| The American Owners versus The Trust 21:08 - Oct 21 with 15355 views | Darran |
I wasn't going to post this untill I'd spoken to Phil tomorrow but I've decided after a couple of beers that it wouldn't be fair to ask him.
Someone told me today that the American owners are not too happy with going ahead with the buying of shares off the Trust and want a change in what they promised meaning that the Trust will be left with no option other than legal action.
Anyone heard anything? |  |
| |  |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 12:43 - Oct 22 with 1756 views | Smellyplumz |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 12:21 - Oct 22 by londonlisa2001 |
You'd rather the people who worked so tirelessly at the beginning and since, lost everything because the current Trust board made the wrong decision? The people of Swansea lost out to a bunch of American opportunists? Really? |
It's what the fans voted for directed by the trust, you make your bed you lie in it. I didn't vote for it because for one thing I knew the yanks would fk the deal but the fans will be crying about it now. |  |
|
""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 |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 12:46 - Oct 22 with 1750 views | Smellyplumz |
If I had voted for joining in the yanks scheme and it turned out the yanks stiff the trust I'd blame nobody but myself Lisa. But I didn't. | |
|
""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 |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:04 - Oct 22 with 1701 views | monmouth |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 12:43 - Oct 22 by Smellyplumz |
It's what the fans voted for directed by the trust, you make your bed you lie in it. I didn't vote for it because for one thing I knew the yanks would fk the deal but the fans will be crying about it now. |
But why? Under the constitution the Trust Board can opt to not follow that vote and opt for legal action without further ballot. It is not binding if the counterparty does not act in good faith. We haven't made our bed at all until contracts are signed. In fact if the counterparty wishes to play silly buggers that increases the chances of successful legal action again.
There is surely no need at all for further discourse if they won't honour the deal they proposed. Just sue. [Post edited 22 Oct 2017 13:05]
|  |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:06 - Oct 22 with 1694 views | Gowerjack |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 11:24 - Oct 22 by QJumpingJack |
Why is the news of the issue dripping out on this site (if true)?
Surely the Trust should make a statement explaining the current situation. |
Aye
The appeaser Uxbridge was all over this site like a f ucking rash peddling his lies
Where is he now? |  |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:08 - Oct 22 with 1682 views | monmouth |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:06 - Oct 22 by Gowerjack |
Aye
The appeaser Uxbridge was all over this site like a f ucking rash peddling his lies
Where is he now? |
That's a bit harsh mun. I don't doubt his integrity or that he genuinely believed the deal was the best option. [Post edited 22 Oct 2017 13:09]
| |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:17 - Oct 22 with 1657 views | Smellyplumz |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:04 - Oct 22 by monmouth |
But why? Under the constitution the Trust Board can opt to not follow that vote and opt for legal action without further ballot. It is not binding if the counterparty does not act in good faith. We haven't made our bed at all until contracts are signed. In fact if the counterparty wishes to play silly buggers that increases the chances of successful legal action again.
There is surely no need at all for further discourse if they won't honour the deal they proposed. Just sue. [Post edited 22 Oct 2017 13:05]
|
You think they have the courage for that? I don't. My posts are indicative of my contempt at what the trust have become. | |
|
""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 |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:20 - Oct 22 with 1652 views | monmouth |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:17 - Oct 22 by Smellyplumz |
You think they have the courage for that? I don't. My posts are indicative of my contempt at what the trust have become. |
Sadly, no, I don't. | |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:23 - Oct 22 with 1639 views | QJumpingJack |
This is all hearsay at the moment.How reliable is the original source?
Perhaps the Americans will keep to their word? |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:06 - Oct 22 with 1565 views | waynekerr55 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 12:19 - Oct 22 by londonlisa2001 |
It'll be because the deal is a great one for them if we stay up and they now think there's a big risk of that not happening.
They're treating it as a big call option. |
And now if it goes to court the Trust have further evidence to show they've been tucked up despite exhausting all ADR avenues. If the Trust win then this will probably influence the judges' decision a Sunday to how much the owners will be compelled to purchase the shares for. |  |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:29 - Oct 22 with 1541 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 12:46 - Oct 22 by Smellyplumz |
If I had voted for joining in the yanks scheme and it turned out the yanks stiff the trust I'd blame nobody but myself Lisa. But I didn't. |
I didn't vote for it either, but I don't hope the Trust gets stiffed by the Americans. [Post edited 22 Oct 2017 15:29]
| | | |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:31 - Oct 22 with 1531 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:06 - Oct 22 by waynekerr55 |
And now if it goes to court the Trust have further evidence to show they've been tucked up despite exhausting all ADR avenues. If the Trust win then this will probably influence the judges' decision a Sunday to how much the owners will be compelled to purchase the shares for. |
The only price the judge could rule on is the original deal price. There isn't another option, whatever happens subsequently. | | | |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:33 - Oct 22 with 1523 views | Smellyplumz |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:29 - Oct 22 by londonlisa2001 |
I didn't vote for it either, but I don't hope the Trust gets stiffed by the Americans. [Post edited 22 Oct 2017 15:29]
|
That's because you hold some nostalgic dream about them. Ok so answer me this, if the Americans do go back on the deal do you not think it makes the trust look a bit stupid for recommending the deal? I 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 |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:39 - Oct 22 with 1516 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:33 - Oct 22 by Smellyplumz |
That's because you hold some nostalgic dream about them. Ok so answer me this, if the Americans do go back on the deal do you not think it makes the trust look a bit stupid for recommending the deal? I do. |
Nothing to do with a romantic notion or nostalgic dream - it's because I think the Trust represents more than just the current members. They definitely represent the people of my city more than the current bunch of idiot owners.
As to the second point, I said for months that the Trust were stupid to recommend the deal in the first place. I still think that. So whether or not the Americans go back on their word is irrelevant, it's a stupid deal full stop. The only thing about them going back on their word is that one of the reasons I was so against it is because I said that they couldn't be trusted, so all the stuff about tag and drag rights was a waste of time unless the Trust could and would take them to court in the US when they broke their agreement. Going back on their word now just emphasises that. | | | |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:42 - Oct 22 with 1508 views | Smellyplumz |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:39 - Oct 22 by londonlisa2001 |
Nothing to do with a romantic notion or nostalgic dream - it's because I think the Trust represents more than just the current members. They definitely represent the people of my city more than the current bunch of idiot owners.
As to the second point, I said for months that the Trust were stupid to recommend the deal in the first place. I still think that. So whether or not the Americans go back on their word is irrelevant, it's a stupid deal full stop. The only thing about them going back on their word is that one of the reasons I was so against it is because I said that they couldn't be trusted, so all the stuff about tag and drag rights was a waste of time unless the Trust could and would take them to court in the US when they broke their agreement. Going back on their word now just emphasises that. |
Fair enough Lisa I've zero problem with that. Tbh I've just got to the point where I've had an absolute guts full of the whole thing, the club the football the trust and I guess I'm venting. | |
|
""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 |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:44 - Oct 22 with 1500 views | waynekerr55 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:31 - Oct 22 by londonlisa2001 |
The only price the judge could rule on is the original deal price. There isn't another option, whatever happens subsequently. |
Wasn't the reality that the judge could rule less than that value? | |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:48 - Oct 22 with 1492 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:42 - Oct 22 by Smellyplumz |
Fair enough Lisa I've zero problem with that. Tbh I've just got to the point where I've had an absolute guts full of the whole thing, the club the football the trust and I guess I'm venting. |
Perfectly understandable  | | | |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:50 - Oct 22 with 1472 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:44 - Oct 22 by waynekerr55 |
Wasn't the reality that the judge could rule less than that value? |
No.
I mean a judge could rule that there was no unfair prejudice and there wouldn't be any forced sale, but if they ruled that there was unfair prejudice, the value at which the Americans would need to buy shares would be the value of the deal (the clock would be rolled back to that date). That would be the case if we were relegated in the meantime or if we won the league. (Snigger). | | | |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 16:08 - Oct 22 with 1420 views | WarwickHunt |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 13:08 - Oct 22 by monmouth |
That's a bit harsh mun. I don't doubt his integrity or that he genuinely believed the deal was the best option. [Post edited 22 Oct 2017 13:09]
|
Ux is one of the good guys. |  | | |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 16:16 - Oct 22 with 1399 views | monmouth |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 16:08 - Oct 22 by WarwickHunt |
Ux is one of the good guys. |
Yes, I think so too. | |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 16:31 - Oct 22 with 1368 views | londonlisa2001 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 16:08 - Oct 22 by WarwickHunt |
Ux is one of the good guys. |
I agree with that.
He gets stick because he bothers to communicate.
I don't blame him if decides not to - none of the others (except Matt) does.
I don't understand why the supporters' director is so silent. How can you represent people that you don't have a conversation with? | | | |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 18:31 - Oct 22 with 1288 views | waynekerr55 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 15:31 - Oct 22 by londonlisa2001 |
The only price the judge could rule on is the original deal price. There isn't another option, whatever happens subsequently. |
I'm sure I'd read that an option was that the judge could have ruled that the offer was fair and set the premium at that, maybe I need to lay off the spice | |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 18:47 - Oct 22 with 1260 views | Shaky |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 18:31 - Oct 22 by waynekerr55 |
I'm sure I'd read that an option was that the judge could have ruled that the offer was fair and set the premium at that, maybe I need to lay off the spice |
You continue to operate under the fundamental misconception that a judge has any interest in the subsequent posturing of the parties after the wrong has been committed. |  |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 19:44 - Oct 22 with 1171 views | waynekerr55 |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 18:47 - Oct 22 by Shaky |
You continue to operate under the fundamental misconception that a judge has any interest in the subsequent posturing of the parties after the wrong has been committed. |
Well I'm sure whoever presides over the case would look at the facts and draw reasoned judgements. As the QC advice states, there is a strong case anyway; further movement of the goalposts would cement the school of thought that the Trust suffered prejudice via the actions of sellers and buyers. Besides, basic human psychology dictates that we make unconscious decisions, the Trusts exhaustion of ADR would only strengthen their case, surely? | |
| |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 21:53 - Oct 22 with 1103 views | DafyddHuw |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 21:20 - Oct 21 by Dr_Winston |
Got to disagree with you there Monny.
Legal action has to be the absolute last resort. The Nuclear Option. |
You don't think we're there already?
Why the Trust would ever believe that the Yanks had suddenly found some morals after being royally shafted by them on more than one occasion is totally baffling to me.
I don't smell bridges burning, shirley? [Post edited 22 Oct 2017 22:11]
|  | | |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 22:15 - Oct 22 with 1078 views | DafyddHuw |
| The American Owners versus The Trust on 16:08 - Oct 22 by WarwickHunt |
Ux is one of the good guys. |
Yes, except for where his head's at.
But that applies to all of them.
Doesn't anyone find it a bit sinister that out of what, 13 board members, there's not even one dissenting voice?
It's like the Politburo. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
