| Trust Chairman’s Update 19:13 - Sep 5 with 12801 views | Darran |
‘It has been almost three weeks since the last update I provided to our members about events at Swans Trust, at what is a critical time for both the Trust and the Club.
I have some key updates for you around the mediation process that we announced in May and the questions we have asked the football club around the decisions taken over the last few months.
Let me start with an update about the mediation process. In May, we informed our members that we had attempted to engage with the majority owners of Swansea City and other parties (including Huw Jenkins and Martin Morgan) through a formal mediation process, beginning with a claim letter that set out the Trust’s legal case in detail and proposed a mediation. 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.
Our aim was, and remains, to seek an agreement to settle past differences, subject to members’ approval, with a view to moving ahead together with the task of rebuilding the club and returning it to top level football.
The Trust entered this process in good faith, attempting to resolve all issues without the need for formal court proceedings. Unfortunately, the legal representatives of the majority owners initially refused our offer to mediate, questioning whether it was genuine, and bizarrely accused the Trust of trying to harm the Club.
An initial ’Without Prejudice’ meeting was held with Huw Jenkins and Martin Morgan in early June, however there has been no follow up meeting with them or their lawyers, although the Trust was open to the possibility.
The courts have a ‘Practice Direction’, which sets out the guidelines which parties in dispute should follow before they start court proceedings. This includes trying to reach agreement by means such as mediation. The Practice Direction outlines a maximum timeline within which the relevant parties should provide a full written response to the Trust’s claim. The Trust and its legal representatives have provided every opportunity for this to be met, even allowing the maximum possible timeline which is usually reserved for more complex cases than this. Unfortunately, this deadline passed on 20thAugust without a response being received, either from the majority owners or the others.
Since the deadline passed, things have progressed a little. Our legal team were contacted by the legal representatives of the majority owners and, as a result, we are currently in discussions to arrange a meeting between the Trust, the majority owners and other parties within the next few weeks.
As a Trust, we must continue to protect our legal position. As part of the mediation process, the Trust requested access to various pieces of documentation relating to the 2016 sale.These documents have not yet been received. On the advice of our legal team, the Trust board has instructed our lawyers to initiate legal action to obtain access to these documents, unless they are provided within a further 7 days. This is a limited legal action specifically to obtain access to these documents. It is not the same as undertaking legal action relating to the sale itself and its impact on the Trust’s shareholding. We hope those issues can still be resolved as part of the discussions that are scheduled to take place in the next few weeks. However, these documents are important so that the Trust can best advise its members on the next course of action to take, which could mean undertaking legal action relating to the 2016 sale and its impact on the Trust’s position.
I can assure you that we will investigate every option available to us to ensure that we get the right result for the Trust, whichwill only be concluded following a full consultation and ballot of our members. We will, of course, continue to keep you updated as things progress.
As representatives of the fans, it is key that we understand the reasons for decisions made by the Club and gain assurances on the financial management of the Club. In my last update, I said that the Trust had sent a comprehensive list of questions to the majority owners of the Club, to obtain some clarity on the club’s financial position after this summer, understand the reasons for why decisions were made as well as seeking to ensure that the decisions taken are in the best interests of the Club. Many of these questions related to our transfer dealings this summer, but we also sought clarity on our financial obligations in the future, such as the salaries of senior employees. We know that relegation to the Championship means that we will receive considerably less revenue than previously, and we need to cut our cloth accordingly, but without visibility on the current situation we cannot say if the decisions taken were in the Club’s best interests.
The majority owners have responded to our requests and offered to meet with Stuart MacDonald, our Supporter Director, to answer our questions and provide those assurances. That was a positive step. However, the club havealso insisted that before any meeting takes place that an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) was signed by Stuart. This NDA would have prevented Stuart releasing key information into the public domain but, crucially, also stopped him from providing any information to the Trust board. This is unacceptable as it would mean that the Trust board could not gain the reassurances that we needed, plus puts our Supporter Director in an impossible position.
We have advised the majority owners that our Supporter Director will not be signing this document and we are deeply disappointed and angry that it was suggested he should sign in the first place given both Stuart’s position as a Director of the Club (which already brings with it fiduciary duties regarding confidential information being made public) but also our position as a 21% shareholder and representative of the fans. We will continue to push for these answers but not being able to provide them at this time is very disappointing.
Furthermore, the request to sign an NDA arrived just 48 hours after some key commercial information relating to the club was released via a private message exchange on Twitter by a current employee (and former shareholder) with a young supporter, which later entered the public domain. Whilst we welcome all levels of fan engagement by members of the Club’s hierarchy, it is completely inappropriate that the Supporter Director is asked to withhold information from the Trust board whilst others release this information to anyone who asks. Not for the first time, we have expressed our strong opinion that Leigh Dineen’s continued employment at the football club is inappropriate, not least due to his unprofessionalism in this matter.
On a separate note we were pleased to play a part in the competitive pricing for the Carabao Cup tie against Crystal Palace and we commend the club for listening to our viewpoints on this matter. While the result did not go our way, there were some promising debuts for some of our younger players which was pleasing to see.
I would also like to applaud the excellent efforts of Graham Potter, the coaching staff and the playing squad in performing so well at the start of this season. There has also been an obvious change in footballing philosophy on the pitch and this has made watching the Swans a much more enjoyable experience than in recent times.
This is a critical time for this organisation, and the Club as a whole. The Trust is only as strong as its membership and, in the coming weeks, we will be seeking to increase our membership base to provide as strong a voice for the fans as possible. We would welcome your help in getting the message out to fans about the importance of joining and the need for a strong Supporters Trust, especially at this time.
I would like to thank everyone who has joined us this evening and for all members who have already joined for this year. We will now open for any questions’ [Post edited 5 Sep 2018 19:17]
|  |
| |  |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:31 - Sep 6 with 1498 views | peenemunde |
The statement states that the trust are “representatives of the fans”, ummm no you are not.
The trust represents the trust and it’s members and therefore should not claim to represent the fans, as the vast majority of Swansea fans have nothing to do with the trust. |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:32 - Sep 6 with 1506 views | waynekerr55 |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 23:35 - Sep 5 by _ |
Nobody on the Trust Board has been in a position to finance and head up a multi million pound company.
Your experience doesn't come close to theirs.
We want something they have. You change. |
Dai little- senior partner in a law firm in Russell square
Lisa - chartered accountant at blue chip firms
The fella who works high up in shell
Quite significant corporate experience there |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:40 - Sep 6 with 1498 views | waynekerr55 |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 23:11 - Sep 5 by IAN05 |
You only need anyone of the Jenkins/Morgan surname within distance to realise that. The same family links will happily tell you anything that know, especially their real views on American owners. |
Ironic, given those twà ts sold up to them | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:50 - Sep 6 with 1474 views | marchamjack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:11 - Sep 6 by Phil_S |
Easily confirmed as not true.
It's interesting how these get reports and interpreted which is exactly the point I made to the room tonight why we release these on the night of a forum to allow people to ask questions.
The two issues discussed
* Mediation/legal
* Getting the answers to key financial questions
Are completely separate. Mediation/legal continues despite their request to meet. This could easily b a delaying tactic (and likely many will say that it is) so we carry o with the strategy not sit and wait for that meeting to take place and then start again.
The key financial questions remain just that and we are going back with a suggestion as to what level of NDA we (as an organisation) may be prepared to accept. I have no issue with not being able to release commercially sensitive information into the public but when presented with a document that essentially says that Stuart can be given it but he cannot tell anyone he has seen it nor that he is happy with it then it is massive over restrictive.
Will mediation work? I have my own personal opinion on that but we have a clear legal process that is being followed and the consultation that this process will involve will not be a million miles off now. Nobody is being walked over, this is a completely different board to the last one I chaired and it is active in what we are doing. And the key is we are doing it right no matter how frustrating it can seem at times.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Cheers for all the updates Phil.
And whatever certain posters on here will say...it is abundantly cleat that the new Trust Board are not as passive as the previous Board you chaired. Thank Christ for that btw. And glad that fellow Members who voted, have voted in a more challenging, seeming pro-legal action body. Anyone suggesting otherwise is spectacularly misreading what's evidently going on.
One concern to air on here - reading the Members only fb page (which is still something I genuinely fail to see the benefit of) since last night, it's clear that there's a number of our Members who just don't get the whole disregard the Yanks have for the Trust and are openly stating they won't vote for legal action/share sale (which is their right...but Jesus...). As laudable as this all is sharing with the non Trust Members, and which I fully endorse, the Trust Board have got a real job on their hands to explain/sell the legal action route to the Members (as whatever views are aired on here by non Members) ultimately, probably less than a 1000 of us (who will bother to vote) will decide whether the Trust pulls the trigger or not.
Phil - there's a hell of lot of work you and the Board need to do to convey this to fellow Members in the first place, before worrying about the views on this forum (as much as the matter needs sharing/airing). I genuinely fear the Trust is not getting this over to the Membership. I don't know the answer here, but I will say as an observation, the drip of information is too infrequent (so loses momentum and fuels doubt) and the legal action agenda route needs pushing more. Because let's not beat about the bush, that's the direction the Board are currently directing things. Good. Members who don't like that can vote against or vote the current Board out, but this needs a push to the Members. |  |
| Oh,..Dave, what's occuring? |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 07:52 - Sep 6 with 1358 views | TheResurrection |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 23:46 - Sep 5 by Uxbridge |
The Trust has changed.
There are also people in the Trust far more experienced in the realities of our football club than a couple of hedge fund managers. We could play that game all day. Well not now as I'm off to bed.
I'll make one final point before I go. The goals of the Trust and the Americans could easily align. The fact the relationship has been as fraught as it has been is due to the lack of engagement from one side. That's on them, pure and simple. Disagree all you want, but a lot of this could have been easily avoidable. |
To engage you've got to be engaging.
That shouldn't be a difficult concept to realise.
The way you go about things, at least from the outside looking in, is slow, ponderous, gentle and passive. This allows them the pass they all too often take and as usual, develops these pathetic stand offs that you lot love to go public with at these fans forums.
Jesus......
We've been hear 30 times before. |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 07:58 - Sep 6 with 1361 views | Zaxx |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:32 - Sep 6 by waynekerr55 |
Dai little- senior partner in a law firm in Russell square
Lisa - chartered accountant at blue chip firms
The fella who works high up in shell
Quite significant corporate experience there |
Yeah, but don't let facts get in the way of a good story.... |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:07 - Sep 6 with 1337 views | Uxbridge |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 07:52 - Sep 6 by TheResurrection |
To engage you've got to be engaging.
That shouldn't be a difficult concept to realise.
The way you go about things, at least from the outside looking in, is slow, ponderous, gentle and passive. This allows them the pass they all too often take and as usual, develops these pathetic stand offs that you lot love to go public with at these fans forums.
Jesus......
We've been hear 30 times before. |
Blimey, you don't have make it look like you'll defend them under any circumstances, even if it isn't the case.
You'll never get an argument from me that the Trust needs to be more agile publicly. That's started to happen. As those in attendance last night will know, there are often legal reasons why statements come out at the times they do. Need to balance the two. Don't have to like it, but that's the reality. |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:20 - Sep 6 with 1305 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 23:15 - Sep 5 by EasternJack |
Good to hear. Don’t you think the trust are being hypocritical and borderline schizophrenic with this current change of tack? It may explain the way they’re now being treated by the owners? I don’t agree with their tactics, but I understand why the owners may not trust the trust.
Add to that, the trust are still tiptoeing around the issue. Why entertain any discussion (that have strings attached) when they’ve already followed due process and waited the required time?
They’re entitled to this information and have adequate controls in place around non disclosure. Phil’s statement suggests that they’ve paused the legal route to obtain this data. Would be good to confirm if that is not true. |
That’s not true. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:20 - Sep 6 with 1280 views | TheResurrection |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:32 - Sep 6 by waynekerr55 |
Dai little- senior partner in a law firm in Russell square
Lisa - chartered accountant at blue chip firms
The fella who works high up in shell
Quite significant corporate experience there |
You'll have to remind me where they pumped millions into a sports club, or two, and managed and directed them. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:28 - Sep 6 with 1251 views | TheResurrection |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:32 - Sep 6 by waynekerr55 |
Dai little- senior partner in a law firm in Russell square
Lisa - chartered accountant at blue chip firms
The fella who works high up in shell
Quite significant corporate experience there |
And anyway, 2 of those don't even sit on the Board | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:47 - Sep 6 with 1206 views | TheResurrection |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:07 - Sep 6 by Uxbridge |
Blimey, you don't have make it look like you'll defend them under any circumstances, even if it isn't the case.
You'll never get an argument from me that the Trust needs to be more agile publicly. That's started to happen. As those in attendance last night will know, there are often legal reasons why statements come out at the times they do. Need to balance the two. Don't have to like it, but that's the reality. |
This isn't about defending them, this is me pissed off and saddened that after a bright start to a season twice this week we've had to put up with the off the field stuff overshadowing a truly great result.
People talk about Potter walking because of not being supported. That won't happen, but this constant malaise that all too easily seeps through to match days could easily see him get fed up.
I think it's time you tried a different Supporters Director. I think it's time you took your hard medicine and make that tough call
We'll know then whether a different face and voice and energy in the club Boardroom will see us engaged more.
That has been the most obvious call for years now, yet NOTHING CHANGES. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:10 - Sep 6 with 1170 views | vetchonian |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:47 - Sep 6 by TheResurrection |
This isn't about defending them, this is me pissed off and saddened that after a bright start to a season twice this week we've had to put up with the off the field stuff overshadowing a truly great result.
People talk about Potter walking because of not being supported. That won't happen, but this constant malaise that all too easily seeps through to match days could easily see him get fed up.
I think it's time you tried a different Supporters Director. I think it's time you took your hard medicine and make that tough call
We'll know then whether a different face and voice and energy in the club Boardroom will see us engaged more.
That has been the most obvious call for years now, yet NOTHING CHANGES. |
Tell us then Chris how does changing the SD get the Yanks to engage more?
YOu are continuing to show how thick you are and so pro the owners it has been said so many times tonight Steve and JAson do not engage.
They will not answer questions and are demanding what amounts to a gagging order if any info is shared withthe SD
FFS stop beating tup the trust start seeing where the issues are get your head out of Huws backside and throw back your 30 pieces of silver |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:15 - Sep 6 with 1165 views | MoscowJack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:47 - Sep 6 by TheResurrection |
This isn't about defending them, this is me pissed off and saddened that after a bright start to a season twice this week we've had to put up with the off the field stuff overshadowing a truly great result.
People talk about Potter walking because of not being supported. That won't happen, but this constant malaise that all too easily seeps through to match days could easily see him get fed up.
I think it's time you tried a different Supporters Director. I think it's time you took your hard medicine and make that tough call
We'll know then whether a different face and voice and energy in the club Boardroom will see us engaged more.
That has been the most obvious call for years now, yet NOTHING CHANGES. |
I think we've given Jenkins and the Yanks the benefit of doubt for a long time now but now time has run out. Leaving a squad as thin as they ground as they possibly could and leaving us with little hope that this will be improved upon in January (in fact, the opposite has happened) is just the tip of the iceberg for me.
I also think you've got it the wrong way around - I think Potter's more likely to move to a decent club if he feels that he's not being backed by the Board (and that it's likely to get worse) but there's a CHANCE of his feeling slightly connected to the club if he knows the fans have got his back. Having the fans onside is a huge plus for a manager....just look at Rafa at Newcastle.
Re. Stu - I don't know him very well at all, but from everything I've heard about him, he's extremely qualified for the role and isn't frightened of asking the hard questions. Whether they're answered or not is out of his control. Unlike you and I, he also has a bit of patience and doesn't seem to want the 'bull in a china shop" approach, until it's absolutely necessary. I actually respect people who have such control and patience, as well as the experience/knowledge to be able to read between the faint lines that the Yanks are drawing. My only gripe has been the ridiculous silence coming from his direction which I simply don't understand or accept. I'd rather him in that role that someone like you or me who'd be loud and tough but probably achieve a hell of a lot less. That's just my opinion, of course.
The way I see it is this is Trust 2.0 in many ways so let's see what happens. I'm not completely jumping on the bandwagon yet as there is so much to do to get the trust back from the fans but it's got to a situation where I have to choose to do something on my own or do something along with other like-minded fans so the words "strength in numbers" come to mind. IF the Trust does start to resemble something like the organisation that we've always wanted it to be, we'll be in a far better position to deal with any and all issues thrown up by the Yanks, should the proverbial hit the fans. I'm sure you'll agree that it's better for the Trust to be 'hoping for the best, preparing for the worst', which is what seems to be happening. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:17 - Sep 6 with 1141 views | TheResurrection |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:10 - Sep 6 by vetchonian |
Tell us then Chris how does changing the SD get the Yanks to engage more?
YOu are continuing to show how thick you are and so pro the owners it has been said so many times tonight Steve and JAson do not engage.
They will not answer questions and are demanding what amounts to a gagging order if any info is shared withthe SD
FFS stop beating tup the trust start seeing where the issues are get your head out of Huws backside and throw back your 30 pieces of silver |
Oh more abuse which will go unnoticed
This is the problem, you see, the Trust is full of old duffers like you who are happy with the way things are and don't want to change, even when the evidence it's needed is staring them right in the face.
It's simple, they pay Stu MacDonald lip service.
So try someone else | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:25 - Sep 6 with 1133 views | Uxbridge |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 08:47 - Sep 6 by TheResurrection |
This isn't about defending them, this is me pissed off and saddened that after a bright start to a season twice this week we've had to put up with the off the field stuff overshadowing a truly great result.
People talk about Potter walking because of not being supported. That won't happen, but this constant malaise that all too easily seeps through to match days could easily see him get fed up.
I think it's time you tried a different Supporters Director. I think it's time you took your hard medicine and make that tough call
We'll know then whether a different face and voice and energy in the club Boardroom will see us engaged more.
That has been the most obvious call for years now, yet NOTHING CHANGES. |
You know what, I completely agree with that first paragraph. Where we fundamentally disagree are the reasons for that.
I've seen Stu close enough in his role in SD role to know he's hardly the lapdog some people paint him as. Not as engaged online as I'd like but you could never criticise his offline engagement. Would a more belligerent SD be more proactive in dealing with the club? Possibly. However I'm not entirely sure that someone shouting the odds is going to engender more engagement. As I've said before, that change of mindset needs to take place on the side of the majority owners. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:48 - Sep 6 with 1068 views | Smellyplumz |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 06:32 - Sep 6 by waynekerr55 |
Dai little- senior partner in a law firm in Russell square
Lisa - chartered accountant at blue chip firms
The fella who works high up in shell
Quite significant corporate experience there |
Don't baffle him with facts mun geez. |  |
|
""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 |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:50 - Sep 6 with 1062 views | Smellyplumz |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:15 - Sep 6 by MoscowJack |
I think we've given Jenkins and the Yanks the benefit of doubt for a long time now but now time has run out. Leaving a squad as thin as they ground as they possibly could and leaving us with little hope that this will be improved upon in January (in fact, the opposite has happened) is just the tip of the iceberg for me.
I also think you've got it the wrong way around - I think Potter's more likely to move to a decent club if he feels that he's not being backed by the Board (and that it's likely to get worse) but there's a CHANCE of his feeling slightly connected to the club if he knows the fans have got his back. Having the fans onside is a huge plus for a manager....just look at Rafa at Newcastle.
Re. Stu - I don't know him very well at all, but from everything I've heard about him, he's extremely qualified for the role and isn't frightened of asking the hard questions. Whether they're answered or not is out of his control. Unlike you and I, he also has a bit of patience and doesn't seem to want the 'bull in a china shop" approach, until it's absolutely necessary. I actually respect people who have such control and patience, as well as the experience/knowledge to be able to read between the faint lines that the Yanks are drawing. My only gripe has been the ridiculous silence coming from his direction which I simply don't understand or accept. I'd rather him in that role that someone like you or me who'd be loud and tough but probably achieve a hell of a lot less. That's just my opinion, of course.
The way I see it is this is Trust 2.0 in many ways so let's see what happens. I'm not completely jumping on the bandwagon yet as there is so much to do to get the trust back from the fans but it's got to a situation where I have to choose to do something on my own or do something along with other like-minded fans so the words "strength in numbers" come to mind. IF the Trust does start to resemble something like the organisation that we've always wanted it to be, we'll be in a far better position to deal with any and all issues thrown up by the Yanks, should the proverbial hit the fans. I'm sure you'll agree that it's better for the Trust to be 'hoping for the best, preparing for the worst', which is what seems to be happening. |
Good post nick | |
|
""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 |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 10:00 - Sep 6 with 1034 views | Smellyplumz |
I've never trusted the new owners from day one and I just knew they would shaft us and yes hindsight is a wonderful thing... But when the trust voted against legal action I became very disappointed in the trust and the whole thing which is mostly down to my impatience but the yanks have yet again showed their true colours and have in essence forced the trusts hand... Better late than never I guess and I fully understand the procedural side of legal action and I am happy that the trust are now pulling their gloves on.
Concidering the above I will be rejoining the trust but I would ask members of the trust to be a little more engaging with non member fans that are still sceptical and not have such a high horse approach, you guys will disagree with this sentence but it's how it's come across in the past. It's not a bashing of the trust but merely a kind request and yes I know the trust has taken a lot of stick, by me as well but I hope the above explains why. [Post edited 6 Sep 2018 10:02]
| |
|
""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 |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 10:01 - Sep 6 with 1032 views | JackSomething |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:15 - Sep 5 by _ |
""As representatives of the fans, it is key that we understand the reasons for decisions made by the Club and gain assurances on the financial management of the Club. In my last update, I said that the Trust had sent a comprehensive list of questions to the majority owners of the Club, to obtain some clarity on the club’s financial position after this summer, understand the reasons for why decisions were made as well as seeking to ensure that the decisions taken are in the best interests of the Club. Many of these questions related to our transfer dealings this summer, but we also sought clarity on our financial obligations in the future, such as the salaries of senior employees. We know that relegation to the Championship means that we will receive considerably less revenue than previously, and we need to cut our cloth accordingly, but without visibility on the current situation we cannot say if the decisions taken were in the Club’s best interests. ""
Lets face it, the answers to the questions they asked there would hardly be groundbreaking or astounding revelations would they?
It seems the Americans are all too keen to share what's going on but they also want to keep a degree of confidentiality, which is frustrating for any "fan" who lives for the odd secret snippet of news, but also understandable.
And they have pretty much answered these questions in their interview the other day, including holding their hands up to their own mistakes.
For me, Jenkins and Pearlman should be on 50% less money but I doubt they are. But again, we don't know.
And the last statement in this extract says - "but without visibility on the current situation we cannot say if the decisions taken were in the Club’s best interests" - Ok, but they also cannot rule out that the decisions made were indeed in the best interests of the Club.
Maybe in this instance they should allow Stu to sign the NDA and take it from there. He may have a gagging order for the info received but he'd still have a job to do upon receipt of this knowledge. |
So it's fine for the Americans to keep a degree of confidentiality, but you want the Trust telling us constantly what's going on from their end? Despite the fact they've repeatedly communicated that they're being very careful to follow all legal steps to not weaken their case?
No, you're not a stooge for the club at all. If you're not a stooge, you're either monumentally one-eyed or wilfully stupid. |  |
| You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocket ship underpants don't help. |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 10:26 - Sep 6 with 962 views | dobjack2 |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:17 - Sep 6 by TheResurrection |
Oh more abuse which will go unnoticed
This is the problem, you see, the Trust is full of old duffers like you who are happy with the way things are and don't want to change, even when the evidence it's needed is staring them right in the face.
It's simple, they pay Stu MacDonald lip service.
So try someone else |
The issue is that the majority owners won’t answer the trust questions irrespective of who the Trust director is on the board.
It is clear to any reasonable person (without an agenda of course) that the communication breakdown is from the majority owners side. Coming from a different country and environment, perhaps they are not used to being challenged in this way and quite probably don’t like it.
However you seem to blame the Trust. Bit like the president across the pond tweeting fake news in relation to any story he doesn’t like.
If the majority owners are refusing to discuss these issues then the Trust Board have to consider every option open to them, which it appears from the understandably limited information they can provide that they are doing. | | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 10:32 - Sep 6 with 949 views | TheResurrection |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 09:48 - Sep 6 by Smellyplumz |
Don't baffle him with facts mun geez. |
The facts that two thirds of his very small list aren't on the Trust Board?
Jesus mate. ðŸ‘😂 | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 10:33 - Sep 6 with 954 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 10:26 - Sep 6 by dobjack2 |
The issue is that the majority owners won’t answer the trust questions irrespective of who the Trust director is on the board.
It is clear to any reasonable person (without an agenda of course) that the communication breakdown is from the majority owners side. Coming from a different country and environment, perhaps they are not used to being challenged in this way and quite probably don’t like it.
However you seem to blame the Trust. Bit like the president across the pond tweeting fake news in relation to any story he doesn’t like.
If the majority owners are refusing to discuss these issues then the Trust Board have to consider every option open to them, which it appears from the understandably limited information they can provide that they are doing. |
The fact that the Trust have to go legal to get sight of 2016 takeover documentation says a lot about the Americans. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
