| Trust Update... 20:34 - May 18 with 27867 views | marchamjack |
CONFIDENTIAL
This update is being sent to you as a registered member of Swansea City Supporters’ Society Limited, which is also known as the ‘Swansea City Supporters’ Trust’ (‘Trust’). If you are not a member of the Trust, please do not read it. If you are a member, please do not share it or pass it on to others. On the advice of our lawyers, we need to state that nothing in this update is, or is intended as, a waiver of legal professional privilege or any other type of privilege.
In January 2018 the majority owners of Swansea City decided to ‘put on hold’ indefinitely the ongoing discussions on the previously proposed deal relating to the part sale of the Trust’s shareholding in Swansea City Football 2002 Limited, which (through another company) owns the Football Club. With no indication as to whether the deal could be resurrected in the future, the Trust engaged further specialist legal advice in order to determine the next steps that could be taken to best protect the interests of the Trust and, therefore, our members. It will be recalled that we have previously reported that initial advice from Queen’s Counsel (a senior lawyer) was taken last year.
As a result, the Trust and our legal advisers have carried out a comprehensive review of the circumstances surrounding the 2016 sale of a controlling interest in the Club and the impact of these events on the Trust and our shareholding. This involved going back to 2001/2002, when the Club was saved from bankruptcy by the Trust and others, and establishing the relevant factual history and developments from then until the present day. Many people and sources had to be consulted to achieve this and the exercise has only been completed within the last few days.
Our lawyers have today sent (by electronic means or post) to the Club and its shareholders a detailed letter, setting out a number of legal claims on the part of the Trust, including complaints as to the very negative impact the sale and related matters have had on the Trust’s position as a shareholder. The letter and its schedules extend to some 60 pages.
On advice from our lawyers, and in accordance with Court guidelines, the Trust has offered to enter into a formal ‘mediation’ process with the majority owners and others, in order to seek to resolve these claims and complaints. The aim is to seek a provisional agreement to settle past differences, with a view to moving ahead together with the task of rebuilding the Club and returning it to top level football. Any such provisional agreement would be put to members for approval, by way of a consultation.
Mediation is a voluntary and confidential process in which relevant parties seek to resolve disputes with the assistance of a trained independent and impartial mediator. The mediator cannot impose a solution, but uses his or her skills to bring the parties together. The letter that has been sent proposes that mediation takes place in early July, to allow time for responses to be provided to the letter. While it is a voluntary process, mediation is increasingly being seen by courts as a necessary first step before any formal court proceedings are taken and costs sanctions can be applied for unreasonably failing to mediate. The Trust is duty bound to explore all available legal avenues to protect the interests of the Trust and our members. If mediation were refused or the process proved unsuccessful, and if Trust members support such action, future court proceedings are possible.
If a potential resolution is achieved via the mediation process, it will be set out in a binding, written settlement agreement. However, we can assure our members that any agreement will not be finalised unless it is approved by Trust members as part of a formal consultation exercise.
Members should be aware, however, that if the offer of formal mediation is accepted, that it is a confidential process. This means that the Trust Board will be limited in what we are able to report during the mediation process, unless or until a provisional agreement is reached (or alternative options are identified) on which members can be consulted.
We will update members as soon as we are able to provide further information.
Best wishes
The Swans Trust Team
|  |
| Oh,..Dave, what's occuring? |
| |  |
| Trust Update... on 21:20 - May 18 with 1974 views | Jackfath |
With the upcoming elections for the trust board, can anyone tell me which members of the current board are up for this fight, and which aren't? Who was pro action and who was against? |  |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:21 - May 18 with 1976 views | PozuelosSideys |
| Trust Update... on 21:17 - May 18 by Phil_S |
I dont believe it can no but I wouldn't 100% swear to it |
Cheers
In an ideal world the Trust would win any legal action and take a part cash/part shares compensation. Increase overall shareholding up to 30/40% in a Championship club and have cash as well. De-risks for the Americans a little as well if we dont go straight back up |  |
| "Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper." | | Poll: | Hattricks |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:25 - May 18 with 1907 views | Phil_S |
I cant find the figures Andy but it would have been in the consultation papers last summer |  | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:25 - May 18 with 1906 views | SwansNZ |
| Trust Update... on 21:20 - May 18 by Jackfath |
With the upcoming elections for the trust board, can anyone tell me which members of the current board are up for this fight, and which aren't? Who was pro action and who was against? |
They won’t say what they stand for, but we’ll know who can speak Welsh, so that’s a great help. |  |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:26 - May 18 with 1898 views | Phil_S |
| Trust Update... on 21:20 - May 18 by pencoedjack |
I’m no expert but I’d imagine legal action would wipe that out ( although I want legal action) |
Quite easily but hopefully the mediation stage will provide the right result | | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:26 - May 18 with 1887 views | jack2jack |
| Trust Update... on 21:20 - May 18 by pencoedjack |
I’m no expert but I’d imagine legal action would wipe that out ( although I want legal action) |
It will become clear after mediation whether or not it's going to be worth it,surely. |  | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:27 - May 18 with 1878 views | max936 |
| Trust Update... on 21:14 - May 18 by Jackfath |
Indeed.
We have to go with this though. Perhaps, just perhaps there is light at the end of the tunnel.
Softly, softly, catchee monkey |
I've read it again and the other posts on here which explain it better than my original thoughts, unless its just me negative thoughts towards the Trust which in fairness is understandable.
On whole its a positive step, what owners will make of it is what matters though. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust Update... on 21:29 - May 18 with 1850 views | Phil_S |
| Trust Update... on 21:27 - May 18 by max936 |
I've read it again and the other posts on here which explain it better than my original thoughts, unless its just me negative thoughts towards the Trust which in fairness is understandable.
On whole its a positive step, what owners will make of it is what matters though. |
Sounds a huge piece of work in so much as it runs to 60 pages and I suspect will include claims against all parties - buyers and sellers alike | | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:31 - May 18 with 1813 views | Shaky |
| Trust Update... on 21:01 - May 18 by Phil_S |
The legal action is over the sale.
If the result is that the yanks must buy then it will have to be at the par value of 2016 |
You mean the market value.
Don't use words and terms you don't understand |  |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:33 - May 18 with 1780 views | Banosswan |
| Trust Update... on 21:31 - May 18 by Shaky |
You mean the market value.
Don't use words and terms you don't understand |
Irony alert |  |
| Ever since my son was... never conceived, because I've never had consensual sex without money involved... I've always kind of looked at you as... a thing, that I could live next to... in accordance with state laws. | | Poll: | How do you like your steak? |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:34 - May 18 with 1762 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
| Trust Update... on 21:27 - May 18 by max936 |
I've read it again and the other posts on here which explain it better than my original thoughts, unless its just me negative thoughts towards the Trust which in fairness is understandable.
On whole its a positive step, what owners will make of it is what matters though. |
Mmmmm.......a failing asset, a potential legal case with a possible large bill at the end.
I think I may be looking at my options, if I could move on I'd be tempted. That may mean some short term pain for us all. |  |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:36 - May 18 with 1743 views | Shaky |
| Trust Update... on 21:29 - May 18 by Phil_S |
Sounds a huge piece of work in so much as it runs to 60 pages and I suspect will include claims against all parties - buyers and sellers alike |
I agree with that.
They are throwing the kitchen sink at this which is only good news for the lawyers' billings.
Much smarter to have kept this manageable and confined to clearly defined issues, that are irrelevant to the crux of the matter; can the Trust force a sale of their shares? | |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:36 - May 18 with 1743 views | TheKirkyLife |
And so the Trust became totally and utterly pointless. |  | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:36 - May 18 with 1730 views | Shaky |
| Trust Update... on 21:33 - May 18 by Banosswan |
Irony alert |
Moron. | |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:37 - May 18 with 1727 views | jack2jack |
| Trust Update... on 21:31 - May 18 by Shaky |
You mean the market value.
Don't use words and terms you don't understand |
Sorry I thought this was all about the sale, and how it was handled  | | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:38 - May 18 with 1713 views | NeathJack |
| Trust Update... on 21:20 - May 18 by Jackfath |
With the upcoming elections for the trust board, can anyone tell me which members of the current board are up for this fight, and which aren't? Who was pro action and who was against? |
Can't up arrow this enough. |  | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:40 - May 18 with 1663 views | max936 |
| Trust Update... on 21:34 - May 18 by JACKMANANDBOY |
Mmmmm.......a failing asset, a potential legal case with a possible large bill at the end.
I think I may be looking at my options, if I could move on I'd be tempted. That may mean some short term pain for us all. |
Well, on reading the posts above from people with a greater knowledge than myself, it would seem that any purchase would be at the share price that they were originally sold at to the Yanks. | |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:40 - May 18 with 1663 views | Banosswan |
| Trust Update... on 21:36 - May 18 by Shaky |
Moron. |
Yup. At least i know the fact. | |
| Ever since my son was... never conceived, because I've never had consensual sex without money involved... I've always kind of looked at you as... a thing, that I could live next to... in accordance with state laws. | | Poll: | How do you like your steak? |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:40 - May 18 with 1658 views | jacksfullaces |
well it's definitely an us and them situation now, and all the sellers are with the them.
the saviours of swansea are likely to be more hated than petty as this runs on.
oh the irony, does that make everyone associated with jack to a king a 'them'? |  | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:42 - May 18 with 1631 views | Garyjack |
CONFIDENTIAL
This update is being sent to you as a registered member of Swansea City Supporters’ Society Limited, which is also known as the ‘Swansea City Supporters’ Trust’ (‘Trust’). If you are not a member of the Trust, please do not read it. If you are a member, please do not share it or pass it on to others. On the advice of our lawyers, we need to state that nothing in this update is, or is intended as, a waiver of legal professional privilege or any other type of privilege.
I've obviously had a massive 'naive moment' as i genuinely thought Marcham had added that first paragraph as a joke!  |  | | |
| Trust Update... on 21:44 - May 18 with 1612 views | Shaky |
| Trust Update... on 21:36 - May 18 by Shaky |
I agree with that.
They are throwing the kitchen sink at this which is only good news for the lawyers' billings.
Much smarter to have kept this manageable and confined to clearly defined issues, that are irrelevant to the crux of the matter; can the Trust force a sale of their shares? |
In fact thinking a bit more about it what this is is a bit of theatre that:
* Delays the day in court
* Gives Kaplan the maximum amount of time to dream up new ways to fob off the Trust
* Panders to supporters who want Jenkins et all crucified for every little error of omission and misdemeanour under the sun | |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:44 - May 18 with 1604 views | Banosswan |
| Trust Update... on 21:42 - May 18 by Garyjack |
CONFIDENTIAL
This update is being sent to you as a registered member of Swansea City Supporters’ Society Limited, which is also known as the ‘Swansea City Supporters’ Trust’ (‘Trust’). If you are not a member of the Trust, please do not read it. If you are a member, please do not share it or pass it on to others. On the advice of our lawyers, we need to state that nothing in this update is, or is intended as, a waiver of legal professional privilege or any other type of privilege.
I've obviously had a massive 'naive moment' as i genuinely thought Marcham had added that first paragraph as a joke! |
I was reading it thinking it must've been a template from some other sarcastic post. | |
| Ever since my son was... never conceived, because I've never had consensual sex without money involved... I've always kind of looked at you as... a thing, that I could live next to... in accordance with state laws. | | Poll: | How do you like your steak? |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:45 - May 18 with 1590 views | Shaky |
| Trust Update... on 21:40 - May 18 by Banosswan |
Yup. At least i know the fact. |
I'm sure when you thought of that comeback it sounded really, really clever. | |
| |
| Trust Update... on 21:47 - May 18 with 1563 views | max936 |
| Trust Update... on 21:40 - May 18 by jacksfullaces |
well it's definitely an us and them situation now, and all the sellers are with the them.
the saviours of swansea are likely to be more hated than petty as this runs on.
oh the irony, does that make everyone associated with jack to a king a 'them'? |
Well, seeing on how things turned out, you can see why the people who did more to see off Petty were omitted from Jack to a King, so that it focused more on the sellout crew with a clear end game all planned out. Conniving and clever. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
