| Trust Chairman’s Update 19:13 - Sep 5 with 12807 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 21:03 - Sep 5 with 1410 views | Shaky |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 20:59 - Sep 5 by 34dfgdf54 |
Ian Roberts supplying forum updates on twitter.
No director at club other than Kaplan and Levein have knowledge of how much we spend on a player or how much we receive for a player. |
Including Jenkins?
Notwithstanding his apparent demotion, I find that very hard to believe indeed! |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:03 - Sep 5 with 1410 views | jack2jack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 20:54 - Sep 5 by 34dfgdf54 |
Without lawyers aswell apparently?
Cretins |
Surely the best way forward without harming the club is to sit down and sort it out, unless there are reasons not to.
The trust do own 21% which is a fair chunk, they deserve answers. |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:04 - Sep 5 with 1394 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:03 - Sep 5 by Shaky |
Including Jenkins?
Notwithstanding his apparent demotion, I find that very hard to believe indeed! |
Only going from what the Trust are saying at the Forum. Only Levein and Kaplan have this information. |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:06 - Sep 5 with 1352 views | E20Jack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:03 - Sep 5 by Shaky |
Including Jenkins?
Notwithstanding his apparent demotion, I find that very hard to believe indeed! |
Going by the laughable stuff you happily admit to believing, that’s hardly a damning statement.
No offence like. |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:06 - Sep 5 with 1360 views | jasper_T |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:03 - Sep 5 by Shaky |
Including Jenkins?
Notwithstanding his apparent demotion, I find that very hard to believe indeed! |
Everything they've said suggests he's not in the inner circle and hasn't been for a long while, though. |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:07 - Sep 5 with 1341 views | Darran |
From the Forum.
Access to American owners is very limited for supporter director. Not great at responding to answers, or emails. People at local level very good but no relationship with owners | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:09 - Sep 5 with 1324 views | Darran |
American owners have indeed loaned money to club in past. They are paid interest on the loans but the same as the banks would charge | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:12 - Sep 5 with 1292 views | Wingstandwood |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 20:59 - Sep 5 by Darran |
Breaking news from tonight’s Forum.
Directors of the club (other than Kaplan and Levien) are not told of how much is received in transfer fees or how much we spend on a player. |
Hells bells!........Absolutely staggering! It's "You could not make it up" stuff!
Eat your heart out "The Oyston and Blackpool F.C story"....This is another potential-themed storyline blockbuster (albeit of most catastrophic type) in the making!!!!!!!
The 'soap-opera' of the Petty era does not come anywhere near to the most ultimate pièce de résistance farce now unfolding at Swansea City Football Club.
In fact? Petty is absolute choir boy compared to Yanks and Co.
From JTAK my f#clking arse!!!!!!!!!!
Can anyone on here name any other club with a regime run on SCFC's basis? |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:13 - Sep 5 with 1272 views | E20Jack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:09 - Sep 5 by Darran |
American owners have indeed loaned money to club in past. They are paid interest on the loans but the same as the banks would charge |
And like it or not, this was absolutely a reason why the sale was needed at the time. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:13 - Sep 5 with 1280 views | Shaky |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:09 - Sep 5 by Darran |
American owners have indeed loaned money to club in past. They are paid interest on the loans but the same as the banks would charge |
That is important confirmation.
And unequivocally good news for the club.
Be interesting to learn whether those loans are coming from Kaplan personally or via the Delaware holding company. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:14 - Sep 5 with 1260 views | jack2jack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 20:56 - Sep 5 by E20Jack |
Both.
The Trust just said they agreed to arrange a meeting with the Trust Director.
The Trust didn’t like the terms of the dialogue though. |
Hang on a minute, who are the ones playing silly buggers here, I'll say it again the trust own 21%, shareholders in the company, I wouldn't like those terms either.
Tell me again, who sold the club? | | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:15 - Sep 5 with 1258 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:09 - Sep 5 by Darran |
American owners have indeed loaned money to club in past. They are paid interest on the loans but the same as the banks would charge |
Business lending tends to be bespoke according to risk, total interest, fees and charges could be anywhere on a wide scale. |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:15 - Sep 5 with 1246 views | leighton1318 |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 20:59 - Sep 5 by 34dfgdf54 |
Ian Roberts supplying forum updates on twitter.
No director at club other than Kaplan and Levein have knowledge of how much we spend on a player or how much we receive for a player. |
If the Board reallly aren’t being told what players are bought and sold for (as suggested) they should ask themselves what they are doing there. Arguably they aren’t exercising their responsibilities correctly and are potentially at legal risk. Someone can explain fiduciary duty better then me.
A Board should be informed, if not consulted, on material financial decisions. Yes, management should be able to operate within certain agreed limits,, but If it’s true that all the big financial decisions are taken away from the board, then members not involved should resign. And perhaps that should include the Trust director. | | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:15 - Sep 5 with 1242 views | _ |
""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. |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:19 - Sep 5 with 1188 views | _ |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:04 - Sep 5 by 34dfgdf54 |
Only going from what the Trust are saying at the Forum. Only Levein and Kaplan have this information. |
Seems to be at odds to previous transfers then where Phil himself has come on here numerous times to tell many that we got nowhere near the £45m reported for Siggy.
Strange eh... | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:19 - Sep 5 with 1188 views | Shaky |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:15 - Sep 5 by leighton1318 |
If the Board reallly aren’t being told what players are bought and sold for (as suggested) they should ask themselves what they are doing there. Arguably they aren’t exercising their responsibilities correctly and are potentially at legal risk. Someone can explain fiduciary duty better then me.
A Board should be informed, if not consulted, on material financial decisions. Yes, management should be able to operate within certain agreed limits,, but If it’s true that all the big financial decisions are taken away from the board, then members not involved should resign. And perhaps that should include the Trust director. |
You are right in general terms, but the new articles of the company adopted at the time of the takeover carved up the responsibilities of the board so all sorts of conventional duties of the board could be carried out by subsets of loyalists.
FWIW, could well be possible to mount legal challenges to that, but for now it stands.
However, Jenkins is the chairman and has wider responsibilities, hence my surprise and scepticism that he is being kept totally in the dark. [Post edited 5 Sep 2018 21:47]
| |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:20 - Sep 5 with 1176 views | jack2086 |
| 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. |
Which job he could only do properly if he breached the terms of the NDA. | | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:20 - Sep 5 with 1174 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:19 - Sep 5 by _ |
Seems to be at odds to previous transfers then where Phil himself has come on here numerous times to tell many that we got nowhere near the £45m reported for Siggy.
Strange eh... |
Thought exactly that to be honest.
Wouldn’t mind knowing when this information stopped becoming available, unless it happened as a direct consequence of the clusterf*ck of Siggy departure (leaving too late). [Post edited 5 Sep 2018 21:21]
| | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:21 - Sep 5 with 1164 views | E20Jack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:14 - Sep 5 by jack2jack |
Hang on a minute, who are the ones playing silly buggers here, I'll say it again the trust own 21%, shareholders in the company, I wouldn't like those terms either.
Tell me again, who sold the club? |
The club wasn’t sold. People sold their own personal shares.
That’s fine if you wouldn’t like the terms, I am making the factual point that they have by all means expressed a willingness to discuss things with the SD. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:21 - Sep 5 with 1167 views | _ |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:07 - Sep 5 by Darran |
From the Forum.
Access to American owners is very limited for supporter director. Not great at responding to answers, or emails. People at local level very good but no relationship with owners |
That says everything you need to know about the Supporters Director, NOT the Americans.
Lets face it, nobody would respond to Stu would they, I doubt they know he's in the same room half the time. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:22 - Sep 5 with 1142 views | _ |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:09 - Sep 5 by Darran |
American owners have indeed loaned money to club in past. They are paid interest on the loans but the same as the banks would charge |
WOW!!!!
And all that guff yesterday....
"And" the Trust knew.....
"""AND""" The Trust have always chosen not to mention this super important aspect.... !!!!
UNBELIEVEVABLE!!!
Wobbly? | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:24 - Sep 5 with 1116 views | Cooperman |
| 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. |
Re the last paragraph - no, not happy with that. That won’t improve the communication traits of our Trust SD. |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:29 - Sep 5 with 1066 views | _ |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:24 - Sep 5 by Cooperman |
Re the last paragraph - no, not happy with that. That won’t improve the communication traits of our Trust SD. |
Stu could always resign his position if he felt he couldn't continue. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:31 - Sep 5 with 1048 views | Darran |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:29 - Sep 5 by _ |
Stu could always resign his position if he felt he couldn't continue. |
And then they’d communicate with his replacement is it?  | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:31 - Sep 5 with 1047 views | Cooperman |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:29 - Sep 5 by _ |
Stu could always resign his position if he felt he couldn't continue. |
I think we both know the answer to that. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
