| OTH Ltd... on 16:55 - Jan 5 with 2102 views | TheCobbler |
| OTH Ltd... on 16:52 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
The deal definitely favoured LD and HJ, that's for sure. I'm sure we'd find that they both got contracts tying them in for 2 or 3 years on silly money, but most of us would have guessed that anyway.
They protected themselves first and, if I'm totally honest, I can understand why. At the time it looked like we could have gone down that season and their "once in a lifetime" financial dream with it. They had families to provide for and that money gave them both a huge amount of security for life. I'm sure they would have preferred to have sold to an oligarch or Saudi prince, but time was running out so they did the first deal that came their way. Once the Trust flushed that option down the pan, they had to ensure that NOBODY could scupper the deal for Yanks v2 and the only way to do that was to make sure nobody else knew.
Also, MM only sold about 6% of his shares so hardly a large sum for someone as wealthy as he is, but HUGE sums for LD and HJ (and especially considering it's paid out in dribs and drabs).
Finally, MM doesn't know I'm posting this on here (or even know about this thread probably as he's not often online) and I'm not going to tell him. I'm not posting on his behalf or at his request, but simply giving my opinion based on what I have seen first-hand over the past couple of years. |
Great post Nick! [Post edited 5 Jan 2018 17:02]
|  | |  |
| OTH Ltd... on 16:57 - Jan 5 with 2095 views | bluenile |
| OTH Ltd... on 12:15 - Jan 5 by TheCobbler |
What's Up? |
You, sir, is what's up........................you are a cad and a bounder, and a spy to boot!! |  |
| Open the ipod bay doors Hal |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:00 - Jan 5 with 2075 views | TheCobbler |
| OTH Ltd... on 16:57 - Jan 5 by bluenile |
You, sir, is what's up........................you are a cad and a bounder, and a spy to boot!! |
Not At All! | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:06 - Jan 5 with 2044 views | londonlisa2001 |
| OTH Ltd... on 16:52 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
The deal definitely favoured LD and HJ, that's for sure. I'm sure we'd find that they both got contracts tying them in for 2 or 3 years on silly money, but most of us would have guessed that anyway.
They protected themselves first and, if I'm totally honest, I can understand why. At the time it looked like we could have gone down that season and their "once in a lifetime" financial dream with it. They had families to provide for and that money gave them both a huge amount of security for life. I'm sure they would have preferred to have sold to an oligarch or Saudi prince, but time was running out so they did the first deal that came their way. Once the Trust flushed that option down the pan, they had to ensure that NOBODY could scupper the deal for Yanks v2 and the only way to do that was to make sure nobody else knew.
Also, MM only sold about 6% of his shares so hardly a large sum for someone as wealthy as he is, but HUGE sums for LD and HJ (and especially considering it's paid out in dribs and drabs).
Finally, MM doesn't know I'm posting this on here (or even know about this thread probably as he's not often online) and I'm not going to tell him. I'm not posting on his behalf or at his request, but simply giving my opinion based on what I have seen first-hand over the past couple of years. |
"Also, MM only sold about 6% of his shares so hardly a large sum for someone as wealthy as he is, but HUGE sums for LD and HJ (and especially considering it's paid out in dribs and drabs). "
That's simply not true. | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:07 - Jan 5 with 2031 views | fbreath |
| OTH Ltd... on 16:52 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
The deal definitely favoured LD and HJ, that's for sure. I'm sure we'd find that they both got contracts tying them in for 2 or 3 years on silly money, but most of us would have guessed that anyway.
They protected themselves first and, if I'm totally honest, I can understand why. At the time it looked like we could have gone down that season and their "once in a lifetime" financial dream with it. They had families to provide for and that money gave them both a huge amount of security for life. I'm sure they would have preferred to have sold to an oligarch or Saudi prince, but time was running out so they did the first deal that came their way. Once the Trust flushed that option down the pan, they had to ensure that NOBODY could scupper the deal for Yanks v2 and the only way to do that was to make sure nobody else knew.
Also, MM only sold about 6% of his shares so hardly a large sum for someone as wealthy as he is, but HUGE sums for LD and HJ (and especially considering it's paid out in dribs and drabs).
Finally, MM doesn't know I'm posting this on here (or even know about this thread probably as he's not often online) and I'm not going to tell him. I'm not posting on his behalf or at his request, but simply giving my opinion based on what I have seen first-hand over the past couple of years. |
You forgot to add "onest guv" at the end |  |
| We are the first Welsh club to reach the Premier League Simples |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:34 - Jan 5 with 1955 views | bigbony |
| OTH Ltd... on 16:52 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
The deal definitely favoured LD and HJ, that's for sure. I'm sure we'd find that they both got contracts tying them in for 2 or 3 years on silly money, but most of us would have guessed that anyway.
They protected themselves first and, if I'm totally honest, I can understand why. At the time it looked like we could have gone down that season and their "once in a lifetime" financial dream with it. They had families to provide for and that money gave them both a huge amount of security for life. I'm sure they would have preferred to have sold to an oligarch or Saudi prince, but time was running out so they did the first deal that came their way. Once the Trust flushed that option down the pan, they had to ensure that NOBODY could scupper the deal for Yanks v2 and the only way to do that was to make sure nobody else knew.
Also, MM only sold about 6% of his shares so hardly a large sum for someone as wealthy as he is, but HUGE sums for LD and HJ (and especially considering it's paid out in dribs and drabs).
Finally, MM doesn't know I'm posting this on here (or even know about this thread probably as he's not often online) and I'm not going to tell him. I'm not posting on his behalf or at his request, but simply giving my opinion based on what I have seen first-hand over the past couple of years. |
This has got to be the ball boy son sticking up for daddy... | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:37 - Jan 5 with 1938 views | MoscowJack |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:06 - Jan 5 by londonlisa2001 |
"Also, MM only sold about 6% of his shares so hardly a large sum for someone as wealthy as he is, but HUGE sums for LD and HJ (and especially considering it's paid out in dribs and drabs). "
That's simply not true. |
Didn't the Morgans have 23%?
11.5% was sold by Mrs. M to the Yanks v2 when they approached her directly and Mr. M has 5% now.
11.5% - 5% = 6.5% sold by Mr. M.
I was only 0.5% out...... | |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:57 - Jan 5 with 1873 views | londonlisa2001 |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:37 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
Didn't the Morgans have 23%?
11.5% was sold by Mrs. M to the Yanks v2 when they approached her directly and Mr. M has 5% now.
11.5% - 5% = 6.5% sold by Mr. M.
I was only 0.5% out...... |
They had 22 or 23% between them, can't remember exactly.
The 5% is owned between them (have a look at those accounts if you don't believe me - same number of shares each in the company in question).
He also, of course, sold the voting rights for that 5% (or they did). | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| OTH Ltd... on 18:20 - Jan 5 with 1829 views | MoscowJack |
| OTH Ltd... on 17:57 - Jan 5 by londonlisa2001 |
They had 22 or 23% between them, can't remember exactly.
The 5% is owned between them (have a look at those accounts if you don't believe me - same number of shares each in the company in question).
He also, of course, sold the voting rights for that 5% (or they did). |
But you know they're divorced, right?
I don't know about the details of OTH Ltd or why the ex-Mrs. M is still a Director.....maybe they might have chosen to be listed as Directors on certain of each other's businesses for some accounting/tax reason that you could probably explain better than me. No idea, really.
All I know is that MM has 5% left in the club, not 2.5%.... | |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:22 - Jan 5 with 1818 views | waynekerr55 |
| OTH Ltd... on 16:52 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
The deal definitely favoured LD and HJ, that's for sure. I'm sure we'd find that they both got contracts tying them in for 2 or 3 years on silly money, but most of us would have guessed that anyway.
They protected themselves first and, if I'm totally honest, I can understand why. At the time it looked like we could have gone down that season and their "once in a lifetime" financial dream with it. They had families to provide for and that money gave them both a huge amount of security for life. I'm sure they would have preferred to have sold to an oligarch or Saudi prince, but time was running out so they did the first deal that came their way. Once the Trust flushed that option down the pan, they had to ensure that NOBODY could scupper the deal for Yanks v2 and the only way to do that was to make sure nobody else knew.
Also, MM only sold about 6% of his shares so hardly a large sum for someone as wealthy as he is, but HUGE sums for LD and HJ (and especially considering it's paid out in dribs and drabs).
Finally, MM doesn't know I'm posting this on here (or even know about this thread probably as he's not often online) and I'm not going to tell him. I'm not posting on his behalf or at his request, but simply giving my opinion based on what I have seen first-hand over the past couple of years. |
I appreciate that Mr MJ however they were hardly on the breadline, they gave themselves 100% pay rises in the year the accounts were fúcked. 250k per year in Swansea, fúck my eyes if you couldn't live off that (550k in Huws case) then you want shooting |  |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:23 - Jan 5 with 1811 views | londonlisa2001 |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:20 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
But you know they're divorced, right?
I don't know about the details of OTH Ltd or why the ex-Mrs. M is still a Director.....maybe they might have chosen to be listed as Directors on certain of each other's businesses for some accounting/tax reason that you could probably explain better than me. No idea, really.
All I know is that MM has 5% left in the club, not 2.5%.... |
Yep.
I also know that the company which owns the shares in the Swans is the company they both own equal shares in and are both directors of. Unless they've transferred the shares and not reported it properly to companies house of course... | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:30 - Jan 5 with 1769 views | londonlisa2001 |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:23 - Jan 5 by londonlisa2001 |
Yep.
I also know that the company which owns the shares in the Swans is the company they both own equal shares in and are both directors of. Unless they've transferred the shares and not reported it properly to companies house of course... |
Btw - should have added.
Sorry, the reason I can see this (I should have said) is that the Swans (2002 company) filed a confirmation statement in October 16 stating who owns what shares.
It shows MM and LM owning the same number.
In October 17 a statement was filed stating no information had changed. | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:38 - Jan 5 with 1747 views | Nookiejack |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:20 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
But you know they're divorced, right?
I don't know about the details of OTH Ltd or why the ex-Mrs. M is still a Director.....maybe they might have chosen to be listed as Directors on certain of each other's businesses for some accounting/tax reason that you could probably explain better than me. No idea, really.
All I know is that MM has 5% left in the club, not 2.5%.... |
Nick
I agree with Lisa from attached Companies House - Martin Morgan and Louisa Morgan both individually hold 23,750 shares each. Which is equivalent to 2.5% holding each (23,750 / 750,000)
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-prod/docs/kCL-rd4roOOWBeO | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:41 - Jan 5 with 1735 views | harryhpalmer |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:22 - Jan 5 by waynekerr55 |
I appreciate that Mr MJ however they were hardly on the breadline, they gave themselves 100% pay rises in the year the accounts were fúcked. 250k per year in Swansea, fúck my eyes if you couldn't live off that (550k in Huws case) then you want shooting |
he has quite a bit of alimony to dish out and his current squeeze has recently retired, so needs to keep her happy! | |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:43 - Jan 5 with 1731 views | Nookiejack |
| OTH Ltd... on 11:54 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
I wouldn't say big mates but I know him well enough. I haven't denied that.
What I've seen, first hand and at the time of the sale announcement, makes me convinced that he and BK had been totally kept in the dark. Of course he and others (including the Trust) knew that HJ & LD were talking to Yanks2, but none of them knew that a deal had been signed in Dec 2015 until about the same time the Trust did in March 2016....but I know others prefer not to believe that. That's their prerogative, I suppose, but at the same time they claim their own 'insiders' from the Trust didn't have a clue about it.
Why else would MM & BK have been so interested in pursuing the Chinese option so strongly in Jan, Feb and March 2016? Why else would MM have been so angry that he met certain Trust Board members, soon after the deal leaked at the end of March? From travelling to almost all away games together, they have almost never travelled together to a game since that announcement was made.
We've seen so many examples of HJ being incredibly devious recently, yet people can't believe HJ did this without most of the Board knowing?
It's not as if it changes anything either, does it? MM still didn't veto the deal when he possibly or probably could have....so all that it changes is whether this was HJ & LD's deal. |
Nick,
When you saw the Head of Terms - which parties were outlined in them? | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:01 - Jan 5 with 1691 views | Nookiejack |
Nick,
Do you know whether Martin's company JAXX Bay Ltd (redeveloping the training grounds) and Morgan's Hotel (Functions etc )made profits from their dealings with the club? | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:11 - Jan 5 with 1668 views | MoscowJack |
| OTH Ltd... on 18:43 - Jan 5 by Nookiejack |
Nick,
When you saw the Head of Terms - which parties were outlined in them? |
I've only seen the bits that have been posted online, mainly on here.
My guess (and that's all it is) is that all of the selling shareholders were listed in that agreement, but only two (possibly three) knew that it existed at the time. | |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:18 - Jan 5 with 1639 views | MoscowJack |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:01 - Jan 5 by Nookiejack |
Nick,
Do you know whether Martin's company JAXX Bay Ltd (redeveloping the training grounds) and Morgan's Hotel (Functions etc )made profits from their dealings with the club? |
I have asked MM this before as I've read all the accusations. He told me that when the tender went out his price was cost plus either 5% or 10% (I can't remember which) and also the option to start-stop the projects based on cash flow.
As other bidders were probably coming from further afield, they wouldn't have been able to offer either the same prices or flexible terms (in regards to the stop-start thingy!).
Personally, even if all bids had been equal, I'd much rather a local business and local contractors be employed, rather than seeing teams of builders coming down from Manchester and Swansea to build our facilities.
I have NO idea whether it's all true or not....but that's what I was told. I'm not sure if the Trust have asked the club how all of the tenders were conducted but I presume they have as there were rumours around a while ago.
Do I believe what I was told? Yes. Is it possible that he made more than that? Also yes. | |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:24 - Jan 5 with 1626 views | MattG |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:18 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
I have asked MM this before as I've read all the accusations. He told me that when the tender went out his price was cost plus either 5% or 10% (I can't remember which) and also the option to start-stop the projects based on cash flow.
As other bidders were probably coming from further afield, they wouldn't have been able to offer either the same prices or flexible terms (in regards to the stop-start thingy!).
Personally, even if all bids had been equal, I'd much rather a local business and local contractors be employed, rather than seeing teams of builders coming down from Manchester and Swansea to build our facilities.
I have NO idea whether it's all true or not....but that's what I was told. I'm not sure if the Trust have asked the club how all of the tenders were conducted but I presume they have as there were rumours around a while ago.
Do I believe what I was told? Yes. Is it possible that he made more than that? Also yes. |
Define "cost". Depending on how you do that, you could be looking at a guaranteed 10% clear profit which is pretty damn good in the construction game. Being paid on a "cost plus" basis also meant that he was at no risk for delays or if additional resources were needed to complete by a certain date.
It would be interesting to know what basis the tenders were sent out on. |  | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:29 - Jan 5 with 1609 views | MoscowJack |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:24 - Jan 5 by MattG |
Define "cost". Depending on how you do that, you could be looking at a guaranteed 10% clear profit which is pretty damn good in the construction game. Being paid on a "cost plus" basis also meant that he was at no risk for delays or if additional resources were needed to complete by a certain date.
It would be interesting to know what basis the tenders were sent out on. |
Matt, I have absolutely no idea but I'm sure the Trust could raise the question and ask for more details, if it hasn't already been asked.
You see the "cost + 5 or 10%" as a negative but I thought that was a good deal for the club. Saying that, I've never constructed more than a lego set with my godson so I'm probably wrong. | |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:30 - Jan 5 with 1604 views | Neath_Jack |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:24 - Jan 5 by MattG |
Define "cost". Depending on how you do that, you could be looking at a guaranteed 10% clear profit which is pretty damn good in the construction game. Being paid on a "cost plus" basis also meant that he was at no risk for delays or if additional resources were needed to complete by a certain date.
It would be interesting to know what basis the tenders were sent out on. |
It is good to get cost plus 10%, but not that unusual.
It should be noted, that another local civil engineering company carried out the asbestos removal and initial refurbishment of the existing Fairwood facilities, not Morgan's mob. |  |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:32 - Jan 5 with 1599 views | MattG |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:29 - Jan 5 by MoscowJack |
Matt, I have absolutely no idea but I'm sure the Trust could raise the question and ask for more details, if it hasn't already been asked.
You see the "cost + 5 or 10%" as a negative but I thought that was a good deal for the club. Saying that, I've never constructed more than a lego set with my godson so I'm probably wrong. |
Put it this way, there's not many contractors out there who would turn down the chance to work on a "cost plus" basis. Compare the ability to recover all of your costs plus a healthy (even at 5%) chunk of profit with the risk of giving a fixed price for a job and then carrying all the risks of delays, cost increases, additional resources, etc. No brainer. | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:34 - Jan 5 with 1585 views | Neath_Jack |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:24 - Jan 5 by MattG |
Define "cost". Depending on how you do that, you could be looking at a guaranteed 10% clear profit which is pretty damn good in the construction game. Being paid on a "cost plus" basis also meant that he was at no risk for delays or if additional resources were needed to complete by a certain date.
It would be interesting to know what basis the tenders were sent out on. |
You could have found all that out when you were on the Trust board Matt.
Also, nobody answered me the other day, how much has been raised by your protest group so far? | |
| |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:38 - Jan 5 with 1571 views | MattG |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:34 - Jan 5 by Neath_Jack |
You could have found all that out when you were on the Trust board Matt.
Also, nobody answered me the other day, how much has been raised by your protest group so far? |
It wasn't really a topic of conversation at the time but you are right, I could have asked the question.
On your question, I don't know but I'll ask. | | | |
| OTH Ltd... on 19:51 - Jan 5 with 1550 views | jacktheripper |
I find it unbelievable that MM and BK were forced into a sale which was against there wishes. I know MM has bleated to anyone who would listen to him that he wanted to talk to the Chinese but big nose wouldn't have any of it |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
