved and saved the club wouldn't just sell us down the river in a style more suited to Petty?
Oh and by the way Shakes I am not Moscow Jack and the amount of time I have posted on here is not relevant |
Good to see you have recovered your poise after you scarpered having been called out, yesterday
The amount of time you have posted here is not relevant you say? But since the purported US investment it is clearly the sole item on your agenda, people might legitimately like to know what is your agenda?
Not me though, I see you purely as background noise. Are you with me? | |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 12:58 - Nov 8 with 886 views | Dr_Winston |
| Trust Position Revisited on 12:52 - Nov 8 by westx |
This is it for me - why they would consider selling shares at all at this point in time is beyond me. they would have no say in the running of the club which is majorly important for me
What I would like to see is the Trust raise its own share to 25% of the club and that all shareholders insist on various forms of protection for the club moving forward that would prevent long term damage for the club
Surely the likes of Dineen who went on camera saying how much he loved and saved the club wouldn't just sell us down the river in a style more suited to Petty?
Oh and by the way Shakes I am not Moscow Jack and the amount of time I have posted on here is not relevant |
The Trust don't really have much say in the running of the club now. They may be against things privately but can't oppose them with one vote, if we vote against them that much at all.
The only way that the fans interests will be fully taken into consideration is if the fans own a controlling stake in the club. That's not going to happen any time soon. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 13:04 - Nov 8 with 879 views | westx |
| Trust Position Revisited on 12:58 - Nov 8 by Shaky |
Good to see you have recovered your poise after you scarpered having been called out, yesterday
The amount of time you have posted here is not relevant you say? But since the purported US investment it is clearly the sole item on your agenda, people might legitimately like to know what is your agenda?
Not me though, I see you purely as background noise. Are you with me? |
Hate to disillusion you Shakes but I have a real life outside of this forum and not one like you that I pretend to be something I am not. I had a most enjoyable afternoon yesterday with the family in Chester, I highly recommend it
My agenda? As a Swans fan (I know that is alien to you) I want the best for the club and share my opinions. I don't pretend to be an expert on anything but neither do I throw my toys out of the pram like you did last weekend that I so clearly highlighted to everyone yesterday and that you had no answer to. Which is what people like you normally do when you are beaten.
Never mind Shakes, leave the talk to the Swansea fans and you continue to play big business in your bedroom and stop pretending you are some bigshot because if you were and you were a Swans fan then you would have offered your help via the right channels.
Now in your style I shall insult you. Cock. | |
| |
| Trust Position Revisited on 13:14 - Nov 8 with 866 views | Shaky |
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
