| No court action? on 17:53 - Feb 15 with 1401 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 17:38 - Feb 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Dilution is a fact of life as I have been explaining to you for months and months and posts after post. The Trust wanted a "free lunch" a big free lunch.
Today they have a very good deal for themselves where they can keep holding and the VIP seats. The others have agreed to give them a "small free lunch" and tag on clause.
I believe they should not get dividends if they are not willing to invest. It appears they can get dividends for their golden 5%, This is generous.
Should the club get promoted with no further investment their value would be £30m or £20m plus the 5% golden share. The US people must believe they can sell the club where the fans own a fixed 5%. Would a Vincent Tan for example accept this? The US cannot sell the club without them with a tag on clause.
It is a good deal for the Trust from what i can see. |
Again, no one is claiming the trust didn't know about dilution. They stated themselves it could happen and that they didn't want to happen. The plan was to sell to avoid this. They've reneged on it. |  |
|  |
| No court action? on 17:55 - Feb 15 with 1389 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 17:38 - Feb 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Dilution is a fact of life as I have been explaining to you for months and months and posts after post. The Trust wanted a "free lunch" a big free lunch.
Today they have a very good deal for themselves where they can keep holding and the VIP seats. The others have agreed to give them a "small free lunch" and tag on clause.
I believe they should not get dividends if they are not willing to invest. It appears they can get dividends for their golden 5%, This is generous.
Should the club get promoted with no further investment their value would be £30m or £20m plus the 5% golden share. The US people must believe they can sell the club where the fans own a fixed 5%. Would a Vincent Tan for example accept this? The US cannot sell the club without them with a tag on clause.
It is a good deal for the Trust from what i can see. |
Again, no one is claiming the trust didn't know about dilution. They stated themselves it could happen and that they didn't want to happen. The plan was to sell to avoid this. | |
| |
| No court action? on 18:05 - Feb 15 with 1360 views | nantywatcher |
| No court action? on 17:55 - Feb 15 by Chief |
Again, no one is claiming the trust didn't know about dilution. They stated themselves it could happen and that they didn't want to happen. The plan was to sell to avoid this. |
It is impossible to expect a result of these negotiations to be a situation where everyone involved is 100% happy. Time to move on and put all the energies used to arrive at this resolution to much better use of costs and energies in the future. |  | | |
| No court action? on 18:11 - Feb 15 with 1349 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 18:05 - Feb 15 by nantywatcher |
It is impossible to expect a result of these negotiations to be a situation where everyone involved is 100% happy. Time to move on and put all the energies used to arrive at this resolution to much better use of costs and energies in the future. |
Unlikely. The trust is finished. The membership will go to zero. | |
| |
| No court action? on 18:12 - Feb 15 with 1346 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| No court action? on 17:55 - Feb 15 by Chief |
Again, no one is claiming the trust didn't know about dilution. They stated themselves it could happen and that they didn't want to happen. The plan was to sell to avoid this. |
They have two big problems 'dilution' and 'devaluation' from inflation. They need 'cash' and and an 'ability to invest' to protect against inflation..
Today they maintain a holding in the club but have lost the ability to "save the club if it goes into administration".
The Burnley option could still see them take a £30m cheque or a £20m cheque + 5% holding.
Ideally they would have £15m in the bank invested for growth and 5% holding. This was achievable but the previous management of the Trust blew their one and only chance. Those people might be criticising this deal.
If Vincent Tan II comes in and wants 100% what happens then? Is the deal for the US people off because the SCST will not sell their 5% (no drag on clause). The US people must believe a buyer will accept the 5% not for sale notice. [Post edited 15 Feb 2022 18:20]
|  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| No court action? on 18:18 - Feb 15 with 1326 views | Flashberryjack |
| No court action? on 17:28 - Feb 15 by KeithHaynes |
The ethos of the trust should never be lost on anyone, but it’s outdated for me. I actually blame Phil for going out training for marathons. And snickers. |
Never been the same since they changed the name from Marathon to Snickers. |  |
| |
| No court action? on 18:30 - Feb 15 with 1305 views | magicdaps10 |
Absolutely fuming with this.
The sell outs have just got away with it all and are let's be fair laughing at us all.
Think this is the beginning of the end for the trust. |  |
| |
| No court action? on 18:30 - Feb 15 with 1289 views | 73__73 |
 
Hardly breaking news. It’s what I’ve been saying for the last 3 years.
The trust are a waste of space..........😠| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| No court action? on 18:32 - Feb 15 with 1298 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 18:12 - Feb 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
They have two big problems 'dilution' and 'devaluation' from inflation. They need 'cash' and and an 'ability to invest' to protect against inflation..
Today they maintain a holding in the club but have lost the ability to "save the club if it goes into administration".
The Burnley option could still see them take a £30m cheque or a £20m cheque + 5% holding.
Ideally they would have £15m in the bank invested for growth and 5% holding. This was achievable but the previous management of the Trust blew their one and only chance. Those people might be criticising this deal.
If Vincent Tan II comes in and wants 100% what happens then? Is the deal for the US people off because the SCST will not sell their 5% (no drag on clause). The US people must believe a buyer will accept the 5% not for sale notice. [Post edited 15 Feb 2022 18:20]
|
As I say. They've given up the chance of £21mill for 500k.
And will get diluted on top of that. | |
| |
| No court action? on 18:38 - Feb 15 with 1280 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| No court action? on 18:30 - Feb 15 by magicdaps10 |
Absolutely fuming with this.
The sell outs have just got away with it all and are let's be fair laughing at us all.
Think this is the beginning of the end for the trust. |
£500,000 says they are not rising to £1,500,000. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| No court action? on 18:44 - Feb 15 with 1270 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 18:38 - Feb 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
£500,000 says they are not rising to £1,500,000. |
If promotion occurs. | |
| |
| No court action? on 19:06 - Feb 15 with 1243 views | Landore_Jack |
No consultation with the members. Each one of them should resign. You are no better than the sellouts who went behind the Trust's back. |  |
| |
| No court action? on 19:10 - Feb 15 with 1231 views | vetchonian |
| No court action? on 19:06 - Feb 15 by Landore_Jack |
No consultation with the members. Each one of them should resign. You are no better than the sellouts who went behind the Trust's back. |
one of the new sellouts posts on here | |
| |
| No court action? on 19:38 - Feb 15 with 1165 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 19:10 - Feb 15 by vetchonian |
one of the new sellouts posts on here |
Will they make themselves known I wonder? | |
| |
| No court action? on 20:10 - Feb 15 with 1123 views | vetchonian |
| No court action? on 19:38 - Feb 15 by Chief |
Will they make themselves known I wonder? |
m5 is a clue | |
| |
| No court action? on 20:14 - Feb 15 with 1107 views | Mad_Mike |
Not happy with this deal.
My understanding was that the value of the compensation in any judgement would be based on the value of the Trusts shares AT THE TIME OF THE TAKEOVER.
I voted for legal action and am not being allowed to vote on this deal.
Not good. | | | |
| No court action? on 20:31 - Feb 15 with 1051 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 20:10 - Feb 15 by vetchonian |
m5 is a clue |
The motorway!? | |
| |
| No court action? on 20:37 - Feb 15 with 1024 views | vetchonian |
| No court action? on 20:31 - Feb 15 by Chief |
The motorway!? |
a village/town with a golf complex just north of Bristol just off the m5 | |
| |
| No court action? on 20:43 - Feb 15 with 1008 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 20:37 - Feb 15 by vetchonian |
a village/town with a golf complex just north of Bristol just off the m5 |
I got you. | |
| |
| No court action? on 20:48 - Feb 15 with 1000 views | swancity |
| No court action? on 18:32 - Feb 15 by Chief |
As I say. They've given up the chance of £21mill for 500k.
And will get diluted on top of that. |
And it’s not solely about the money.
Disgraceful and scandalous from the Trust.
The members voted. They’ve ignored the wishes of the members so how does that stack up legally ?
Let’s be honest though. It’s not a complete surprise. They haven’t got a clue. How much was that barrister paid to confirm that the Trust had a strong case?
Very poor show from the Trust isn’t it. | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| No court action? on 20:52 - Feb 15 with 981 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 20:48 - Feb 15 by swancity |
And it’s not solely about the money.
Disgraceful and scandalous from the Trust.
The members voted. They’ve ignored the wishes of the members so how does that stack up legally ?
Let’s be honest though. It’s not a complete surprise. They haven’t got a clue. How much was that barrister paid to confirm that the Trust had a strong case?
Very poor show from the Trust isn’t it. |
It's an absolute s hitshow.
And from the comments my friends are telling me (I couldn't connect), twitter and the other forum, the board look like an absolute shambles in this AGM tonight trying to answer questions.
They've signed up for something they don't even know the full answers for unbelievably was one comment. | |
| |
| No court action? on 20:56 - Feb 15 with 964 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| No court action? on 20:52 - Feb 15 by Chief |
It's an absolute s hitshow.
And from the comments my friends are telling me (I couldn't connect), twitter and the other forum, the board look like an absolute shambles in this AGM tonight trying to answer questions.
They've signed up for something they don't even know the full answers for unbelievably was one comment. |
I will make it very simple for you.
a) The Trust can sell the 5% golden share - great deal (say after 20 years)
b) The Trust can never sell the 5% Golden share - terrible deal | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| No court action? on 20:59 - Feb 15 with 947 views | Chief |
| No court action? on 20:56 - Feb 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I will make it very simple for you.
a) The Trust can sell the 5% golden share - great deal (say after 20 years)
b) The Trust can never sell the 5% Golden share - terrible deal |
Well that's not simple at all is it because you seemingly don't know the answer. | |
| |
| No court action? on 21:01 - Feb 15 with 941 views | builthjack |
Years of messing about with members heads. The Trust present and past have just bullshitted it's members and all should hang their heads in shame. The members voted for action and were ignored.Bull from day one after Jenkins, Morgan etc sold out. It makes you wonder did a few quid change hands with Trust high flyers. |  |
| 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.
|
| |
| No court action? on 21:12 - Feb 15 with 912 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| No court action? on 20:59 - Feb 15 by Chief |
Well that's not simple at all is it because you seemingly don't know the answer. |
Cash is all that counts. Cash now or cash later. You have confused yourself with two other un-related issued namely.
Protection against dilution (whatever that means)
Giving the sellers a bloody nose. (£500k compo).
You have your protection with the class A shares. They are of no cash value unless you can sell them. I have advised you what to lo out for. "The class A shares can be sold a after x years" . It is a vital piece of fine print.
If the trust cannot ever sell them it is a "timeshare" type deal. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
