| Takeover Confirmed on 14:32 - Jun 7 with 1263 views | tomdickharry |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:24 - Jun 7 by Landore_Jack |
Thanks Uxbridge.
Are the Trust planning on taking legal action? |
Legal action against whom? |  | |  |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:36 - Jun 7 with 1255 views | Landore_Jack |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:27 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
Not sure I'd answer that here if I knew. Which I don't. Could make it a legal issue, or at least delay things, if were that way inclined. To what ends would be the question though. |
Thanks Uxbridge.
I believe the Trust should pursue the case. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:37 - Jun 7 with 1252 views | Landore_Jack |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:32 - Jun 7 by tomdickharry |
Legal action against whom? |
Against the selling shareholders. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:39 - Jun 7 with 1240 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:36 - Jun 7 by Landore_Jack |
Thanks Uxbridge.
I believe the Trust should pursue the case. |
It's a valid point. The question that springs to mind though is what would it achieve. It could delay the deal, but is that desirable? Part of me likes the idea. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:46 - Jun 7 with 1213 views | tomdickharry |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:37 - Jun 7 by Landore_Jack |
Against the selling shareholders. |
That would be more than interesting. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:46 - Jun 7 with 1213 views | costalotta |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:39 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
It's a valid point. The question that springs to mind though is what would it achieve. It could delay the deal, but is that desirable? Part of me likes the idea. |
Look at the upside and downside and go from there.
There'd have to be something in it, something tangible that equates to a win. If not its a big waste of money.
If its not there then don't do it. If you're going to fight then fight on your own terms and not your foe's. |  | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:13 - Jun 7 with 1144 views | ItchySphincter |
| Takeover Confirmed on 13:50 - Jun 7 by DafyddHuw |
"If you think the Americans will want a belligerent partner with a major stake capable of whipping up negative PR about them then you're way off the mark. They'll want things to run smoothly."
Yeah, right. The yanks took over the club and it was all done secretly. So they didn't care what the Trust'sm reaction was going to be. Now that they've seen that there's no reaction, they'll be further emboldened.
Any negative PR the Trust can generate, the yanks can go to major media outlets and drown the Trust out. They've already got the South Wales press in their pockets.
What negarive PR can the Trust come up with anyway? It'll only affect Swans' fans. And the yanks can blithely carry on regardless of what us fans think.
Talk about an opportunity missed. But never mind, this is all "largely nonsense". |
I didn't think it was nonsense, but that's what you get at the moment.
It's already been said that the time for negotiations is before the deal is done, not after. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:13 - Jun 7 with 1142 views | DafyddHuw |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:15 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
Well, yeah, it pretty much is I'm afraid.
If you want to talk about the local press, they weren't exactly driving Petty out until they realised which was public perception was going.
I'll ask again ... what negative PR exercise should the Trust have performed? Drive them away without knowing what the plans are and we'd be, legitimately, accused of driving away potential investment. Fact is there's been nothing that's come out so far that has meant we can, unequivocally, come out against this deal. Or, indeed, for it.
Not to say I don't have major concerns personally. I think the conduct of the likes of Jenkins in keeping this deal, and information, from the Trust has been scandalous. It's difficult to have faith in a buying party who, to date, has paid scant more than lip service. However, now the terms of purchase have been finalised, the parties need to work through this to determine the future structure. If, after that, the Trust feels these aren't people we can work with then it'll act whatever way it can ... depending on the decision of the members of course. However, and I can only repeat this, there's been nothing to date that has meant we can come out against this deal. |
Can you not see that your post screams "These people are not bona fide"?
You say that the Trust have taken no action because you don't know if the yanks are heroes or villains.
If they've got the interests of the club at heart then
Why did they not only choose to not include the Trust in takeover talks, but actively sought to conduct negotiations in secret?
Why do they choose to not divulge to the Trust, after being asked, who is behind the takeover?
Even now, after it's all over, you concede that you have no idea what the new owners' plans are. Why do they think they are not forthcoming?
Doesn't this tell you something? And still the Trust persists with this notion of "let's wait and see". |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:16 - Jun 7 with 1133 views | ItchySphincter |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:39 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
It's a valid point. The question that springs to mind though is what would it achieve. It could delay the deal, but is that desirable? Part of me likes the idea. |
It could force the purchasers in to the open. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:19 - Jun 7 with 1133 views | Landore_Jack |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:13 - Jun 7 by DafyddHuw |
Can you not see that your post screams "These people are not bona fide"?
You say that the Trust have taken no action because you don't know if the yanks are heroes or villains.
If they've got the interests of the club at heart then
Why did they not only choose to not include the Trust in takeover talks, but actively sought to conduct negotiations in secret?
Why do they choose to not divulge to the Trust, after being asked, who is behind the takeover?
Even now, after it's all over, you concede that you have no idea what the new owners' plans are. Why do they think they are not forthcoming?
Doesn't this tell you something? And still the Trust persists with this notion of "let's wait and see". |
Jason and Steve were told not to contact the Trust by HJ.
That was confirmed by Phil in the recent trust meeting. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:23 - Jun 7 with 1121 views | costalotta |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:19 - Jun 7 by Landore_Jack |
Jason and Steve were told not to contact the Trust by HJ.
That was confirmed by Phil in the recent trust meeting. |
Did the Trust contact Jason and Steve once they realised this? | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:25 - Jun 7 with 1115 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:16 - Jun 7 by ItchySphincter |
It could force the purchasers in to the open. |
How? | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:26 - Jun 7 with 1109 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:23 - Jun 7 by costalotta |
Did the Trust contact Jason and Steve once they realised this? |
Finding out about the deal and finding out about the Americans was simulataneous. The issue is that both were 6 months too late. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:28 - Jun 7 with 1105 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:13 - Jun 7 by DafyddHuw |
Can you not see that your post screams "These people are not bona fide"?
You say that the Trust have taken no action because you don't know if the yanks are heroes or villains.
If they've got the interests of the club at heart then
Why did they not only choose to not include the Trust in takeover talks, but actively sought to conduct negotiations in secret?
Why do they choose to not divulge to the Trust, after being asked, who is behind the takeover?
Even now, after it's all over, you concede that you have no idea what the new owners' plans are. Why do they think they are not forthcoming?
Doesn't this tell you something? And still the Trust persists with this notion of "let's wait and see". |
It hints at a lot. It confirms nothing.
Let's flip the argument. They were told by HJ to keep quiet until as late as possible. So, who is the issue there ... the Americans or HJ? Do you write off the Americans for listening to bad advice? | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:44 - Jun 7 with 1068 views | ItchySphincter |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:25 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
How? |
I'll take that as it couldn't then.
It might be easier if you could give us an idea of exactly what rights the trust have, if any? | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:45 - Jun 7 with 1065 views | costalotta |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:28 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
It hints at a lot. It confirms nothing.
Let's flip the argument. They were told by HJ to keep quiet until as late as possible. So, who is the issue there ... the Americans or HJ? Do you write off the Americans for listening to bad advice? |
I'd take issue with anything HJ did/does after this becoming clear. I mean, how can he be trusted? Are the people he's dealing responsible, no... But if HJ has behave this way, then how's he behaved with the Americans? Has he played them too? There's some stuff been written about other board members not knowing, there is another possible example of this type of behaviour. Also, and back to the Americans we don't know what messages HJ has given them with respect to the Trust so we have to start again for sure, i mean in terms of building a relationship. What I am struggling with though, clearly HJ should not be anyway near the club or the decision making process going forward, So what are the Trust going to do about that. Let him sh t on us again?
So, knowing this as we do and knowing what duties the Trust are bound by you can flip it any way you want but its the same thing.Are the Trust doing enough to protect our Football Club and its future? Also, What are the plans for attempting to circumnavigate HJ and creating a relatianship built on Trust with the new owners. Are we keeping our cards close and possibly continuing the sitting on our hands approach and are we going to take the initiative? | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:50 - Jun 7 with 1042 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:45 - Jun 7 by costalotta |
I'd take issue with anything HJ did/does after this becoming clear. I mean, how can he be trusted? Are the people he's dealing responsible, no... But if HJ has behave this way, then how's he behaved with the Americans? Has he played them too? There's some stuff been written about other board members not knowing, there is another possible example of this type of behaviour. Also, and back to the Americans we don't know what messages HJ has given them with respect to the Trust so we have to start again for sure, i mean in terms of building a relationship. What I am struggling with though, clearly HJ should not be anyway near the club or the decision making process going forward, So what are the Trust going to do about that. Let him sh t on us again?
So, knowing this as we do and knowing what duties the Trust are bound by you can flip it any way you want but its the same thing.Are the Trust doing enough to protect our Football Club and its future? Also, What are the plans for attempting to circumnavigate HJ and creating a relatianship built on Trust with the new owners. Are we keeping our cards close and possibly continuing the sitting on our hands approach and are we going to take the initiative? |
Ah the HJ dilemma. Personally I struggle with this one. He's done an excellent job at the helm of the club by any objective measure. Do we jettison that? Could we anyway ... clearly the major shareholder are keen to keep him on.
The Trust are already in direct dialogue with the Americans. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:51 - Jun 7 with 1037 views | Landore_Jack |
Maybe it's time for another Trust meeting at the Liberty?
It will be an opportunity for fans to express their views and ask questions. [Post edited 7 Jun 2016 15:52]
| |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:51 - Jun 7 with 1036 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:44 - Jun 7 by ItchySphincter |
I'll take that as it couldn't then.
It might be easier if you could give us an idea of exactly what rights the trust have, if any? |
In terms of stopping the 79% selling their shares? Not a lot. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:52 - Jun 7 with 1032 views | max936 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:28 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
It hints at a lot. It confirms nothing.
Let's flip the argument. They were told by HJ to keep quiet until as late as possible. So, who is the issue there ... the Americans or HJ? Do you write off the Americans for listening to bad advice? |
The thing is now that the deal is done or was more or less done last week are the Yanks now seeking talks with the Trust? if not, you have to ask why, l also think that the trust should/ should have aired their our grievance directly to Jenkins, because as it looks from the outside that hasn't been done.
Ignore my point of talking to the Yanks you've answered above. [Post edited 7 Jun 2016 16:01]
|  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:54 - Jun 7 with 1020 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:52 - Jun 7 by max936 |
The thing is now that the deal is done or was more or less done last week are the Yanks now seeking talks with the Trust? if not, you have to ask why, l also think that the trust should/ should have aired their our grievance directly to Jenkins, because as it looks from the outside that hasn't been done.
Ignore my point of talking to the Yanks you've answered above. [Post edited 7 Jun 2016 16:01]
|
There are talks ongoing and planned. HJ is more than aware of our feelings on the matters to date. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:55 - Jun 7 with 1013 views | monmouth |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:17 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
(1) The Trust will negotiate on a number of areas. This would be one I would expect ... doesn't make sense if minor shareholders have a director position but the Trust, with 2 or 4 times the shareholding, has the same. To be honest, it's not the highest thing on my personal wishlist though.
(2) Yes. Moot point to a point considering the Trust has no means to buy, although the fact the Trust were never approached is an issue in itself. |
What are the top three things on your personal wishlist? |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:03 - Jun 7 with 984 views | max936 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:54 - Jun 7 by Uxbridge |
There are talks ongoing and planned. HJ is more than aware of our feelings on the matters to date. |
Cheers, for that next time you're standing next to him accidently on purpose stand on his toes  | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:09 - Jun 7 with 967 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:55 - Jun 7 by monmouth |
What are the top three things on your personal wishlist? |
Entirely my view etc etc but the areas that concern me relate to dilution, future debt levels and key (non footballing) appointments. Guarantees in these areas are IMO key. A second director probably touches all three but more important is the SHA.
To be honest, I'll be shamelessly relying on the advice of our legal types on such matters though. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
