| Time for some straight talking. 12:27 - Jan 29 with 9861 views | perchrockjack |
=============== Jackarmy boys can paste this if it stimulates you.
1. Where is the Evidence that this sell out will take place
2. If it does, why would it kill our club
3. If the current board of directors make a lot of money by a sale, quite wtf should we be arsed ;frankly why people who were pre -eminent in saving our club and putting our club into this whole new ball game are being vilified by questionable posters is deeply shaming. It makes us look like filth.
4.Why would any American incomers want to run down/asset stripour club when ,if we move up, they d make more.
5. If their involvement frees us from a rabid and feckless band of doombrains at Swansea Council, then surely its joy deep joy. Never forget it was a Swansea council that bought the vetch on the cheap and did nowt for us at all. We went bust as a result.
Now its karma time and our club-now a big deal- is calling the shots.
6. Not all American /foreign investment is necessarily bad.
7. I remember Swansea Town/City as being a basket case- a source of amusement for those denizens of a decrepit mind set. Now, look at us and this is just the beginning, but some are blinded by simply envy- ie Swansea people becoming rich, anathema to some, well not to all. THE BIGGEST CAUSE OF THIS VILIFICATION is simply the fact that directors ,those who took the risk to save us, will end up rich men. If they do, I really hope they enjoy it as we have everything to thank them for .
So.. its a matter of Trust and THE trust.
Who you believe will colour your thoughts |  |
| |  |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:37 - Jan 29 with 4418 views | Parlay |
1. It has been discussed by our very own chairman. Why would they lie about it?
2. Kill it? It probably wont. Send it backwards? Because our ethos goes out the window and we would have a business plan which relies on loans. Loans we will have to pay back. They can also cream off any profits limiting our spending power like he did with the Padres and pocketed $200m of their tv rights deal.
3. Nobody is arsed they get rich. We are arsed that certain board members who claim a great connection to this club are selling out to a man that has an awful track record in Sport which rivals the likes of Tony Petty when it comes to intentions and moral up-keeping.
4. They wouldnt come in with the intention of doing that. But asset stripping may be the result of it. Vincent Tan ploughed £140m into Cardiff, they are now in the Championship owe him crippling amounts of money and are now forced to live off a thread buying league 2 journeymen to balance the books while Tan assets strips what he can on the playing staff.
5. The stadium doesnt need to be purchased. It is a waste of £20 million, it is being done to facilitate the takeover, not because it makes sense for the club.
6. This isnt "all investment" this is a takeover by John Moores. Ask a San Diego Padres fan what they think of John Moores.
7. It has nothing to do with them being rich men. The club always comes first. How anybody can applaud them getting rich to the detriment of the club is beyond me. |  |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:40 - Jan 29 with 4417 views | sixpenses |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:37 - Jan 29 by Parlay |
1. It has been discussed by our very own chairman. Why would they lie about it?
2. Kill it? It probably wont. Send it backwards? Because our ethos goes out the window and we would have a business plan which relies on loans. Loans we will have to pay back. They can also cream off any profits limiting our spending power like he did with the Padres and pocketed $200m of their tv rights deal.
3. Nobody is arsed they get rich. We are arsed that certain board members who claim a great connection to this club are selling out to a man that has an awful track record in Sport which rivals the likes of Tony Petty when it comes to intentions and moral up-keeping.
4. They wouldnt come in with the intention of doing that. But asset stripping may be the result of it. Vincent Tan ploughed £140m into Cardiff, they are now in the Championship owe him crippling amounts of money and are now forced to live off a thread buying league 2 journeymen to balance the books while Tan assets strips what he can on the playing staff.
5. The stadium doesnt need to be purchased. It is a waste of £20 million, it is being done to facilitate the takeover, not because it makes sense for the club.
6. This isnt "all investment" this is a takeover by John Moores. Ask a San Diego Padres fan what they think of John Moores.
7. It has nothing to do with them being rich men. The club always comes first. How anybody can applaud them getting rich to the detriment of the club is beyond me. |
This 100%
Thanks for saving me the typing Parlay | | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:42 - Jan 29 with 4409 views | 1jack |
I stand to be corrected, but if the council hadn't bought Vetch Field off us wouldn't we have been fooked then? |  | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:46 - Jan 29 with 4391 views | perchrockjack |
True, but they bought it for a song and looking at the site now didn't have much idea as to how to spend the proceeds..
They did it because it was cheap and not for altruistic reason | |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:46 - Jan 29 with 4391 views | ApeShit |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:37 - Jan 29 by Parlay |
1. It has been discussed by our very own chairman. Why would they lie about it?
2. Kill it? It probably wont. Send it backwards? Because our ethos goes out the window and we would have a business plan which relies on loans. Loans we will have to pay back. They can also cream off any profits limiting our spending power like he did with the Padres and pocketed $200m of their tv rights deal.
3. Nobody is arsed they get rich. We are arsed that certain board members who claim a great connection to this club are selling out to a man that has an awful track record in Sport which rivals the likes of Tony Petty when it comes to intentions and moral up-keeping.
4. They wouldnt come in with the intention of doing that. But asset stripping may be the result of it. Vincent Tan ploughed £140m into Cardiff, they are now in the Championship owe him crippling amounts of money and are now forced to live off a thread buying league 2 journeymen to balance the books while Tan assets strips what he can on the playing staff.
5. The stadium doesnt need to be purchased. It is a waste of £20 million, it is being done to facilitate the takeover, not because it makes sense for the club.
6. This isnt "all investment" this is a takeover by John Moores. Ask a San Diego Padres fan what they think of John Moores.
7. It has nothing to do with them being rich men. The club always comes first. How anybody can applaud them getting rich to the detriment of the club is beyond me. |
Job done, close this thread. |  | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:46 - Jan 29 with 4386 views | skippyjack |
1. Do you read this board ffs?
2. It could potentially kill our club
3. We're questioning because it could potentially ruin what we stand for
4. Because he may want assurances if everything goes Pete tong
5. Is it good for the club though?
6. Nope, but it's never straightforward with outsiders..
7. It's not about the money.. it's about the future of our club.. do you know why we saved the club?
The whole point of this.. we saved the club because we wanted control of our club.. now they're taking the money and running.. |  |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:49 - Jan 29 with 4368 views | NOTRAC |
That is a brilliant summary of the situation.
A couple of directors selling shares is one thing.
Accepting loans from these people is completely worrying. | |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:50 - Jan 29 with 4359 views | perchrockjack |
SO..
No need for further discussion because PARLAY is correct..
In that case, we are truly fekced and Im giving myself an enema..
What has been omitted is of course what is at the very core of this and that is PROOF/EVIDENCE..
We are going to be shafted then.. that s what your saying and The Trust led by Phil Sumbler is basically selling us down the river | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:53 - Jan 29 with 4320 views | Parlay |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:50 - Jan 29 by perchrockjack |
SO..
No need for further discussion because PARLAY is correct..
In that case, we are truly fekced and Im giving myself an enema..
What has been omitted is of course what is at the very core of this and that is PROOF/EVIDENCE..
We are going to be shafted then.. that s what your saying and The Trust led by Phil Sumbler is basically selling us down the river |
The proof is common sense and history.
What do you reckon he is going to do then? Decide to give us a blank cheque book and say "write your own boys, no worries about paying it back" just because he can? For fun? Because Texas has a deep rooted affiliation with Swansea and he cannot bear the thought of going to the grave without donating his worldly possessions to us?
He is in it for ONE thing. Money. Our money. | |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:55 - Jan 29 with 4332 views | perchrockjack |
Common Sense and HISTORY then..
Thanks for that
Clear matter up for me..
BTW, if things turn out OK would you accept you be wrong | |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:01 - Jan 29 with 4286 views | Parlay |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:55 - Jan 29 by perchrockjack |
Common Sense and HISTORY then..
Thanks for that
Clear matter up for me..
BTW, if things turn out OK would you accept you be wrong |
Define ok. | |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:02 - Jan 29 with 4294 views | pencoedjack |
Another day another 6/7 pager on the same subject |  | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:03 - Jan 29 with 4287 views | Starsky |
Sorry Perch but Parlay and Sixpence are bang on the money on this one. |  |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:06 - Jan 29 with 4263 views | perchrockjack |
Don't be sorry starks.
If they are then fine, they ve been proven right and that ll sustain them for a while.
On the other hand, if this deal comes off and we prosper then some serious questions need to be asked of them ..
I asked for evidence..
They is none..
Its a case of wait and see.
So there.. | |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:17 - Jan 29 with 4181 views | Parlay |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:06 - Jan 29 by perchrockjack |
Don't be sorry starks.
If they are then fine, they ve been proven right and that ll sustain them for a while.
On the other hand, if this deal comes off and we prosper then some serious questions need to be asked of them ..
I asked for evidence..
They is none..
Its a case of wait and see.
So there.. |
I gave you some. He has a history of taking sports clubs money for himself. What on earth do you think has changed? Life long fan is he? | |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:50 - Jan 29 with 4108 views | A_Fans_Dad |
So has it been confirmed that this is a complete buy out or that the said person will have more than 50% of the shares?
If not then all the doom and gloom cannot happen without the rest of the shareholder's and the Trust's say so.
Or do you know something about corporate law that I am missing? | | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:10 - Jan 29 with 4043 views | ApeShit |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:50 - Jan 29 by A_Fans_Dad |
So has it been confirmed that this is a complete buy out or that the said person will have more than 50% of the shares?
If not then all the doom and gloom cannot happen without the rest of the shareholder's and the Trust's say so.
Or do you know something about corporate law that I am missing? |
But why is it a good thing?
You do realise there is no investment happening? The club don't get any money out of this.
The only way the club will see money is from loans, which is not good. | | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:14 - Jan 29 with 4035 views | SwansNZ |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:06 - Jan 29 by perchrockjack |
Don't be sorry starks.
If they are then fine, they ve been proven right and that ll sustain them for a while.
On the other hand, if this deal comes off and we prosper then some serious questions need to be asked of them ..
I asked for evidence..
They is none..
Its a case of wait and see.
So there.. |
At the end of the day, what do we stand to gain? Prosper? He can come in and “loan” us 200 Million, and the only thing it would guarantee us, is being in serious debt.
Keep running a smart operation, you can keep on achieving what we have, grow little by little — we are unlikely to go much further anyway. Let’s face it, you might get the odd good season, where you hit the top 6, but you will never be able to consistently challenge the big 6, so what could we stand to gain? |  |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:25 - Jan 29 with 3984 views | Parlay |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:50 - Jan 29 by A_Fans_Dad |
So has it been confirmed that this is a complete buy out or that the said person will have more than 50% of the shares?
If not then all the doom and gloom cannot happen without the rest of the shareholder's and the Trust's say so.
Or do you know something about corporate law that I am missing? |
Why would they want 30% of the club? Come on now.
This is and will be the initial share purchase. | |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:27 - Jan 29 with 3996 views | monmouth |
| Time for some straight talking. on 13:50 - Jan 29 by A_Fans_Dad |
So has it been confirmed that this is a complete buy out or that the said person will have more than 50% of the shares?
If not then all the doom and gloom cannot happen without the rest of the shareholder's and the Trust's say so.
Or do you know something about corporate law that I am missing? |
Or alternatively, why would two unconnected money focused americans, with a history of building a sports club, making it successful for a while, then extracting all the cash and leaving it as a f*cked over husk, be interested in buying out 30% of the equity for £30m quid, yes that's £30m quid if there was no expectation to gain influence and control. Hmmmm.... that's a toughie isn't it....so forgive me if I don't err on the sweetness and light side.
Oh and Perch mun; it's not that we don't trust Phil and the Trust, that's not the issue. It's what the Trust can't influence that's the issue. Just to remind you, the Trust is against any change of ownership, so that means you are too doesn't it? Or don't you trust the Trust and its public opinion. I don't know, but if I had to bet, if the trust could say f**k off to these yanks they would. If you blindly think the other directors are unconditionally on the side of the Trust or the supporters, then I suggest you look at their actions since we became premier league, particularly hypothecation of trust membership fees, dividends, and improving the 'suppoter experience' in the stadium.
Just to reiterate. the Trust is against any change of ownership, so as you support the Trust so vehemently you are against it too aren't you? |  |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:31 - Jan 29 with 3974 views | sixpenses |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:10 - Jan 29 by ApeShit |
But why is it a good thing?
You do realise there is no investment happening? The club don't get any money out of this.
The only way the club will see money is from loans, which is not good. |
THIS THIS THIS
Of course as long as it is referred to as an "investment" the confusion for some will continue
Perhaps PROFITEERING SELLOUT might make the point a little stronger and be more accurate (it certainly could not be less accurate)
It is an investment into the club as much as buying a Turkey for Christmas is an investment in the Turkey.
The Turkey gets no money, yet the value for its payment is taken out of its hide. | | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:52 - Jan 29 with 3925 views | ApeShit |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:27 - Jan 29 by monmouth |
Or alternatively, why would two unconnected money focused americans, with a history of building a sports club, making it successful for a while, then extracting all the cash and leaving it as a f*cked over husk, be interested in buying out 30% of the equity for £30m quid, yes that's £30m quid if there was no expectation to gain influence and control. Hmmmm.... that's a toughie isn't it....so forgive me if I don't err on the sweetness and light side.
Oh and Perch mun; it's not that we don't trust Phil and the Trust, that's not the issue. It's what the Trust can't influence that's the issue. Just to remind you, the Trust is against any change of ownership, so that means you are too doesn't it? Or don't you trust the Trust and its public opinion. I don't know, but if I had to bet, if the trust could say f**k off to these yanks they would. If you blindly think the other directors are unconditionally on the side of the Trust or the supporters, then I suggest you look at their actions since we became premier league, particularly hypothecation of trust membership fees, dividends, and improving the 'suppoter experience' in the stadium.
Just to reiterate. the Trust is against any change of ownership, so as you support the Trust so vehemently you are against it too aren't you? |
I think you have just caused Perch's world to implode!
He loves Americans mun, they are good people, surely they wouldn't do anything like this? | | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:56 - Jan 29 with 3901 views | Dizzy |
| Time for some straight talking. on 12:46 - Jan 29 by skippyjack |
1. Do you read this board ffs?
2. It could potentially kill our club
3. We're questioning because it could potentially ruin what we stand for
4. Because he may want assurances if everything goes Pete tong
5. Is it good for the club though?
6. Nope, but it's never straightforward with outsiders..
7. It's not about the money.. it's about the future of our club.. do you know why we saved the club?
The whole point of this.. we saved the club because we wanted control of our club.. now they're taking the money and running.. |
"WE saved the club because WEwanted control of our club.. now THEY're taking the money and running.. "
Who is we and who is they please? |  | | |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:59 - Jan 29 with 3886 views | skippyjack |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:56 - Jan 29 by Dizzy |
"WE saved the club because WEwanted control of our club.. now THEY're taking the money and running.. "
Who is we and who is they please? |
The sell outs obviously.. | |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| Time for some straight talking. on 15:00 - Jan 29 with 3882 views | Dizzy |
| Time for some straight talking. on 14:59 - Jan 29 by skippyjack |
The sell outs obviously.. |
You have included yourself in the group who saved the club. Im interested to here more about your efforts.
Even if they do sell their shares, they have still done a fk sight more for this club than gobby no marks like yourself. [Post edited 29 Jan 2015 15:06]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
