| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! 07:37 - Jan 29 with 12086 views | NOTRAC |
There is one fatal flaw in the Trust's approach to the proposed sale of shares to the American investors.
From the beginning they have indicated,without any open discussion with members,that they are not interested themselves in selling any of their shares.From the Trusts minutes it is recorded that from the beginning of negotiations the Trust informed the buyers that their shares were not for sale.
Why?
On a pro rata basis the percentage of shares sold would amount to no more than about 6%.
This would leave the Trust with a 16% share?This would be perfectly adequate to give the Trust the same input into it's Boardroom involvement as now.Same representation,same limits on what it can and can't do.
Whether the Trust has 21% or 16% of the Shares does not really alter the Trusts say in the Boardroom one iota.
If one looks at the Trusts list of Aims or ,in other words the reasons why the Trust was set up in the first place, you will not find any suggestion that the aim of the Trust is to own or run the club.
It's main aim is to ensure the preservation of League football at Swansea..
This aim was obviously a reaction to the dire days ,and aftermath of the Petty era.
In reality there is only one way that the Trust can achieve that aim.
By having sufficient funds to enable or help the Financial state of the club if a similar catastrophe occurs in the future.
From the clubs present position of Premiership and financial well being, it seems almost impossible to imagine a similar catastrophe occurring again.
But we all know that there are no certainties in football, and the lower leagues are littered with successful teams of the past where future certainties are as negative as their bank balances.
A fine example of this is Coventry.In Premiership and preceding First Division days an ever regular well run club.Now a club almost without a ground.
In order therefore for the Trust to follow its own objectives, money is king.
The last three years has seen the Trust receive dividends in accord with its shareholdings of Approximately £600,000.
A nice sum indeed to have in reserve if the calamity ever happens.
But not as nice as £6.6m which is apparently what the Trust would end up with if the they were part of a pro rata sale share.
The giving up of a £6m windfall does not really make any sense
The advantages of retaining the 21% share in the hope of increasing it to a more influential holding is virtually nil.
There would be a small loss in dividends in the future but with a new Board structure there is no guarantee that these would continue anyway.
As stated earlier the 16% holding would still afford the same board representation as previous.
The consequences of not taking the money now, is advantageous to the other shareholders.
And remember most of all that although the Trust talk about a new shareholders agreement to protect their status, this will be almost impossible to achieve if the remaining shareholders do not want it.
In accordance with the Trust's main aim therefore they should take this opportunity of increasing the funding .
In that way ,and that way only, the Trust will have a much better opportunity in the future of achieving its prime aim of maintaining league football in Swansea in the future if ever things once again go pear shape.
|  |
| |  |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 09:00 - Dec 26 with 930 views | builthjack |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 19:28 - Dec 23 by TheResurrection |
No brain is right!! |
Wow, a compliment. Merry Xmas. |  |
| 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.
|
| |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 12:44 - Dec 26 with 850 views | TheResurrection |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 00:16 - Dec 26 by Darran |
They've done most of that you need to keep up.
You're another local businessman that would be good to get involved,go for it Andy. |
An investigation?
Was there? When was that, I must have missed it...
But I have asked Matt G just now to look into it for us so maybe we'll get one soon? |  |
| |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 12:51 - Dec 26 with 846 views | Darran |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 12:44 - Dec 26 by TheResurrection |
An investigation?
Was there? When was that, I must have missed it...
But I have asked Matt G just now to look into it for us so maybe we'll get one soon? |
I didn't say all of it but they have put things in place to stop it happening again.
Seriously what the fûck do you want to happen? |  |
| |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 12:58 - Dec 26 with 839 views | TheResurrection |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 12:51 - Dec 26 by Darran |
I didn't say all of it but they have put things in place to stop it happening again.
Seriously what the fûck do you want to happen? |
A proper investigation into who let Cooze continue, when they knew about his remuneration and who made the decision not to tell the fans.
The above should have been done already but instead they've brushed it under the carpet with the rolling out of some governance charter 15 years too late.
Do you mind if we just ask the Trust these questions though without you trying to derail debate or do their dirty work? That OK like?? | |
| |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 13:04 - Dec 26 with 832 views | Darran |
| The Trust has had it wrong from the start! on 12:58 - Dec 26 by TheResurrection |
A proper investigation into who let Cooze continue, when they knew about his remuneration and who made the decision not to tell the fans.
The above should have been done already but instead they've brushed it under the carpet with the rolling out of some governance charter 15 years too late.
Do you mind if we just ask the Trust these questions though without you trying to derail debate or do their dirty work? That OK like?? |
I don't mind at all but it's still not going to get anywhere really is it? | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
