| Who dares wins 10:22 - Jul 21 with 2621 views | Smellyplumz |
So received my ballot papers this morning and after reading it I have voted for legal action and I urge y'all to do the same. Yes it's a risk but isn't everything in life, this is our chance to get justice if we turn it down now is gone for ever! Once the yanks have brought us off on the cheap they can then blank the trust.
I truly believe we can get a better deal than the one currently in offer.
Do you trust Huw Jenkins? Do you trust the Americans? Not me, seems the trust do. |  |
|
""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 |
| |  |
| Who dares wins on 13:58 - Jul 21 with 2503 views | Swanseajill |
HOpefully I'll be out of hospital in time to get my vote in time.
AS someone who begged anyone who would listen,that this club we love was no longer our club but in the hands of the receiver, and it no longer was able to produce proffesional football this side of Cardiff.
The heartache of having grown men break down on a pledge telephone line will live with me forever.
I urge fans to think, not about revenge. A revenge that will not secure the future of our club. I think about revenge all the time, anyone that loves this club will know how we felt being stabbed in the back.
But I will voting to have a nest egg in the bank. I hate selling our shares, but I hate the fact that we could become a City with no football team. That,I hate even more. |  | | |
| Who dares wins on 14:11 - Jul 21 with 2488 views | Watchman |
| Who dares wins on 13:58 - Jul 21 by Swanseajill |
HOpefully I'll be out of hospital in time to get my vote in time.
AS someone who begged anyone who would listen,that this club we love was no longer our club but in the hands of the receiver, and it no longer was able to produce proffesional football this side of Cardiff.
The heartache of having grown men break down on a pledge telephone line will live with me forever.
I urge fans to think, not about revenge. A revenge that will not secure the future of our club. I think about revenge all the time, anyone that loves this club will know how we felt being stabbed in the back.
But I will voting to have a nest egg in the bank. I hate selling our shares, but I hate the fact that we could become a City with no football team. That,I hate even more. |
Hope all is well Lorr get well soon. Wise words as always, however there is one major obstacle here and does make the decision a hard one to make |  |
| |
| Who dares wins on 14:46 - Jul 21 with 2443 views | Swanseajill |
| Who dares wins on 14:11 - Jul 21 by Watchman |
Hope all is well Lorr get well soon. Wise words as always, however there is one major obstacle here and does make the decision a hard one to make |
Thanks Watch. Went for a cardiac check up, and they wouldn't even let me go home to sort the dog out.
Major obstacle, yeah. It's between a rock and a hard place. | | | |
| Who dares wins on 15:08 - Jul 21 with 2408 views | Dewi1jack |
| Who dares wins on 14:46 - Jul 21 by Swanseajill |
Thanks Watch. Went for a cardiac check up, and they wouldn't even let me go home to sort the dog out.
Major obstacle, yeah. It's between a rock and a hard place. |
You're right as usual.
But you need to concentrate on yourself first. Hope you're well soonest.
Think most of us know it isn't possible to gain revenge on the sellers via Court action.
Trouble is people see a bad deal on the table, not the little bit of cash on offer- Drag rights are a real deal killer for me.
Especially with the story (true or false) of the Indian takeover.
Yet another, just like our Merrycan cousins and the suspected moneymen with a history of setting up shell companies as a way around ownership problems.
We've been bought for a quid plus debt before.
This time makes the shares that everyone has worked hard to gain and maintain being worth about 20p |  |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| Who dares wins on 15:12 - Jul 21 with 2395 views | felixstowe_jack |
I have received my voting papers and information sheet with gives a clear picture of all three options.
The QC has said a couple of things. " The Trust has a strong case for unfair prejudice, should the matter go to court"
He also says "that legal action should be a last resort only if we cannot negotiate a settlement"
Even if we win legal action all that will happen it the Trust will sell its entire holding.
If we accept the current offer the Trust will sell half it's holding over 5 years.
Option 1 Accept offer
Option 2 Pursue legal action
Option 3 Do not pursue legal action and continue as we are.
I urge you all to consider what is best for our club and put aside any personal views of current board members before you vote. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 16:11]
|  |
| |
| Who dares wins on 15:18 - Jul 21 with 2384 views | Swanseajill |
| Who dares wins on 15:08 - Jul 21 by Dewi1jack |
You're right as usual.
But you need to concentrate on yourself first. Hope you're well soonest.
Think most of us know it isn't possible to gain revenge on the sellers via Court action.
Trouble is people see a bad deal on the table, not the little bit of cash on offer- Drag rights are a real deal killer for me.
Especially with the story (true or false) of the Indian takeover.
Yet another, just like our Merrycan cousins and the suspected moneymen with a history of setting up shell companies as a way around ownership problems.
We've been bought for a quid plus debt before.
This time makes the shares that everyone has worked hard to gain and maintain being worth about 20p |
Everyone will have an opinion. I really want people to think carefully what is best for the club in the long term..
Thanks for your good wishes Dewi. | | | |
| Who dares wins on 15:45 - Jul 21 with 2340 views | tomdickharry |
| Who dares wins on 15:12 - Jul 21 by felixstowe_jack |
I have received my voting papers and information sheet with gives a clear picture of all three options.
The QC has said a couple of things. " The Trust has a strong case for unfair prejudice, should the matter go to court"
He also says "that legal action should be a last resort only if we cannot negotiate a settlement"
Even if we win legal action all that will happen it the Trust will sell its entire holding.
If we accept the current offer the Trust will sell half it's holding over 5 years.
Option 1 Accept offer
Option 2 Pursue legal action
Option 3 Do not pursue legal action and continue as we are.
I urge you all to consider what is best for our club and put aside any personal views of current board members before you vote. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 16:11]
|
Option 3. Stay as we are, bridges with the owners having been built and still holding 21% of the club shares. As the QC has intimated legal action may or may not be successful and the ramifications either way are at this time indeterminable,so perhaps it would be better to employ the old adage "a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush" who knows. | | | |
| Who dares wins on 15:49 - Jul 21 with 2333 views | NOTRAC |
If the Trust had been fully involved in the American offer last year
a) would It have been able to stop the buy out.
I believe the answer is no
b) would the Trust have sold all its shares.
I believe the answer is no.
Therefore why would legal action be the option now?
What has been offered may not give all the answers to present expectations but does give theTrust a fair price for the percentage being bought now,and in following years i.e. the same price as paid to other shareholders plus add ons.
It also gives the Trust a voice in the running of the club. Whilst this is limited because it would be the Americans who make the final decisions, it doesn't leave the Trust out in the cold,which would probably be the case if legal action was taken.
Legal action could last a considerable time during which the American shares could end up being sold to a third party which would not involve the Trust at all.
Lastly there is no guarantee that the present offer would be on the table if legal action is taken.
The offer provides money, involvement and future guarantees.
The legal option guarantees none of these and has too much risk attached to it.
Acceptance of the offer for me. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Who dares wins on 16:10 - Jul 21 with 2313 views | Dewi1jack |
| Who dares wins on 15:45 - Jul 21 by tomdickharry |
Option 3. Stay as we are, bridges with the owners having been built and still holding 21% of the club shares. As the QC has intimated legal action may or may not be successful and the ramifications either way are at this time indeterminable,so perhaps it would be better to employ the old adage "a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush" who knows. |
At least option 3 leaves all doors open and excludes the Drag rights.
We can always decide to restart legal action should meaningful discussions fail or a better deal doesn't emerge.
I really, really, wholeheartedly don't trust the Merrycans in any shape or form.
I trust them just above our EX Board for honesty.
Felixstowe picked up on the following point
"If we accept the current offer the Trust will sell half it's holding over 5 years."
IF WE STAY UP or can regain our place at the top table. No guarantees there (see Blackburn/ Cardiff/ Portsmouth and many, many others).
WILL SELL HALF is a very misleading term and not the only misleading term in the voting papers
Point 2 for accepting the deal.
Also Jase and Stevie boy may or may not decide to buy a few more shares, depending on how they/ the money men feel. Or if their lucky cat points to yes or no. Who can tell how they'll examine buying more shares
Oh and as an slight aside, Jenkins- one of the main protagonists of the Trust and it's friendship with the old board leading to it being stitched up better than the CID could ever do in Twin Town, gaining more shares.
Sorry.
Accepting the deal on offer just doesn't seem an option to me.
Drag rights (could make Tag rights redundant). No guarantee of money through share sales. Different terms to the original sale.
Caught between options 2 and 3, even though 3 might seem to be fence sitting. Maybe a safer option just to see what direction our Colonial cousins take.
Will have to Email a couple of questions as there is no way (at the mo- things can change!!) that I can make the forum.
Pity, I still think hearing people talk and seeing the body language of both the questioner and Trust person answering would give me a far clearer idea. | |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| Who dares wins on 16:58 - Jul 21 with 2252 views | Smellyplumz |
Well for me it's nothing to do with revenge and all to do with getting a better deal and not trusting Huw or the Yanks, simple as that really. I think most educated people already know that legal action will not be revenge on the sellouts, it's about making the best out of a a pigs ear and is up to us to decide what's the best. | |
|
""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 |
| |
| Who dares wins on 18:10 - Jul 21 with 2167 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Who dares wins on 15:12 - Jul 21 by felixstowe_jack |
I have received my voting papers and information sheet with gives a clear picture of all three options.
The QC has said a couple of things. " The Trust has a strong case for unfair prejudice, should the matter go to court"
He also says "that legal action should be a last resort only if we cannot negotiate a settlement"
Even if we win legal action all that will happen it the Trust will sell its entire holding.
If we accept the current offer the Trust will sell half it's holding over 5 years.
Option 1 Accept offer
Option 2 Pursue legal action
Option 3 Do not pursue legal action and continue as we are.
I urge you all to consider what is best for our club and put aside any personal views of current board members before you vote. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 16:11]
|
Legal action should always be a last resort. Doesn't mean its threat won't get a better deal.
Also the statement that the Trust will sell half its holding over 5 years is simply untrue.
It will sell its holding when the Americans want it to. Even if in 3 months' time to some dodgy Indian businessman.
If the Americans hold on for another 5 years AND we have remained in the Premier League for that entire time, the Trust will have sold half. | | | |
| Who dares wins on 18:11 - Jul 21 with 2160 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Who dares wins on 15:49 - Jul 21 by NOTRAC |
If the Trust had been fully involved in the American offer last year
a) would It have been able to stop the buy out.
I believe the answer is no
b) would the Trust have sold all its shares.
I believe the answer is no.
Therefore why would legal action be the option now?
What has been offered may not give all the answers to present expectations but does give theTrust a fair price for the percentage being bought now,and in following years i.e. the same price as paid to other shareholders plus add ons.
It also gives the Trust a voice in the running of the club. Whilst this is limited because it would be the Americans who make the final decisions, it doesn't leave the Trust out in the cold,which would probably be the case if legal action was taken.
Legal action could last a considerable time during which the American shares could end up being sold to a third party which would not involve the Trust at all.
Lastly there is no guarantee that the present offer would be on the table if legal action is taken.
The offer provides money, involvement and future guarantees.
The legal option guarantees none of these and has too much risk attached to it.
Acceptance of the offer for me. |
As I am away and haven't received the papers, what is the price? | | | |
| Who dares wins on 18:13 - Jul 21 with 2156 views | felixstowe_jack |
| Who dares wins on 18:10 - Jul 21 by londonlisa2001 |
Legal action should always be a last resort. Doesn't mean its threat won't get a better deal.
Also the statement that the Trust will sell half its holding over 5 years is simply untrue.
It will sell its holding when the Americans want it to. Even if in 3 months' time to some dodgy Indian businessman.
If the Americans hold on for another 5 years AND we have remained in the Premier League for that entire time, the Trust will have sold half. |
It is exactly what I said glad you agree. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 18:14]
| |
| |
| Who dares wins on 18:16 - Jul 21 with 2148 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Who dares wins on 18:13 - Jul 21 by felixstowe_jack |
It is exactly what I said glad you agree. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 18:14]
|
The difference between what you said and what I said is the whole ballgame.
Certainty of sale. Drag rights.
Makes all the difference. | | | |
| Who dares wins on 20:07 - Jul 21 with 2040 views | Spratty |
| Who dares wins on 18:10 - Jul 21 by londonlisa2001 |
Legal action should always be a last resort. Doesn't mean its threat won't get a better deal.
Also the statement that the Trust will sell half its holding over 5 years is simply untrue.
It will sell its holding when the Americans want it to. Even if in 3 months' time to some dodgy Indian businessman.
If the Americans hold on for another 5 years AND we have remained in the Premier League for that entire time, the Trust will have sold half. |
"If the Americans hold on for another 5 years AND we have remained in the Premier League for that entire time, the Trust will have sold half."
Is even this correct?
The Trust Chair has referred to the deal potentially giving us a "war chest" of £11 million (although we might posit the time for war, if ever, is now, when you are holding all the best cards) - this was an overestimate and also did not subtract the £2.2 million which it was known would be due for Capital Gains Tax from the amount stated.
The full deal would indeed eventually sell just short of 1/2 our holding. However.....
My understanding is that only the purchase from us of 5% of the club is guaranteed (less than 1/4 of our 21% holding). £4 Million after tax. How much of that will be frittered away on legal advise and action if the Americans revert to type once the current threat of legal action is removed and we remain in a minority relationship with them holding all the power.
As you say we need to remain in the PL for an additional 5 years (presumably not starting until the end of this coming season at the earliest) in order for them to eventually (at 0.5% of the club at a time) purchase another 2.5% of the club in total (which may be sometime never and only, if as you say, they even last that long). That will also be a pretty good deal for them if we stay in the PL and they can buy them 5 years or more into the future at last years prices.
Even if the 5 years in the PL condition is ever met within their tenure, it only eventually makes a sale of 7.5% of the club - scarcely more than 1/3rd of our 21% holding. Giving us about £6 million
The final 3% is worse than meaningless as there is no compunction on the Americans to buy these, but they have the option to force us to sell them at any time over the next 2.5 years (which they obviously will only do if it is beneficial to them).
Of course as well as the drag giving the Americans full control over the price and timing of selling the Trust out of the club. We also have no protection from share dilution.
The Trust previously said the following about the threat of share dilution (as part of a written statement)
“Unfortunately, short term protection without any form of long term protection is not something we could work with”
Yet amazingly the deal now recommended by the Trust no longer even gives us short term protection against this. |  | | |
| Who dares wins on 20:16 - Jul 21 with 2009 views | E20Jack |
| Who dares wins on 15:49 - Jul 21 by NOTRAC |
If the Trust had been fully involved in the American offer last year
a) would It have been able to stop the buy out.
I believe the answer is no
b) would the Trust have sold all its shares.
I believe the answer is no.
Therefore why would legal action be the option now?
What has been offered may not give all the answers to present expectations but does give theTrust a fair price for the percentage being bought now,and in following years i.e. the same price as paid to other shareholders plus add ons.
It also gives the Trust a voice in the running of the club. Whilst this is limited because it would be the Americans who make the final decisions, it doesn't leave the Trust out in the cold,which would probably be the case if legal action was taken.
Legal action could last a considerable time during which the American shares could end up being sold to a third party which would not involve the Trust at all.
Lastly there is no guarantee that the present offer would be on the table if legal action is taken.
The offer provides money, involvement and future guarantees.
The legal option guarantees none of these and has too much risk attached to it.
Acceptance of the offer for me. |
Id argue it offers neither involvement or any meaningful amount of money.
The Trust couldnt even influence the change in the price of a friendly. So lets not kid ourselves regarding influence.
So for me the only thing that matters now is acquiring sufficient amount of money to buy the club with it being in as good a state as possible. £5m will barely buy a conference side. [Post edited 21 Jul 2017 20:32]
|  |
| |
| Who dares wins on 20:28 - Jul 21 with 1987 views | Spratty |
Consultation papers - option 1 top bullet point
"Trust to sell 5% of its existing 21.1% shareholding to the Americans immediately"
This statement very misleading and could create confusion both on that bullet point and the following 2 bullet points.
It suggests that the Trust is selling 5% (ie 1/20th) of its holding, rather than 5% of the club
5 of its existing 21% shareholding of the club - might be slightly clearer
It is important to make clear that all these %s given for purchases by the Americans relate to a portion of the total club - rather than a portion of our shareholding (as the wording incorrectly suggests the latter). | | | |
| Who dares wins on 20:59 - Jul 21 with 1941 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Who dares wins on 20:07 - Jul 21 by Spratty |
"If the Americans hold on for another 5 years AND we have remained in the Premier League for that entire time, the Trust will have sold half."
Is even this correct?
The Trust Chair has referred to the deal potentially giving us a "war chest" of £11 million (although we might posit the time for war, if ever, is now, when you are holding all the best cards) - this was an overestimate and also did not subtract the £2.2 million which it was known would be due for Capital Gains Tax from the amount stated.
The full deal would indeed eventually sell just short of 1/2 our holding. However.....
My understanding is that only the purchase from us of 5% of the club is guaranteed (less than 1/4 of our 21% holding). £4 Million after tax. How much of that will be frittered away on legal advise and action if the Americans revert to type once the current threat of legal action is removed and we remain in a minority relationship with them holding all the power.
As you say we need to remain in the PL for an additional 5 years (presumably not starting until the end of this coming season at the earliest) in order for them to eventually (at 0.5% of the club at a time) purchase another 2.5% of the club in total (which may be sometime never and only, if as you say, they even last that long). That will also be a pretty good deal for them if we stay in the PL and they can buy them 5 years or more into the future at last years prices.
Even if the 5 years in the PL condition is ever met within their tenure, it only eventually makes a sale of 7.5% of the club - scarcely more than 1/3rd of our 21% holding. Giving us about £6 million
The final 3% is worse than meaningless as there is no compunction on the Americans to buy these, but they have the option to force us to sell them at any time over the next 2.5 years (which they obviously will only do if it is beneficial to them).
Of course as well as the drag giving the Americans full control over the price and timing of selling the Trust out of the club. We also have no protection from share dilution.
The Trust previously said the following about the threat of share dilution (as part of a written statement)
“Unfortunately, short term protection without any form of long term protection is not something we could work with”
Yet amazingly the deal now recommended by the Trust no longer even gives us short term protection against this. |
Actually Spratty, yes, you're correct. The call option may never be exercised. | | | |
| Who dares wins on 21:08 - Jul 21 with 1921 views | Spratty |
| Who dares wins on 20:59 - Jul 21 by londonlisa2001 |
Actually Spratty, yes, you're correct. The call option may never be exercised. |
Thanks and well done for sticking with my meanderings to the punch line | | | |
| Who dares wins on 22:40 - Jul 21 with 1863 views | Dewi1jack |
| Who dares wins on 20:59 - Jul 21 by londonlisa2001 |
Actually Spratty, yes, you're correct. The call option may never be exercised. |
Quite a few of the so-called antagonists/ agitators have picked this point up.
Seems not many are picking up on that slimeball Jenkins getting Trust shares with his gains from the Merrycans.
The tw@ whose set fans against fans over a legal battle because he tucked the Trust up, getting the Trust shares.
Mmmmmmmm
No one from the "accept the deal" side is convincing me that's a good option at all.
Still caught between options 2 and 3. | |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
