| Greed.... 20:37 - Sep 13 with 8378 views | bonymine |
The definition .......’intense desire for something, especially wealth, power or food’......
And that one word alone can wholly sum up the demise of OUR Football Club over the past 3/4 years I believe.
And I can relate to the actions of Messrs Jenkins, Morgan, Dineen, Van Zweden et al in ‘selling out’ on their individual stake in OUR Club (notwithstanding their previous boasts about being involved ‘by the fans for the fans’ ) .....say no more.
The similarities between the overriding, perpetual greed of the Sellouts as the gravy train known as the Premier League riches became more and more the ‘norm’ can be compared in my eyes to my recent divorce and the greed of my soon to be ex-wife.
We were married for 21 years yet in that time we moved from a 3 bedroom semi detached house to a 4 bedroom detached and ultimately to a 4 bedroom executive detached house in a small gated community. Yet she still she sought to seek further materialistic gains through adding on an indoor swimming pool and an orangery !!!
So coming back on topic here the question is posed.....’how much is enough’ in terms of monetary and materialistic values in life ??
It seems to me that the trappings of the PL and it’s incessant monetary riches ‘changed’ the personalities of the ‘former’ Swans fans on our Board and almost overnight they became money grabbing, power crazy people who had forgotten their roots ?? .....
Each to their own I guess but just my own observations.
[Post edited 22 Feb 2019 21:03]
|  |
| |  |
| Greed.... on 13:56 - Apr 29 with 579 views | shaggyrogers |
| Greed.... on 12:28 - Apr 29 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Gary this is taken from the model rules 2016 listed on the SCST website.
-------------------------------------------
" In order to achieve its objects the Society may either itself or through a subsidiary company
or society acting under its control:
6.1. buy, sell and lease property;
6.2. borrow;
6.3. grant security over its property and assets;
6.4. establish promote and maintain for the purposes of the Society any lawful fund
raising scheme;
6.5. buy and hold shares in the Club;
6.6. hold and exercise proxies for shares in any company owning or controlling the Club
either itself or through a subsidiary;
6.7. promote means to give supporters greater opportunity to invest in the Club;
a) It can therefore buy property at least.
b) 6.3 Might include insurances to grant security over its assests e.g cash.
c) 6.4 Might also allow for buying share or bonds as "a lawful fund raising scheme".
Where did you get your information from? [Post edited 29 Apr 2021 12:33]
|
I may not be right but i can't remember the trust spending any money on anything other than legal fees over the last decade other than items such as the hall of fame.
Have they the expertise on the board or the appetite to start looking at buying property and bonds ? |  | | |
| Greed.... on 14:16 - Apr 29 with 555 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Greed.... on 12:48 - Apr 29 by Chief |
How much do you suggest the trust invests into these schemes (which may not even be permitted by law) and property then? Surely such an undertaking means employing a property manager and contractors, paying estate agents, the property itself, renovation costs.
All that despite the trust needing instant funds to pay its expenses and operate on a day to day basis?
How feasible is that? |
Great some debate, some thoughts, some energy. You are a member and can find out if you can be bothered.
It is your organisation that is planning to raise upto £14m to do what exactly?
I say to invest to grow and even create a job or two from the wealth created. The Sunday school moralists like to speak the language of 'greed' and make 'profit' sound like a sin.
As a member you need to find out what plans the SCST have for a cash rich future. I have always argued they have operated without any coherient strategy. Sticking the money in a bank at 0.1% interest is negligent in my view especially as other inflation proof investment are possible.
They should by agreement hold 5% of shares in the club and the rest in inflation proof investments such as property. They should insist that they are allowed to get involved in all new issue of shares or Convertible loan note schemes. 5% is a nice little return these days.
They could also invest in Swansea city 'Delaware' Limited as this is also allowed in the constitution.
(6.6. hold and exercise proxies for shares in any company owning or controlling the Club)
[Post edited 29 Apr 2021 14:19]
|  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Greed.... on 14:29 - Apr 29 with 546 views | Chief |
| Greed.... on 14:16 - Apr 29 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Great some debate, some thoughts, some energy. You are a member and can find out if you can be bothered.
It is your organisation that is planning to raise upto £14m to do what exactly?
I say to invest to grow and even create a job or two from the wealth created. The Sunday school moralists like to speak the language of 'greed' and make 'profit' sound like a sin.
As a member you need to find out what plans the SCST have for a cash rich future. I have always argued they have operated without any coherient strategy. Sticking the money in a bank at 0.1% interest is negligent in my view especially as other inflation proof investment are possible.
They should by agreement hold 5% of shares in the club and the rest in inflation proof investments such as property. They should insist that they are allowed to get involved in all new issue of shares or Convertible loan note schemes. 5% is a nice little return these days.
They could also invest in Swansea city 'Delaware' Limited as this is also allowed in the constitution.
(6.6. hold and exercise proxies for shares in any company owning or controlling the Club)
[Post edited 29 Apr 2021 14:19]
|
- find out what?
- who's planning to raise 14 million?
- next paragraph is not relevant. We've established that certain investments aren't permitted.
- You keep repeating this notion of them not getting interested while ignoring what people are telling you. Without the legalities of it, they can't realistically tie up their money currently for any length of time and get a good interest rate can they? They need ready cash and there isn't a lot in the chest to do that anyway.
- next paragraph as above, you're ignoring the practicalities of this. Let alone finding a buyer for 16% of their shares.
- as a minority share holder, are they able to 'demand' that? Maybe when it's finally confirmed that the loan is being converted into equity they could then. When will that be?
- Why would they invest in anything to do with 'Delaware' and why would they be allowed to?
- So now you're advocating them buying shares in the Americans' holding company!?
Come on Resolven some of these are fantastic ideas but iesu mawr come back to the real world. |  |
| |
| Greed.... on 14:35 - Apr 30 with 471 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Greed.... on 14:29 - Apr 29 by Chief |
- find out what?
- who's planning to raise 14 million?
- next paragraph is not relevant. We've established that certain investments aren't permitted.
- You keep repeating this notion of them not getting interested while ignoring what people are telling you. Without the legalities of it, they can't realistically tie up their money currently for any length of time and get a good interest rate can they? They need ready cash and there isn't a lot in the chest to do that anyway.
- next paragraph as above, you're ignoring the practicalities of this. Let alone finding a buyer for 16% of their shares.
- as a minority share holder, are they able to 'demand' that? Maybe when it's finally confirmed that the loan is being converted into equity they could then. When will that be?
- Why would they invest in anything to do with 'Delaware' and why would they be allowed to?
- So now you're advocating them buying shares in the Americans' holding company!?
Come on Resolven some of these are fantastic ideas but iesu mawr come back to the real world. |
We have not established anything in fact. Gary, bless him, stated that the Trust could not invest in property and could only put the money in a bank or building society guarenteeing profits for them and loses for the SCST. Your problem is you use rumours and unreliable testomy as fact.
I produced the actual (2016) clauses which said they could invest in property. The wording is not exactly clear but it does not say they cannot by shares in other companies or bonds.
It needs a lawyer or a Trust insider to determine this. If they employed someone they could set up a pension using these methods for sure. They could also buy share in the US owners holding company.
My company had a 3 year bond with HSBC giving me 1.2%. Interest, If one of thse were taken out the Trust in 2013 would gross £10,560 pa. Over the last 8 years that would be £84,480. Not an inconsiderable sum. Property funds have done much better and we have 'established' they can invest in property.
Please expalin to me what the Trust needs its £880,000 in it current account for? . It has no staff of any serious liabilities? They only need it to keep the English legal asociates fully funded. It has cost them at least £150,000 and another £80,000 in lost interest.
The best people to find buyer of their shares are their partners in the club. Jake Silverstein was looking for 5% but they went down another route to inject fresh capital into the club. They found Jake. Silverstein thinks his "long term investment" can make a good profit. It is a pity there are not more Welsh investors like him. If I was leader of the SCST i would normalise relations with the US owners immediately parking away past antagonism for good. A fresh start. I believe this is what the member want. Incidentally the Trust has an obligation to help fans buy shares in the club if they want to. I beileve the US people would not be opposied to a crowd funded fans holding. £300,000 would buy 1%. 100 fans for £3000 a piece.
The US peole and the SCST are in the same boat and need to cooperate.
Shareholder in theory under UK law can demand their rights. SCST should have done this in 2016. To be fiar they demanded their right to first option of 4% f the sold shares as per the reported agreement with an offer of £0. The sellers did not accept that price ( a little bit too low given that the SCST had £800k on account).
They are allowed to according to the clause I provided from the 216 document. The US people would need to sell them the case for investing in their body. For exampe they stand to benefit from the 5% loan arrangement. If thevUS company is run as a "hedgefund" they would not be allowed to buy shares under Hedge fund rules. "too high risk".
I am not recommending they buy shares in SCFC (USA) Ltd. unless they can be convinced it is a good investment.
The CLN comes to end for repayment including interest in 5 years if what i have read ia accurate. November 2025. Hopefully they will take the shares (as Valuesd at Nov 2020) which as I understand it includes no interest obligations. They can convert to shares before then I understand.
I am putting up lots of ideas some good some not so good but they are ideas. The SCST ideas of putting it the bank guarentees loss.
[Post edited 30 Apr 2021 14:36]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Greed.... on 15:00 - Apr 30 with 458 views | Chief |
| Greed.... on 14:35 - Apr 30 by ReslovenSwan1 |
We have not established anything in fact. Gary, bless him, stated that the Trust could not invest in property and could only put the money in a bank or building society guarenteeing profits for them and loses for the SCST. Your problem is you use rumours and unreliable testomy as fact.
I produced the actual (2016) clauses which said they could invest in property. The wording is not exactly clear but it does not say they cannot by shares in other companies or bonds.
It needs a lawyer or a Trust insider to determine this. If they employed someone they could set up a pension using these methods for sure. They could also buy share in the US owners holding company.
My company had a 3 year bond with HSBC giving me 1.2%. Interest, If one of thse were taken out the Trust in 2013 would gross £10,560 pa. Over the last 8 years that would be £84,480. Not an inconsiderable sum. Property funds have done much better and we have 'established' they can invest in property.
Please expalin to me what the Trust needs its £880,000 in it current account for? . It has no staff of any serious liabilities? They only need it to keep the English legal asociates fully funded. It has cost them at least £150,000 and another £80,000 in lost interest.
The best people to find buyer of their shares are their partners in the club. Jake Silverstein was looking for 5% but they went down another route to inject fresh capital into the club. They found Jake. Silverstein thinks his "long term investment" can make a good profit. It is a pity there are not more Welsh investors like him. If I was leader of the SCST i would normalise relations with the US owners immediately parking away past antagonism for good. A fresh start. I believe this is what the member want. Incidentally the Trust has an obligation to help fans buy shares in the club if they want to. I beileve the US people would not be opposied to a crowd funded fans holding. £300,000 would buy 1%. 100 fans for £3000 a piece.
The US peole and the SCST are in the same boat and need to cooperate.
Shareholder in theory under UK law can demand their rights. SCST should have done this in 2016. To be fiar they demanded their right to first option of 4% f the sold shares as per the reported agreement with an offer of £0. The sellers did not accept that price ( a little bit too low given that the SCST had £800k on account).
They are allowed to according to the clause I provided from the 216 document. The US people would need to sell them the case for investing in their body. For exampe they stand to benefit from the 5% loan arrangement. If thevUS company is run as a "hedgefund" they would not be allowed to buy shares under Hedge fund rules. "too high risk".
I am not recommending they buy shares in SCFC (USA) Ltd. unless they can be convinced it is a good investment.
The CLN comes to end for repayment including interest in 5 years if what i have read ia accurate. November 2025. Hopefully they will take the shares (as Valuesd at Nov 2020) which as I understand it includes no interest obligations. They can convert to shares before then I understand.
I am putting up lots of ideas some good some not so good but they are ideas. The SCST ideas of putting it the bank guarentees loss.
[Post edited 30 Apr 2021 14:36]
|
- random waffle in first paragraph.
- I've addressed property above and shown why it hasn't been feasible for the trust to go down that route. And buying shares in the Americans company. Not realistic.
- so where would the trust get cash needed for day to day operations if they're tying up all their capital into bonds then?
- Expenses of board members, legal representatives aren't free, nor are accountants to publish accounts, nor are their charitable projects, nor are subscriptions to bodies, renting venues, paying for the website. I could go on.
- If Silverstein wanted to he'd have bid for shares already. He's obviously aware of the situation. He's chosen to just put a loan in at present. The Americans stated they were going to re engage when they gave that interview. As far as we know, they were just empty words. No idea what you're mentioning that crowd funding thing for.
- agreed, but the Americans aren't and haven't on the subject of share ownership so here we are.
- Well the trust didn't demand anything, they asked (at a very late stage of proceedings) if the sellouts would give away some of their shares. Given what they did sell for, even if the trust offered their whole 800k (which is unrealistic anyway) it would probably have been rejected anyway. They could maybe have imposed some sort of sanction at that point, but how would the club function then? Sellouts who want to go who held working positions in the operation of the club. Imagine the outcry then. Again it's not realistic.
- yes investing in the Americans company, just like most of your ramblings is again completely unfeasible.
- at which point the other shareholders will be allowed to weigh in too or get diluted. Not before.
- Well at least you're open about it. I'm sure the trust has a plan for their potential windfall don't worry. That's a game changer compared to the amounts they've been handling up until now. Different ball game. | |
| |
| Greed.... on 18:30 - Apr 30 with 430 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Greed.... on 15:00 - Apr 30 by Chief |
- random waffle in first paragraph.
- I've addressed property above and shown why it hasn't been feasible for the trust to go down that route. And buying shares in the Americans company. Not realistic.
- so where would the trust get cash needed for day to day operations if they're tying up all their capital into bonds then?
- Expenses of board members, legal representatives aren't free, nor are accountants to publish accounts, nor are their charitable projects, nor are subscriptions to bodies, renting venues, paying for the website. I could go on.
- If Silverstein wanted to he'd have bid for shares already. He's obviously aware of the situation. He's chosen to just put a loan in at present. The Americans stated they were going to re engage when they gave that interview. As far as we know, they were just empty words. No idea what you're mentioning that crowd funding thing for.
- agreed, but the Americans aren't and haven't on the subject of share ownership so here we are.
- Well the trust didn't demand anything, they asked (at a very late stage of proceedings) if the sellouts would give away some of their shares. Given what they did sell for, even if the trust offered their whole 800k (which is unrealistic anyway) it would probably have been rejected anyway. They could maybe have imposed some sort of sanction at that point, but how would the club function then? Sellouts who want to go who held working positions in the operation of the club. Imagine the outcry then. Again it's not realistic.
- yes investing in the Americans company, just like most of your ramblings is again completely unfeasible.
- at which point the other shareholders will be allowed to weigh in too or get diluted. Not before.
- Well at least you're open about it. I'm sure the trust has a plan for their potential windfall don't worry. That's a game changer compared to the amounts they've been handling up until now. Different ball game. |
The SCST has a whole host of options. The court case is by far the worst as the outcomes are highly unpredicable and costly. From what i can see the case is not strong but i am not a lawyer. S
You project managing property and property funds as huge obstacles which many of us do on a daily basis. It become a problem when people are lazy. My parents next door neighbour has excuses for non achievement as long as his arm. The fact is he prefered getting drunk most days. I get 3% frorm my Santander income investment fund. 3% of £880,000 is a whopping £26,000 pa.
I believe as the club develops the US people will be all too keen to ease the SCST out of the organisation. This is good business. Owners with cash flow problems ar no use to the business.
The Trust gets its money from the members £10 a year. with 1000+ members that is £10,000+. They reduced that to £5 so are not short of cash priamrily due to the good work of Huw Jenkins .
Their £880,000 is cash is devaluaing at around 2% a year or £17,000 pa due to inflation. Meanwhile their holding in shares is probably increasing and will pass the 2016 sale valiue in a decade even if Swansea stay in the championship. The US poeple and Winter will not take foolish risks like Bournemouth who will tell their players "they must win promotion at all costs".
THe SCST requests for free shares got the same response that drunk in Neath gets outside Morrsions from me when I venture into Neath for toilet roll and firelighters.
I think you as a smart fellow can find out exacty what the SCST can invest in and what it cannot. It can invest in property and in shares held by the club owners that is clear. Can it invest in State bonds and property bonds?
As all good investors will tell you have 100% in a football club is very risky. You might as well go to Vegas. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Greed.... on 18:44 - Apr 30 with 429 views | Chief |
| Greed.... on 18:30 - Apr 30 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The SCST has a whole host of options. The court case is by far the worst as the outcomes are highly unpredicable and costly. From what i can see the case is not strong but i am not a lawyer. S
You project managing property and property funds as huge obstacles which many of us do on a daily basis. It become a problem when people are lazy. My parents next door neighbour has excuses for non achievement as long as his arm. The fact is he prefered getting drunk most days. I get 3% frorm my Santander income investment fund. 3% of £880,000 is a whopping £26,000 pa.
I believe as the club develops the US people will be all too keen to ease the SCST out of the organisation. This is good business. Owners with cash flow problems ar no use to the business.
The Trust gets its money from the members £10 a year. with 1000+ members that is £10,000+. They reduced that to £5 so are not short of cash priamrily due to the good work of Huw Jenkins .
Their £880,000 is cash is devaluaing at around 2% a year or £17,000 pa due to inflation. Meanwhile their holding in shares is probably increasing and will pass the 2016 sale valiue in a decade even if Swansea stay in the championship. The US poeple and Winter will not take foolish risks like Bournemouth who will tell their players "they must win promotion at all costs".
THe SCST requests for free shares got the same response that drunk in Neath gets outside Morrsions from me when I venture into Neath for toilet roll and firelighters.
I think you as a smart fellow can find out exacty what the SCST can invest in and what it cannot. It can invest in property and in shares held by the club owners that is clear. Can it invest in State bonds and property bonds?
As all good investors will tell you have 100% in a football club is very risky. You might as well go to Vegas. |
- You're biased and not a QC.
- Irrelevant waffle.
- No doubt, although they may not need to. Presumably you think the Americans will look to get shot of Huw and Morgan etc too then.
- You often ridicule them for not having funds, but you're saying they do?
- not sure of the relevance. We know they can't tie up much capital.
- Indeed, the sellouts were intent on cashing in.
- earlier you were saying a lawyer was needed to work out what they can and can't invest in. I am not a lawyer. The property question has been addressed. Its unrealistic.
- ok, duly noted | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Greed.... on 20:25 - Apr 30 with 401 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Greed.... on 18:44 - Apr 30 by Chief |
- You're biased and not a QC.
- Irrelevant waffle.
- No doubt, although they may not need to. Presumably you think the Americans will look to get shot of Huw and Morgan etc too then.
- You often ridicule them for not having funds, but you're saying they do?
- not sure of the relevance. We know they can't tie up much capital.
- Indeed, the sellouts were intent on cashing in.
- earlier you were saying a lawyer was needed to work out what they can and can't invest in. I am not a lawyer. The property question has been addressed. Its unrealistic.
- ok, duly noted |
The SCST has funds but little indication they know how to spend it wisely. I was getting 1.2% on my savngs in my company account (3 year bond) while the SCST were getting 0.15% wasting £10,000 interest for 7 years or so. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Greed.... on 21:45 - Apr 30 with 385 views | Chief |
| Greed.... on 20:25 - Apr 30 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The SCST has funds but little indication they know how to spend it wisely. I was getting 1.2% on my savngs in my company account (3 year bond) while the SCST were getting 0.15% wasting £10,000 interest for 7 years or so. |
Yes so you keep saying.
But your circumstances and that of the supporters trust are entirely different. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
