| Trust Chairman’s Update 19:13 - Sep 5 with 12806 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 21:31 - Sep 5 with 1430 views | jack2jack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:21 - Sep 5 by E20Jack |
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. |
Well the majority of it was sold, cut it which way you like butt, seemingly without consultation with one of the shareholders, am I correct. |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:32 - Sep 5 with 1408 views | _ |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:31 - Sep 5 by Cooperman |
I think we both know the answer to that. |
At least someone would know, not ideal I agree, but better than no one. |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:33 - Sep 5 with 1413 views | AguycalledJack |
The yanks will be used to long drawn out litigation. The courts in this country want litigation sorted as soon as is possible.
Get the pre-action disclosure application done. Get your costs for that, and if the yanks don’t comply with any court order get the claim form completed signed and filed. |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:57 - Sep 5 with 1244 views | Quincy999 |
I'm finding it mildly amusing that they want the supporters director to sign an NDA. He's not exactly a blabber mouth is he. | | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:01 - Sep 5 with 1218 views | builthjack |
it beggars belief what's happening to our club. Burn those American flags on match day. |  |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:02 - Sep 5 with 1209 views | _ |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:57 - Sep 5 by Quincy999 |
I'm finding it mildly amusing that they want the supporters director to sign an NDA. He's not exactly a blabber mouth is he. |
I was under the impression life itself had asked Stu to sign a facking great big walloping NDA ;-) | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:02 - Sep 5 with 1214 views | Smellyplumz |
And some fans still think the sun shines out of huws @ss... Traitors |  |
|
""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 22:07 - Sep 5 with 1187 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 21:57 - Sep 5 by Quincy999 |
I'm finding it mildly amusing that they want the supporters director to sign an NDA. He's not exactly a blabber mouth is he. |
It's nonsensical, asking an individual to sign an NDA in these circumstances because he is a member of an organisation that holds shares, it's another way of saying you can't have ant information because he can't share it.
Another win for the Trust if it goes to court as the Americans are frustrating the mediation process. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:08 - Sep 5 with 1177 views | Phil_S |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 20:10 - Sep 5 by LeonWasGod |
Absolutely this.
But the Trust’s naivety here is staggering. They’ve been repeatedly lied to, repeatedly fobbed off with promises, yet are still acting on the basis of more promises (which won’t be kept).
If they believe they have a good case they have to go to court, for the good of the trust, the fans and ultimately the club. I appreciate they have to be answerable to their members, so maybe a stronger, more appropriate case can be made next time they go out to a vote.
As others have said, it very much looks like the Trust are being played for fools. |
What promises are we acting upon? Based on the forum? |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:10 - Sep 5 with 1157 views | awayjack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:01 - Sep 5 by builthjack |
it beggars belief what's happening to our club. Burn those American flags on match day. |
Fans are getting louder match by match against the Board / Owners. When tonights update hits the media it may go up to another level against Forest. |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:15 - Sep 5 with 1117 views | thornabyswan |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:10 - Sep 5 by awayjack |
Fans are getting louder match by match against the Board / Owners. When tonights update hits the media it may go up to another level against Forest. |
The louder it gets the more distant the owners will get.
What was the last home game they attended.
Has to go to court. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:18 - Sep 5 with 1087 views | _ |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:10 - Sep 5 by awayjack |
Fans are getting louder match by match against the Board / Owners. When tonights update hits the media it may go up to another level against Forest. |
Hang on, tonights update has told us very little indeed. Waste of time. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:19 - Sep 5 with 1085 views | QJumpingJack |
Were the Americans aware that other shareholders met the Trust in June? (or is there a division between the Americans & the others?)
I see on twitter (from the event this evening) that it is claimed that the Americans are very slow in replying to the Trust.
Again this just demonstrates a complete lack of respect to the Trust and the fan base which has to be a worry. [Post edited 5 Sep 2018 22:20]
| | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:21 - Sep 5 with 1062 views | pencoedjack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:08 - Sep 5 by Phil_S |
What promises are we acting upon? Based on the forum? |
Phil I don’t think you need to explain yourself on here
Those not up the sellouts arse (spouting their bullshite on this site) & with more than an ounce of a braincell know the trust have to play a game to get the best outcome.
Keep up the good work, much appreciated |  | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:23 - Sep 5 with 1043 views | Yossarian |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 19:59 - Sep 5 by Darran |
Any Swans fans that continue to trust Kaplan and Levien need to either pack in being a Swans fan or seek medical help. This isn’t the fault of the Trust. |
Spot on. Boycott spending ANYTHING within the Stadium. |  |
| "Yossarian- the very sight of the name made him shudder.There were so many esses in it. It just had to be subversive" (Catch 22) |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:23 - Sep 5 with 1043 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:18 - Sep 5 by _ |
Hang on, tonights update has told us very little indeed. Waste of time. |
One fact is that the Trust have had to go legal just to get some paperwork relating to the 2016 sale that they are entitled to. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:24 - Sep 5 with 1025 views | thornabyswan |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:21 - Sep 5 by pencoedjack |
Phil I don’t think you need to explain yourself on here
Those not up the sellouts arse (spouting their bullshite on this site) & with more than an ounce of a braincell know the trust have to play a game to get the best outcome.
Keep up the good work, much appreciated |
Voluntary as well thanks for the updates.
Even if we are somewhat in the dark. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:25 - Sep 5 with 1015 views | Yossarian |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 20:07 - Sep 5 by Shaky |
i have some sympathy with them not wanting the player salaries in the public domain.
If that is known it becomes easy for other clubs to know what to offer if when they want to tap somebody up.
Sure the trust Trust board would be bound by confidentiality, but in practice that almost certainly leaks like a sieve. |
Yeah- just look at Dineen on Twitter...a point emphasised again by Phil in his address. | |
| "Yossarian- the very sight of the name made him shudder.There were so many esses in it. It just had to be subversive" (Catch 22) |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:30 - Sep 5 with 990 views | Jack11 |
This statement proves the empty words of the American owners. Emphatically shows they don’t want to collaborate with the Trust (us fans). Beyond any doubt it emphasises that they hold the SD in contempt and consequently shows they have no respect for the fans. We all thought this, but the statement rubber stamps it. If anyone wasn’t worried about their trustworthiness, they should be now. | | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:32 - Sep 5 with 977 views | herbie |
The pre action protocol has been followed. You have been advised to seek pre action disclosure but personally as a commercial litigation partner myself, I would have thought you have enough information to decide on legal action without it, and simply wastes costs and time.
The request for an NDA does not fill me with confidence they will be forthcoming with information and it is only hard litigation that will get to a proper negotiation.
Costs and the risk of adverse costs is an obvious risk.
Third party funding or insurance cover would negate that risk.
My reading of the situation is they are taking the proverbial to be honest
Litigate and get it done quickly. [Post edited 5 Sep 2018 22:40]
| | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:34 - Sep 5 with 965 views | awayjack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:15 - Sep 5 by thornabyswan |
The louder it gets the more distant the owners will get.
What was the last home game they attended.
Has to go to court. |
They care about their reputations not just in Swansea but for their other investments in the US.
Fans protests create a media story. Sky already started to comment on fans ‘greed’ chants during matches and various summary shows. Yes let the Trust focus on the legal route but IMO fans / media pressure helps and encourages media and people to question the spin pushed out by the Board. | | | |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:46 - Sep 5 with 907 views | Uxbridge |
Well, I'd love to say the posts of certain usual suspects have surprised me, but that'd be silly.
Firstly, anyone who thinks our SD should sign an NDA basically stopping them saying anything to anyone, Trust board or public, is a blathering fool. It's an outrageous suggestion. He already has fiduciary duties regarding confidentiality to the public. The Trust, if ever going to perform the duties some people 24 hours ago were saying they should be performing regarding the financial situation, needs access to that information as a board (or a subsection of, and more than 1), not limited to one person who then can't comment on it. Ludicrous.
I think a point some have been missing is that the actions to date have always been with one eye on the legal path. Mediation is increasingly seen as a prerequisite to court action. True, it'd still be ideal to reach an agreement without going down that path, but it's obviously difficult to square that circle when things like this NDA happen. Anyway, the meeting will happen and who knows, maybe miracles happen and we agree all the rights and protections we want plus agree a deal that keeps everyone happy. We have to go into those meetings in good faith, even if history tells us we shouldn't be too optimistic.
FWIW, I think the paths will become clear in the coming weeks. If talks go nowhere, then we go back to the members with a clear path forward. If talks go somewhere, then we have alternative options to present. We'll see on that score. Nobody from the Trust will be sitting still though, as outlined with the continued following of the legal process in parallel with these discussions. |  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:47 - Sep 5 with 897 views | Darran |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:46 - Sep 5 by Uxbridge |
Well, I'd love to say the posts of certain usual suspects have surprised me, but that'd be silly.
Firstly, anyone who thinks our SD should sign an NDA basically stopping them saying anything to anyone, Trust board or public, is a blathering fool. It's an outrageous suggestion. He already has fiduciary duties regarding confidentiality to the public. The Trust, if ever going to perform the duties some people 24 hours ago were saying they should be performing regarding the financial situation, needs access to that information as a board (or a subsection of, and more than 1), not limited to one person who then can't comment on it. Ludicrous.
I think a point some have been missing is that the actions to date have always been with one eye on the legal path. Mediation is increasingly seen as a prerequisite to court action. True, it'd still be ideal to reach an agreement without going down that path, but it's obviously difficult to square that circle when things like this NDA happen. Anyway, the meeting will happen and who knows, maybe miracles happen and we agree all the rights and protections we want plus agree a deal that keeps everyone happy. We have to go into those meetings in good faith, even if history tells us we shouldn't be too optimistic.
FWIW, I think the paths will become clear in the coming weeks. If talks go nowhere, then we go back to the members with a clear path forward. If talks go somewhere, then we have alternative options to present. We'll see on that score. Nobody from the Trust will be sitting still though, as outlined with the continued following of the legal process in parallel with these discussions. |
Well said. | |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:52 - Sep 5 with 863 views | EasternJack |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 19:59 - Sep 5 by Darran |
Any Swans fans that continue to trust Kaplan and Levien need to either pack in being a Swans fan or seek medical help. This isn’t the fault of the Trust. |
Did you vote for the trust’s recommendation to sell their shares and absolve the majority owners and previous shareholders of any legal consequences? [Post edited 5 Sep 2018 22:54]
|  |
| |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 23:01 - Sep 5 with 830 views | _ |
| Trust Chairman’s Update on 22:46 - Sep 5 by Uxbridge |
Well, I'd love to say the posts of certain usual suspects have surprised me, but that'd be silly.
Firstly, anyone who thinks our SD should sign an NDA basically stopping them saying anything to anyone, Trust board or public, is a blathering fool. It's an outrageous suggestion. He already has fiduciary duties regarding confidentiality to the public. The Trust, if ever going to perform the duties some people 24 hours ago were saying they should be performing regarding the financial situation, needs access to that information as a board (or a subsection of, and more than 1), not limited to one person who then can't comment on it. Ludicrous.
I think a point some have been missing is that the actions to date have always been with one eye on the legal path. Mediation is increasingly seen as a prerequisite to court action. True, it'd still be ideal to reach an agreement without going down that path, but it's obviously difficult to square that circle when things like this NDA happen. Anyway, the meeting will happen and who knows, maybe miracles happen and we agree all the rights and protections we want plus agree a deal that keeps everyone happy. We have to go into those meetings in good faith, even if history tells us we shouldn't be too optimistic.
FWIW, I think the paths will become clear in the coming weeks. If talks go nowhere, then we go back to the members with a clear path forward. If talks go somewhere, then we have alternative options to present. We'll see on that score. Nobody from the Trust will be sitting still though, as outlined with the continued following of the legal process in parallel with these discussions. |
Why did they insist on an NDA? Simple question. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
