| Takeover Confirmed on 13:39 - Jun 5 with 1987 views | oh_tommy_tommy |
| Takeover Confirmed on 13:24 - Jun 5 by dobjack2 |
Nope. In the first instance my view would be influenced by the way in which the share sale was conducted not the nationality of the buyer. |
And then in a blink of an eye you'd cream over a billionaire Arab.
They shafted the trust apparently , so it's a good thing they have gone then No ? |  |
|  |
| Takeover Confirmed on 13:44 - Jun 5 with 1977 views | londonlisa2001 |
Yesterday, and a few days ago, I raised the questions about the mismatch between press reports that were fairly obviously being leaked and the word that was coming from the Trust, both in statements and in unofficial statements from people within the Trust on this board and I said that something wasn't right with it. I said that the Trust seemed to be being treated with contempt and asked why it wasn't seemingly asserting its rights.
The answer given just yesterday, was that the Trust didn't believe it to be in the best interests of the club to delay for the sake of it which is fair enough, but there was also a very clear suggestion that it was the press reports that were incorrect and that any suggestion that the deal was 'done' were wrong.
Now this. Its with a heavy heart that I say again, something is obviously not right with what has been said during this - the deal is complete enough that it has been announced by the club, and yet the Trust don't appear to know the details.
Can I please ask again why not. And if, as it appears, the existence of the Trust has simply been ignored throughout, then what is the response at this time?
Because from what's been said from a variety of sources, the existing owners have sold, the new owners have bought (these deals to be ratified and closed within a matter of days) and the new owners will be party to an existing Shareholders Agreement with no new protections for the Trust going forward.
It seems that the answer given yesterday of 'don't worry about your concerns - the press haven't a clue' no longer holds true'. |  | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 13:47 - Jun 5 with 1945 views | dobjack2 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 13:39 - Jun 5 by oh_tommy_tommy |
And then in a blink of an eye you'd cream over a billionaire Arab.
They shafted the trust apparently , so it's a good thing they have gone then No ? |
Nope then I would be influenced by how they acted. We are now at that stage, the buyers already made me suspicious by the way in which the sale was conducted | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:01 - Jun 5 with 1885 views | scottishjack |
All good things and all that eh?
Ah well, I guess these things are out of our control, and fingers crossed, these new folks have good intentions...? I'm just trying to be realistic, I'm not going to expect too much, I just hope that these investors realise what a special achievement it took to get the Swans where they are today, and that they embrace what makes us special and build on it. I realise I'm probably clutching at straws, and these folks just see pound/dollar signs, but we are stuck with it now, so fingers crossed.
It's a case of wait and see I suppose? It's been an amazing period these past 15 years, and hopefully we move forward from here. |  | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:05 - Jun 5 with 1864 views | waynekerr55 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 12:03 - Jun 5 by Dr_Winston |
Dineen was bumping his gums on Twitter last night about how well the commercial dept was doing despite being the smallest in the PL.
Question is why is it the smallest in the PL despite us being here for half a decade, and what is the prat in charge of the whole operation doing to earn his keep? |
He'll be out of the door in 12-18 months. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:09 - Jun 5 with 1841 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 13:44 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
Yesterday, and a few days ago, I raised the questions about the mismatch between press reports that were fairly obviously being leaked and the word that was coming from the Trust, both in statements and in unofficial statements from people within the Trust on this board and I said that something wasn't right with it. I said that the Trust seemed to be being treated with contempt and asked why it wasn't seemingly asserting its rights.
The answer given just yesterday, was that the Trust didn't believe it to be in the best interests of the club to delay for the sake of it which is fair enough, but there was also a very clear suggestion that it was the press reports that were incorrect and that any suggestion that the deal was 'done' were wrong.
Now this. Its with a heavy heart that I say again, something is obviously not right with what has been said during this - the deal is complete enough that it has been announced by the club, and yet the Trust don't appear to know the details.
Can I please ask again why not. And if, as it appears, the existence of the Trust has simply been ignored throughout, then what is the response at this time?
Because from what's been said from a variety of sources, the existing owners have sold, the new owners have bought (these deals to be ratified and closed within a matter of days) and the new owners will be party to an existing Shareholders Agreement with no new protections for the Trust going forward.
It seems that the answer given yesterday of 'don't worry about your concerns - the press haven't a clue' no longer holds true'. |
I think your last sentence misrepresents the Trust's view, or at least my view of it. The trust has said, since Chelsea, that this deal would take some time to complete. As it has. However it was always a matter of time, if not these then someone else. The press, eventually, would be right.
Have the Trust been kept out of the loop? Absolutely. Now that the share purchase element is largely complete there is absolutely no excuse for that to continue. There seems to be the underlying message that the Trust should have somehow blocked this from happening, but frankly we don't know if that was in fact the desirable outcome especially when the alternative was a owner desperate to sell.
The position now was always what mattered from a Trust perspective. Will the new owners truly work with the Trust, in the interests of the fans and for the betterment of this football club? The issue of the SHA has been mentioned and the details within that will be of primary interest. There will also be questions/issues regarding the future operation of the club, and particularly who will be in key positions.
If the Trust doesn't receive the protections it wants, then all bets are off I guess. But this is the time when that must happen imo. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:25 - Jun 5 with 1760 views | Edmundo |
If as Cardiff fans fear we will move to another level (Europa League/Bigger ground 30k) and steal many of the floating fans for years to come.......it's a good thingðŸ‘
If no change on stadium size and the 'investors' are just after a slice of the Tv/commercial gains......then it's a bad thing 😔
Simples 👠|  |
| Swansea City-Officially the best football team in Wales-FACT |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:32 - Jun 5 with 1730 views | Joe_bradshaw |
| Takeover Confirmed on 13:44 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
Yesterday, and a few days ago, I raised the questions about the mismatch between press reports that were fairly obviously being leaked and the word that was coming from the Trust, both in statements and in unofficial statements from people within the Trust on this board and I said that something wasn't right with it. I said that the Trust seemed to be being treated with contempt and asked why it wasn't seemingly asserting its rights.
The answer given just yesterday, was that the Trust didn't believe it to be in the best interests of the club to delay for the sake of it which is fair enough, but there was also a very clear suggestion that it was the press reports that were incorrect and that any suggestion that the deal was 'done' were wrong.
Now this. Its with a heavy heart that I say again, something is obviously not right with what has been said during this - the deal is complete enough that it has been announced by the club, and yet the Trust don't appear to know the details.
Can I please ask again why not. And if, as it appears, the existence of the Trust has simply been ignored throughout, then what is the response at this time?
Because from what's been said from a variety of sources, the existing owners have sold, the new owners have bought (these deals to be ratified and closed within a matter of days) and the new owners will be party to an existing Shareholders Agreement with no new protections for the Trust going forward.
It seems that the answer given yesterday of 'don't worry about your concerns - the press haven't a clue' no longer holds true'. |
Interesting questions and the email just sent out by the trust to full members confirms that the existence of the trust has largely been ignored throughout. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:34 - Jun 5 with 1714 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:09 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
I think your last sentence misrepresents the Trust's view, or at least my view of it. The trust has said, since Chelsea, that this deal would take some time to complete. As it has. However it was always a matter of time, if not these then someone else. The press, eventually, would be right.
Have the Trust been kept out of the loop? Absolutely. Now that the share purchase element is largely complete there is absolutely no excuse for that to continue. There seems to be the underlying message that the Trust should have somehow blocked this from happening, but frankly we don't know if that was in fact the desirable outcome especially when the alternative was a owner desperate to sell.
The position now was always what mattered from a Trust perspective. Will the new owners truly work with the Trust, in the interests of the fans and for the betterment of this football club? The issue of the SHA has been mentioned and the details within that will be of primary interest. There will also be questions/issues regarding the future operation of the club, and particularly who will be in key positions.
If the Trust doesn't receive the protections it wants, then all bets are off I guess. But this is the time when that must happen imo. |
"It's not that the media are better informed. Far from it,.. otherwise you'd be seen a picture of Jason holding a scarf above his head last Wednedsay".
That was yesterday Ux.
And my suggestion was never that the Trust blocked the sale - it was an acknowledgement that the moment of most power that the Trust had was in their ability to do so, or to at least make things far more awkward. To get the concessions and protections needed.
You say - now it starts. Now the Trust will negotiate. But why should the new owners negotiate now? They can just say no. The Trust can't do anything about it anymore. The deal is done.
It's like getting a new job - the time to negotiate the deal is before you start. Once you've started you've lost your bargaining power.
Could rely on them of course to act out of the goodness of their own hearts - after all, they obviously care deeply about the Trust which is why they've involved the Trust throughout. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:37 - Jun 5 with 1685 views | dobjack2 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:25 - Jun 5 by Edmundo |
If as Cardiff fans fear we will move to another level (Europa League/Bigger ground 30k) and steal many of the floating fans for years to come.......it's a good thingðŸ‘
If no change on stadium size and the 'investors' are just after a slice of the Tv/commercial gains......then it's a bad thing 😔
Simples 👠|
How does a new owner and a bigger ground mean Europa league?
Did I fall asleep this year and miss Newcastle qualifying for Europe with the £80 million they spent on their squad and their 50,000 plus home crowds.
Sorry not so fecking simples in the real world. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:38 - Jun 5 with 1683 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:32 - Jun 5 by Joe_bradshaw |
Interesting questions and the email just sent out by the trust to full members confirms that the existence of the trust has largely been ignored throughout. |
Yes - I've just read it.
The biggest single shareholder in the club (or may well be at least since who knows) doesn't know who the other shareholders are, or even who has sold their shares, or how many they have sold. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:41 - Jun 5 with 1664 views | skippyjack |
Interesting comment from a Sunderland fan.. they won an FA Cup 43 years ago.. (tumbleweed)
"Why they would want to take over a club who belong in the third division is the biggest mystery to me.
They are unnatural top division incumbents in the same way as Wimbledon, Oxford, Luton, and Oldham were in the 80s.
Watford are in the same boat." |  |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:45 - Jun 5 with 1639 views | Highjack |
I think the first thing we need to know is who is involved with this consortium in total. Levein and the other guy are just a front, figureheads if you like. But who the hell is lurking in the background is what worries me. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:49 - Jun 5 with 1603 views | ItchySphincter |
Well something isn't right.  |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:52 - Jun 5 with 1586 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:49 - Jun 5 by ItchySphincter |
Well something isn't right. |
Exactly - which is what some of us have been saying for ages. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:54 - Jun 5 with 1576 views | tomdickharry |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:09 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
I think your last sentence misrepresents the Trust's view, or at least my view of it. The trust has said, since Chelsea, that this deal would take some time to complete. As it has. However it was always a matter of time, if not these then someone else. The press, eventually, would be right.
Have the Trust been kept out of the loop? Absolutely. Now that the share purchase element is largely complete there is absolutely no excuse for that to continue. There seems to be the underlying message that the Trust should have somehow blocked this from happening, but frankly we don't know if that was in fact the desirable outcome especially when the alternative was a owner desperate to sell.
The position now was always what mattered from a Trust perspective. Will the new owners truly work with the Trust, in the interests of the fans and for the betterment of this football club? The issue of the SHA has been mentioned and the details within that will be of primary interest. There will also be questions/issues regarding the future operation of the club, and particularly who will be in key positions.
If the Trust doesn't receive the protections it wants, then all bets are off I guess. But this is the time when that must happen imo. |
"Have the Trust been kept out of the loop? Absolutely".
Is it possible that the reason for this lies within the composition of the existing SHA. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:58 - Jun 5 with 1560 views | jackonicko |
Ux as ever hits the nail on the head. This was a done deal by all accounts after Chelsea. Here we are in June and whilst we have an announcement, the deal is still not 'done'. But it's definitely a step closer. The photo of Jason with a scarf above his head has been predicted by the WM and SWEP more times than Les Ferdinand signing for Reading.
Back in April, this was a deal to acquite the voting rights of more than 75% of the shares. Now it is a deal where the proportion of shares to be transferred are lower, but at this stage there is still no public disclosure of the final nature of who is selling what. However, it is arguable that it is already more palatable than it was.
However, I'm not giving away any private or confidential information by saying that the precise nature of who is selling all, some or none has changed many, many times since Chelsea. I've certainly lost count of all the different machinations.
As Ux says, if a committed group of private shareholders wants to sell, there is nothing that a minority shareholder can do about it. And you can read into that that there were some committed sellers. Swansea til I get a cheque. Or check.
The Trust had options to delay (and to be honest, still does) but based on the press release today even now it is not likely to be completed until the end of June. The squad comes back from the summer break for pre-season virtually at that time. I don't think anyone would look favourably on any further uncertainty unless it was in the best interests of the football club.
The only other question was whether the Trust should seek to also engage in the sale of some of its shares. As Phil said earlier, expert and independent advice from counsel at the time of Americans 1.0 was that a part sale had a number of negative implications for the Trust.
As the release today suggests, the Trust is not the only current shareholder retaining an ongoing interest. Now those outgoing shareholders know precisely how much they have enriched themselves by, the attention rightly turns to those who remain, to focus on the future.
My own personal view is some of the selling shareholders have behaved poorly, and have not lived up to their obligation as the stewards and custodians of "our" football club. That's putting it politely. The representatives of the new consortium has done enough thus far to deserve the benefit of the doubt, even if we still don't know who all of the constituents of that consortium are. However, I do find the fact that the selling shareholders are not bothered about who is cutting that cheque astounding. |  | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:09 - Jun 5 with 1512 views | Edmundo |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:37 - Jun 5 by dobjack2 |
How does a new owner and a bigger ground mean Europa league?
Did I fall asleep this year and miss Newcastle qualifying for Europe with the £80 million they spent on their squad and their 50,000 plus home crowds.
Sorry not so fecking simples in the real world. |
Re read please.........should the investment lead to us moving to another level and a far bigger ground and a minimum of constant Europa League qualification and therefore sucking up lots of floating fans in South/Mid/West Wales.......that would be a good thing.
Cardiff fans can see this as a possible scenario......can't you?
The alternative scenario is also as possible.....just to be even minded like👠| |
| Swansea City-Officially the best football team in Wales-FACT |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:14 - Jun 5 with 1484 views | donkeylabour |
Excellent news, investment into the club.
Those of us who believe in growth for the future and not nostalgic standing still should be delighted.
If you have respect for the previous Directors, you will respect their decision. Thank you to the previous owners, time to progress even further as a club. |  |
| My father voted labour and his father voted labour and his father voted labour so I vote labour |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:31 - Jun 5 with 1409 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:34 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
"It's not that the media are better informed. Far from it,.. otherwise you'd be seen a picture of Jason holding a scarf above his head last Wednedsay".
That was yesterday Ux.
And my suggestion was never that the Trust blocked the sale - it was an acknowledgement that the moment of most power that the Trust had was in their ability to do so, or to at least make things far more awkward. To get the concessions and protections needed.
You say - now it starts. Now the Trust will negotiate. But why should the new owners negotiate now? They can just say no. The Trust can't do anything about it anymore. The deal is done.
It's like getting a new job - the time to negotiate the deal is before you start. Once you've started you've lost your bargaining power.
Could rely on them of course to act out of the goodness of their own hearts - after all, they obviously care deeply about the Trust which is why they've involved the Trust throughout. |
So how could the Trust have forced the issue? As has been mentioned previously, the Trust only has 21%. You say the Americans could just say no now ... well, that pretty much happened to date didn't it.
I'm relying on their self interest. A Trust on side and a fanbase onside is very much so. If not, then the Trust has levers to pull.
On the flip side , where would we be now if the Trust had been more obstructive? | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:33 - Jun 5 with 1395 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:54 - Jun 5 by tomdickharry |
"Have the Trust been kept out of the loop? Absolutely".
Is it possible that the reason for this lies within the composition of the existing SHA. |
Nope. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:37 - Jun 5 with 1366 views | monmouth |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:31 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
So how could the Trust have forced the issue? As has been mentioned previously, the Trust only has 21%. You say the Americans could just say no now ... well, that pretty much happened to date didn't it.
I'm relying on their self interest. A Trust on side and a fanbase onside is very much so. If not, then the Trust has levers to pull.
On the flip side , where would we be now if the Trust had been more obstructive? |
I wouldn't blame any members of the Trust board saying stuff this for a game of soldiers to be honest. I hope they don't but can't imagine that it's much fun at the moment. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:39 - Jun 5 with 1354 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 14:58 - Jun 5 by jackonicko |
Ux as ever hits the nail on the head. This was a done deal by all accounts after Chelsea. Here we are in June and whilst we have an announcement, the deal is still not 'done'. But it's definitely a step closer. The photo of Jason with a scarf above his head has been predicted by the WM and SWEP more times than Les Ferdinand signing for Reading.
Back in April, this was a deal to acquite the voting rights of more than 75% of the shares. Now it is a deal where the proportion of shares to be transferred are lower, but at this stage there is still no public disclosure of the final nature of who is selling what. However, it is arguable that it is already more palatable than it was.
However, I'm not giving away any private or confidential information by saying that the precise nature of who is selling all, some or none has changed many, many times since Chelsea. I've certainly lost count of all the different machinations.
As Ux says, if a committed group of private shareholders wants to sell, there is nothing that a minority shareholder can do about it. And you can read into that that there were some committed sellers. Swansea til I get a cheque. Or check.
The Trust had options to delay (and to be honest, still does) but based on the press release today even now it is not likely to be completed until the end of June. The squad comes back from the summer break for pre-season virtually at that time. I don't think anyone would look favourably on any further uncertainty unless it was in the best interests of the football club.
The only other question was whether the Trust should seek to also engage in the sale of some of its shares. As Phil said earlier, expert and independent advice from counsel at the time of Americans 1.0 was that a part sale had a number of negative implications for the Trust.
As the release today suggests, the Trust is not the only current shareholder retaining an ongoing interest. Now those outgoing shareholders know precisely how much they have enriched themselves by, the attention rightly turns to those who remain, to focus on the future.
My own personal view is some of the selling shareholders have behaved poorly, and have not lived up to their obligation as the stewards and custodians of "our" football club. That's putting it politely. The representatives of the new consortium has done enough thus far to deserve the benefit of the doubt, even if we still don't know who all of the constituents of that consortium are. However, I do find the fact that the selling shareholders are not bothered about who is cutting that cheque astounding. |
The official statement by the club Jacko states 'The deal is complete subject to premier league approval'.
Are you saying that this is incorrect?
And there doesn't appear to be knowledge of how many shares are being sold as that has not been disclosed (and the Trust email does not imply that the Trust knows either). So how do we know it's more palatable?
Anyway - I can't be bothered to press the point any longer. I genuinely hope it works out well, and I also hope that my comments are not seen as criticism of the Trust because they are not intended to be. It's simply a genuine concern borne out of many years of dealing with these sorts of transactions with US purchasers that means I don't share the same view of 'giving them the benefit of the doubt'. In my experience every detail that has not been tied down up front is unlikely to be given as a concession at a later date and you never cede advantage until the protections that you want are in place. Nothing I have read seems to suggest that they have behaved particularly well towards the Trust anymore than the selling shareholders have but maybe that view is incorrect.
I trust (no pun intended) that the people inside the Trust know more than we do and completely trust that they are acting in the best possible interests of the club as they see it.
The only slight caveat - in my mind, if it is the best interests of the club in the longer term to create a fuss that will adversely impact on this season, then so be it. I would prefer a longer term view.
I would also prefer that the Trust are open about 'some shareholders behaving badly' - don't see why the Trust continues to protect those that don't deserve it.
Anyway - onwards and upwards and we all share the hope that this works out and thank those that continue to give their own time to try to protect the club for all the fans. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:42 - Jun 5 with 1341 views | Smellyplumz |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:14 - Jun 5 by donkeylabour |
Excellent news, investment into the club.
Those of us who believe in growth for the future and not nostalgic standing still should be delighted.
If you have respect for the previous Directors, you will respect their decision. Thank you to the previous owners, time to progress even further as a club. |
Oi Donkey, they have given money to Huw and Co, no investment so far unless is is going to chip in with some of his winnings. |  |
|
""Although I cannot promise or predict the future, I can guarantee one thing - the current board of directors will always fight, as we have done over the last 12 years, to work together as one with the Supporters Trust to make 100% sure that Swansea City football club remains the number one priority in all our thoughts and in every decision we make." | | Poll: | Huw Jenkins |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:44 - Jun 5 with 1338 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:37 - Jun 5 by monmouth |
I wouldn't blame any members of the Trust board saying stuff this for a game of soldiers to be honest. I hope they don't but can't imagine that it's much fun at the moment. |
Cheers. Passions are often running high. Some stuff has been a bit nasty at times, to say the least. Interesting times. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
