| Takeover Confirmed on 15:45 - Jun 5 with 1617 views | Cooperman |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:39 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
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. |
Correct. Just because we don't know the detail we should assume that there are Trust members ITK. It's simply a case of needing to comply with confidentiality agreements and all that - these are normal business practices during due diligence and thereafter. |  |
|  |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:51 - Jun 5 with 1588 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:39 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
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. |
As for shareholders behaving badly, I don't see the value in singling anyone out. All kept the deal from the Trust for months. The rest, from that perspective,is just noise. IMO of course
I hope you don't temper your tone ... all opinions are welcome and necessary. I'm just not sure what extra power the Trust had last week ... the Trust were simply not involved, in fact excluded, from any negotiations.
I share your concerns. Can we trust parties, Americans, Jenkins, Dineen, Morgan et al who have acted disingenuously? Probably not, but for the clubs sake we need to try and work with them, or go down a different path. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:57 - Jun 5 with 1542 views | londonlisa2001 |
| 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? |
Ux - I am not saying the Trust could or indeed should have blocked the deal - don't know any of the details so how could any of us make that judgement?
I am simply saying that by pressing their rights, the Trust could have made it significantly more awkward and the threat of doing so MAY have led to concession. As you point out, a Trust onside has great advantage - well there hasn't been any dissension from the Trust throughout the process - no PR war being waged, no (public) attempt to see if there may have been a better deal available, no consideration if the possibility of the Trust selling up and keeping the money for a rainy day.
As I said to jacko - I am not criticising the Trust, I am just deeply cynical about the deal.
Can anyone remember any club being taken over without some sort of statement of who owns it now, who remains from existing people, what the plans are for the club?
I agree with Mon that your job is thankless and not helped by people like me I'm sure, so I reiterate my thanks to those who give up their time to protect our interests. |  | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:01 - Jun 5 with 1529 views | max936 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:51 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
As for shareholders behaving badly, I don't see the value in singling anyone out. All kept the deal from the Trust for months. The rest, from that perspective,is just noise. IMO of course
I hope you don't temper your tone ... all opinions are welcome and necessary. I'm just not sure what extra power the Trust had last week ... the Trust were simply not involved, in fact excluded, from any negotiations.
I share your concerns. Can we trust parties, Americans, Jenkins, Dineen, Morgan et al who have acted disingenuously? Probably not, but for the clubs sake we need to try and work with them, or go down a different path. |
That Hallo that most of us put on Jenkins head has truly slipped it seems and he can never been seen in the same light again, as for Dineen and Morgan their gravy boats are fuller. [Post edited 5 Jun 2016 16:43]
|  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:07 - Jun 5 with 1493 views | donkeylabour |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:42 - Jun 5 by Smellyplumz |
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. |
Oh yes, I'm sure it's all purely about lining the Directors pockets.
They deserve far more respect |  |
| My father voted labour and his father voted labour and his father voted labour so I vote labour |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:08 - Jun 5 with 1488 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:51 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
As for shareholders behaving badly, I don't see the value in singling anyone out. All kept the deal from the Trust for months. The rest, from that perspective,is just noise. IMO of course
I hope you don't temper your tone ... all opinions are welcome and necessary. I'm just not sure what extra power the Trust had last week ... the Trust were simply not involved, in fact excluded, from any negotiations.
I share your concerns. Can we trust parties, Americans, Jenkins, Dineen, Morgan et al who have acted disingenuously? Probably not, but for the clubs sake we need to try and work with them, or go down a different path. |
I am very concerned that I sound like I am criticising people like you or jacko and I really don't want you to think that, I'm just as I say deeply cynical - probably because of lots of previous stuff I have been involved with when similar people are on the 'other side' and am venting as a result!
On the first paragraph - see this is one of the things there has been a lot of conflicting views about - I have read and been told a few times that Martin Morgan didn't know anything about it. If that is not the case, then I would like to know that it was all of them. Leigh Dineen on Twitter a few weeks ago said to someone that was accusing him of selling out that they should shut up as the details were not public and when they were people would change their tune. At the moment it's really hard to tell if they all acted badly or if some have tried to do the right thing.
It's not because I think there should be a witch hunt, but people shouldn't be allowed to say 'nothing to do with me guv' if it was to do with them. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:10 - Jun 5 with 1473 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:07 - Jun 5 by donkeylabour |
Oh yes, I'm sure it's all purely about lining the Directors pockets.
They deserve far more respect |
Lol.
Going fishing on a Sunday are you? | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:12 - Jun 5 with 1462 views | dobjack2 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:09 - Jun 5 by Edmundo |
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👠|
It's the next level bollox that gets on my nerves. The next level is a pretty meaningless phrase generally used by people who equate spending money with guaranteed benefits hence my Newcastle analogy. I accepted at the time that you were using the concept of us becoming a more consistently successful club in terms of league position in your argument but the phrase really winds me up so sorry for jumping on you a bit.
Spending big money on players (and there is no evidence that will happen so far) and a larger capacity are neither guarantees of European football not guarantees against relegation. Owning the stadium means it is an asset to secure debt against
As far as floating supporters go, they are unlikely to stay if we get relegated, In the main that's why they float because they don't have a deep commitment to either club. That's what's happened to our neighbours and what happened when we got relegated from the old first division.
If we get relegated, the man Utd shirts will reappear and both ourselves and our neighbours will go back to core support, unless of course our neighbours get promoted. They would then pick up the floaters so to speak.
They are worrying too much in my view. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:12 - Jun 5 with 1463 views | tylagarwjack |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:08 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
I am very concerned that I sound like I am criticising people like you or jacko and I really don't want you to think that, I'm just as I say deeply cynical - probably because of lots of previous stuff I have been involved with when similar people are on the 'other side' and am venting as a result!
On the first paragraph - see this is one of the things there has been a lot of conflicting views about - I have read and been told a few times that Martin Morgan didn't know anything about it. If that is not the case, then I would like to know that it was all of them. Leigh Dineen on Twitter a few weeks ago said to someone that was accusing him of selling out that they should shut up as the details were not public and when they were people would change their tune. At the moment it's really hard to tell if they all acted badly or if some have tried to do the right thing.
It's not because I think there should be a witch hunt, but people shouldn't be allowed to say 'nothing to do with me guv' if it was to do with them. |
Well if Morgan didn't know anything about it in the first instance then he certainly did last Sunday as he was out on Wind Street with one of the Americans. He was brought up to speed alright! | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:16 - Jun 5 with 1447 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 15:57 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
Ux - I am not saying the Trust could or indeed should have blocked the deal - don't know any of the details so how could any of us make that judgement?
I am simply saying that by pressing their rights, the Trust could have made it significantly more awkward and the threat of doing so MAY have led to concession. As you point out, a Trust onside has great advantage - well there hasn't been any dissension from the Trust throughout the process - no PR war being waged, no (public) attempt to see if there may have been a better deal available, no consideration if the possibility of the Trust selling up and keeping the money for a rainy day.
As I said to jacko - I am not criticising the Trust, I am just deeply cynical about the deal.
Can anyone remember any club being taken over without some sort of statement of who owns it now, who remains from existing people, what the plans are for the club?
I agree with Mon that your job is thankless and not helped by people like me I'm sure, so I reiterate my thanks to those who give up their time to protect our interests. |
True the Trust could have been more awkward, but not sure how that would have resulted in greater concessions being generated ... would they have simply been scared off by a bolshy Trust ... would we want them scared off? This is the problem, we don't have enough detail.
Appreciate I'm privy to some more information than most but I think the Trust has made most info available. I'm not sure there's any smoking gun being hidden at our side so all perspectives welcome, especially from one with experience in such matters. I tend to listen to our own people in that regard.
I tend to agree with you that the info from the club to the fans has been very shoddy. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:18 - Jun 5 with 1434 views | tylagarwjack |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:16 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
True the Trust could have been more awkward, but not sure how that would have resulted in greater concessions being generated ... would they have simply been scared off by a bolshy Trust ... would we want them scared off? This is the problem, we don't have enough detail.
Appreciate I'm privy to some more information than most but I think the Trust has made most info available. I'm not sure there's any smoking gun being hidden at our side so all perspectives welcome, especially from one with experience in such matters. I tend to listen to our own people in that regard.
I tend to agree with you that the info from the club to the fans has been very shoddy. |
I can't understand why there could possibly be a situation where the trust has any information that it chooses not to disclose to it's members. Does that not defeat the object of it? | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:19 - Jun 5 with 1425 views | monmouth |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:01 - Jun 5 by max936 |
That Hallo that most of us put on Jenkins head has truly slipped it seems and he can never been seen in the same light again, as for Dineen and Morgan their gravy boats are fuller. [Post edited 5 Jun 2016 16:43]
|
I think some will come to regret it in time. The choice - essentially buy ever more shiny shit when you had much more than you could ever need anyway and you and your families were already secure, or own something really special that leads to pride and self respect.
Without naming any names, as a random example, five years ago if any of us had seen, I don't know, let's call him John Van der Valk for arguments sake. I'd guess we'd have shaken his hand and bought him a beer, now, well I'd just spit on the w*nker. So he has more noughts than he had. Get another car John. Vroom vroom. Get a yacht. The real money will still laugh at you and take the piss out of you as a brainless mouthy tw@t that won a lucky lottery. You will never have anything worth as much as you did. Now stick your retarded twitter comments up your arse and stfu. You are just another pointless prick.
That's my non-emotive opinion. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:21 - Jun 5 with 1418 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:08 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
I am very concerned that I sound like I am criticising people like you or jacko and I really don't want you to think that, I'm just as I say deeply cynical - probably because of lots of previous stuff I have been involved with when similar people are on the 'other side' and am venting as a result!
On the first paragraph - see this is one of the things there has been a lot of conflicting views about - I have read and been told a few times that Martin Morgan didn't know anything about it. If that is not the case, then I would like to know that it was all of them. Leigh Dineen on Twitter a few weeks ago said to someone that was accusing him of selling out that they should shut up as the details were not public and when they were people would change their tune. At the moment it's really hard to tell if they all acted badly or if some have tried to do the right thing.
It's not because I think there should be a witch hunt, but people shouldn't be allowed to say 'nothing to do with me guv' if it was to do with them. |
I'm not sure what Dineen is expecting to come out that will change the perception that this deal was deliberately done behind people's backs until the last possible moment.
As for MM, depends who you believe. Me, I'm a cynical sod.
I've no interest in a witch hunt, but similarly I'm not a fan of whitewashing history. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:27 - Jun 5 with 1378 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:21 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
I'm not sure what Dineen is expecting to come out that will change the perception that this deal was deliberately done behind people's backs until the last possible moment.
As for MM, depends who you believe. Me, I'm a cynical sod.
I've no interest in a witch hunt, but similarly I'm not a fan of whitewashing history. |
That's a good way of putting it - I feel the same.
The thought of some of them continuing to Lord it next season makes me angry.
And I am cynical as well about who knew what, but the Trust's first statement actually said that not all shareholders had known anything about it? Sort of what I mean about PR. The last thing the new people will want is bad PR to start off and in my experience American investors in particular avoid it like the plague. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:31 - Jun 5 with 1345 views | dobjack2 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:21 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
I'm not sure what Dineen is expecting to come out that will change the perception that this deal was deliberately done behind people's backs until the last possible moment.
As for MM, depends who you believe. Me, I'm a cynical sod.
I've no interest in a witch hunt, but similarly I'm not a fan of whitewashing history. |
Are we going to get the next round of PR entitled "Why we had to sell our shares without letting the trust know and without really knowing who we were selling the shares to". The story will be serialised every day in the evening post and western mail and explain how it is all for the benefit of the club and for the benefit of true supporters as it will take us to the next level. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:32 - Jun 5 with 1342 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:27 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
That's a good way of putting it - I feel the same.
The thought of some of them continuing to Lord it next season makes me angry.
And I am cynical as well about who knew what, but the Trust's first statement actually said that not all shareholders had known anything about it? Sort of what I mean about PR. The last thing the new people will want is bad PR to start off and in my experience American investors in particular avoid it like the plague. |
Given, as jacko stated, the deal is not finalised, then that would hopefully still apply.
From my perspective at least, the Yanks have a lot to do to earn my trust. Ditto anyone who stays involved. The "cake and eat it" syndrome would leave a bad taste, and when details emerge we will need to assess, particularly about what we see as in the clubs interest. | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:40 - Jun 5 with 1314 views | airedale |
I think that it would be in the interests of the Americans to buy the stadium too. That way they will have an income whatever division we were in. Income from rents, events, food and whatever. They could even consider expanding the stadium to derive extra revenue from bums on seats. Perhaps the Council could flog it to them for £30 mill? |  | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:41 - Jun 5 with 1309 views | max936 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:19 - Jun 5 by monmouth |
I think some will come to regret it in time. The choice - essentially buy ever more shiny shit when you had much more than you could ever need anyway and you and your families were already secure, or own something really special that leads to pride and self respect.
Without naming any names, as a random example, five years ago if any of us had seen, I don't know, let's call him John Van der Valk for arguments sake. I'd guess we'd have shaken his hand and bought him a beer, now, well I'd just spit on the w*nker. So he has more noughts than he had. Get another car John. Vroom vroom. Get a yacht. The real money will still laugh at you and take the piss out of you as a brainless mouthy tw@t that won a lucky lottery. You will never have anything worth as much as you did. Now stick your retarded twitter comments up your arse and stfu. You are just another pointless prick.
That's my non-emotive opinion. |
Humping Josephs Monny that's one hell of a rant for a pleasant Sunday afternoon, I can't really disagree with it though, but there's other's there just as culpable imho. [Post edited 5 Jun 2016 16:49]
| |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:41 - Jun 5 with 1307 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:31 - Jun 5 by dobjack2 |
Are we going to get the next round of PR entitled "Why we had to sell our shares without letting the trust know and without really knowing who we were selling the shares to". The story will be serialised every day in the evening post and western mail and explain how it is all for the benefit of the club and for the benefit of true supporters as it will take us to the next level. |
I'm sure they can find a pliable journo at the Western Mail ... | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:42 - Jun 5 with 1302 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:32 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
Given, as jacko stated, the deal is not finalised, then that would hopefully still apply.
From my perspective at least, the Yanks have a lot to do to earn my trust. Ditto anyone who stays involved. The "cake and eat it" syndrome would leave a bad taste, and when details emerge we will need to assess, particularly about what we see as in the clubs interest. |
The Beeb have reported details albeit that they may be incorrect.
Seems we may have seen the last of our Dutch connection. Hopefully that'll mean an end to hundreds of tickets going that way as well when people in Swansea can't get them. | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:44 - Jun 5 with 1292 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:41 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
I'm sure they can find a pliable journo at the Western Mail ... |
No one can stop the Trust issuing public statements Ux. Never have been able to throughout.
I'd suggest that Monmouth isn't asked to draft them though :-) | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:48 - Jun 5 with 1268 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:44 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
No one can stop the Trust issuing public statements Ux. Never have been able to throughout.
I'd suggest that Monmouth isn't asked to draft them though :-) |
I was just about to suggest the exact opposite. Put Monny in charge of Trust comms. At least that way they'd be a bit less passive than they currently are. |  |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:49 - Jun 5 with 1265 views | Uxbridge |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:42 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
The Beeb have reported details albeit that they may be incorrect.
Seems we may have seen the last of our Dutch connection. Hopefully that'll mean an end to hundreds of tickets going that way as well when people in Swansea can't get them. |
Didn't you hear, he's being kept on in a commercial and marketing advisory position ... | |
| |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:52 - Jun 5 with 1240 views | dobjack2 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:44 - Jun 5 by londonlisa2001 |
No one can stop the Trust issuing public statements Ux. Never have been able to throughout.
I'd suggest that Monmouth isn't asked to draft them though :-) |
Problem now They've had their exclusives and are hooked. So will any editor want to publish articles critical of the club that could result in their paper losing their inside links?
Needs to be explored though as a new pr war is surely on the horizon | | | |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:54 - Jun 5 with 1229 views | dobjack2 |
| Takeover Confirmed on 16:49 - Jun 5 by Uxbridge |
Didn't you hear, he's being kept on in a commercial and marketing advisory position ... |
 | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
