| When Huw Jenkins talked about 10:41 - Sep 20 with 5967 views | swancity |
Selling the Club which would help “ take it to the next level “
I didn’t think he meant relegation under absent owners and not having a tin pot to piss in as that’s where we seem to be heading
Surely no one is still gullible and naive enough to believe any of that crap...
|  |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |  |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 10:59 - Sep 20 with 2524 views | Badlands |
Back in lockdown, or just another uneventful day? |  |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 11:01 - Sep 20 with 2520 views | Neath_Jack |
Possibly Badlands and that Resolven poster.
Other than those I’m struggling. |  |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 13:19 - Sep 20 with 2456 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 11:01 - Sep 20 by Neath_Jack |
Possibly Badlands and that Resolven poster.
Other than those I’m struggling. |
The only people able to talk about next level own Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and vast tracks of Siberia. Everyone knows this. Kaplan and Levien are in my view decent owners and a level above Morgan and Jenkins and co. The biggest Welsh owners 21% abdicated responsibility for investment in the club 2010 -2016 when they chose not to sell any of their holding and retained less than £1m the bank. It is not enough. Roulette players in the casino tend not to have much time for cleaning out the guttering and fixing the garage roof back home. They leave that for others.
Fans accepted ownership but not the responsibility that comes with it. The previous owners did an outstanding job without spending any of their own money on the club. Stoke city a club similar to Swanseas in scale owe their owner £180m. If Swansea was run like Stoke the Trust would be owed £37m or be diluted to around 4% holding based on fag packet sums. |  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 17:23 - Sep 20 with 2370 views | BillyChong |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 13:19 - Sep 20 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The only people able to talk about next level own Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and vast tracks of Siberia. Everyone knows this. Kaplan and Levien are in my view decent owners and a level above Morgan and Jenkins and co. The biggest Welsh owners 21% abdicated responsibility for investment in the club 2010 -2016 when they chose not to sell any of their holding and retained less than £1m the bank. It is not enough. Roulette players in the casino tend not to have much time for cleaning out the guttering and fixing the garage roof back home. They leave that for others.
Fans accepted ownership but not the responsibility that comes with it. The previous owners did an outstanding job without spending any of their own money on the club. Stoke city a club similar to Swanseas in scale owe their owner £180m. If Swansea was run like Stoke the Trust would be owed £37m or be diluted to around 4% holding based on fag packet sums. |
I stopped reading after the 3rd sentence. Utter bollocks. | | | |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 17:52 - Sep 20 with 2357 views | Catullus |
I think Kaplan and Levein are doing a better job than some will ever admit but the bit about the trust, it's nonsense isn't it? They weren't involved in the sale, kept in the dark, hence the talk of legal action and all the BS we have seen since the sale.
The sale itself was conducted in an underhand way by people more interested in enrichment than anything else. | |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 19:38 - Sep 20 with 2319 views | swancity |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 10:59 - Sep 20 by Badlands |
Back in lockdown, or just another uneventful day? |
I suppose when you listen to Steve Cooper ( who is doing a fine job ) recently saying that there’s no money available to buy a recognised / proven striker despite the serious need for one it underlined the mess that the Club is now in financially
Fortunately 99.999% of our fans can see through the lies from Jenkins. What they did was despicable but the Trust don’t seem to be in any hurry to do anything about it. Why is that? | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 19:53 - Sep 20 with 2307 views | Chief |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 13:19 - Sep 20 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The only people able to talk about next level own Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and vast tracks of Siberia. Everyone knows this. Kaplan and Levien are in my view decent owners and a level above Morgan and Jenkins and co. The biggest Welsh owners 21% abdicated responsibility for investment in the club 2010 -2016 when they chose not to sell any of their holding and retained less than £1m the bank. It is not enough. Roulette players in the casino tend not to have much time for cleaning out the guttering and fixing the garage roof back home. They leave that for others.
Fans accepted ownership but not the responsibility that comes with it. The previous owners did an outstanding job without spending any of their own money on the club. Stoke city a club similar to Swanseas in scale owe their owner £180m. If Swansea was run like Stoke the Trust would be owed £37m or be diluted to around 4% holding based on fag packet sums. |
So by your first sentence you agree that Jenkins did willfully mislead the fans?
Your bit about the trust choosing to hold onto their shares - 1) Why would they have wanted to sell them during that span? 2) Was there ever any prospect of anyone actually wanting to buy 21% of the club?
What responsibilities exactly have the trust shirked during their tenure then as you allude to? |  |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 01:27 - Sep 21 with 2233 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 19:53 - Sep 20 by Chief |
So by your first sentence you agree that Jenkins did willfully mislead the fans?
Your bit about the trust choosing to hold onto their shares - 1) Why would they have wanted to sell them during that span? 2) Was there ever any prospect of anyone actually wanting to buy 21% of the club?
What responsibilities exactly have the trust shirked during their tenure then as you allude to? |
The ex chairman from recollection stated the new US investors had access to additional funding that they themselves did not have. This has been proven by the recent cash injection by Mr Silverstein who has reportedly injected a 'significant sum' into the club alongside new cash from the other US owners.
If the Trust was serious about preserving professional football in Swansea and avoiding the events of 2001 it would need significant ammounts of cash to be relevant. Selling share in the PL period was the best time to do this (with no significant legal fees). In the PL the asset value of the 21% had rocketted such that 95% of the Trusts assets were tied up in a PL football club. Just about the riskiest type of investment imaginable. They were sitting on a x100 mark up. They simply had to put themselves up for sale just like any seller.
There clearly were US buyers circling 2015 onwards with two buyer involved in serious talks and many other EPL and EFL clubs were taken over most without Trust holdings. The sterling crash of 20016 aided the US dollar buyers.
The Trust have managed their affairs to hold 21% and not hold cash. The recent cash call has been covered by a US loan that they want to turn into new shares in the club. The Trust as 21% owner should morally also contribute to the emergency funding and a maintain its share holding but is unable to do so leaving the responsibility to others.
I fully accept my view are not those of a normal fan. What needs to be understood is that Swansea fans are not normal fans but are more responsible than that and are actual owners. If the fans want to be 100% owners then the club will join Wrexham and Exeter in the lower parts of the leagues. The club is better off with the current US owners who have good track records in US sports but will make their assets sweat and keep a tight reign of the purse strings.. This is good for the club and good for the Trust. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 03:39 - Sep 21 with 2220 views | Dr_Parnassus |
Yes as I stated under my previous name, I am not too sure where this ''next level'' thing came from in the context it is being described, reminds me of the Trump ''fine people'' hoax that is still repeated today.
When Jenkins stated that, he was talking about not having the funds as owners to lend to the club on favourable terms which is why they needed bank loans to solve cashflow issues. I am pretty sure he also alluded to the fact their experience running clubs may lead to extra commercial revenue, hence the introduction of Pearlman.
So the next level as I understood it at the time was the next level of self sufficiency, not us turning into a Champions league club as many seem to be suggesting these days.
This was instrumental in us getting the stadium deal done (argument whether that is a good thing now relegated) which would have paved the way for stadium naming rights to be earned by the club had we have stayed up. [Post edited 21 Sep 2020 4:14]
|  |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 07:04 - Sep 21 with 2198 views | Chief |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 01:27 - Sep 21 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The ex chairman from recollection stated the new US investors had access to additional funding that they themselves did not have. This has been proven by the recent cash injection by Mr Silverstein who has reportedly injected a 'significant sum' into the club alongside new cash from the other US owners.
If the Trust was serious about preserving professional football in Swansea and avoiding the events of 2001 it would need significant ammounts of cash to be relevant. Selling share in the PL period was the best time to do this (with no significant legal fees). In the PL the asset value of the 21% had rocketted such that 95% of the Trusts assets were tied up in a PL football club. Just about the riskiest type of investment imaginable. They were sitting on a x100 mark up. They simply had to put themselves up for sale just like any seller.
There clearly were US buyers circling 2015 onwards with two buyer involved in serious talks and many other EPL and EFL clubs were taken over most without Trust holdings. The sterling crash of 20016 aided the US dollar buyers.
The Trust have managed their affairs to hold 21% and not hold cash. The recent cash call has been covered by a US loan that they want to turn into new shares in the club. The Trust as 21% owner should morally also contribute to the emergency funding and a maintain its share holding but is unable to do so leaving the responsibility to others.
I fully accept my view are not those of a normal fan. What needs to be understood is that Swansea fans are not normal fans but are more responsible than that and are actual owners. If the fans want to be 100% owners then the club will join Wrexham and Exeter in the lower parts of the leagues. The club is better off with the current US owners who have good track records in US sports but will make their assets sweat and keep a tight reign of the purse strings.. This is good for the club and good for the Trust. |
Well actually this cash injection (debatable wording) is no different to the loans that Morgan put in from time to time when he was a large stake holder.
We are 19 years on from 2001 and league football has been preserved?
Again- who would realistically want to buy 21% of the shares? Yes there were other potential buyers over the year's like the other American consortium but they didn't buy Morgan et al shares so why would they want to buy the trust's 21%?
So with the latest 'cash call' you also believe Jenkins and the other small shareholders should also have put money in then?
I believe the exact opposite - it's morally wrong to expect shareholders who either don't want to or don't have the funds to put money in especially when that shareholder finds itself in this position through deceit (there's no actual evidence the current share holders have actually called for trust investment in anyway).
I haven't seen anyone advocate for 100% Trust ownership. | |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 07:22 - Sep 21 with 2191 views | Chief |
You speak ResolvenSwan about the trust in the same terms as a multimillion pound corporation. They are not a an investment company, a hedgefund or a multinational. Their focus is SCFC - expecting them to be involved in stocks and investments is cloud cuckoo - they are volunteers working outside of their day jobs.
Some of the things though you mention such as investment matching while not being reality currently is now a possibility under our current majority owners.
The sell outs brought such complications to our club and the trust's table - with whom they had a shareholders agreement&actively deceived to push the deal through.
Your criticism is misplaced. | |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 09:16 - Sep 21 with 2159 views | Best_loser |
They meant the next level for their bank balance |  | | |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 10:21 - Sep 21 with 2133 views | builthjack |
The Americans came in to make money. Simple as that.
They thought in a few years they could sell us on.
Some would say they are business people. Others would say they are vultures.
But it all went wrong. Relegated.
If they sold now they would have to take a huge hit. That may well be their best option.
They will not invest to get us back up. They just live in hope.
The sooner they are gone the better. They dont communicate. They treat Swansea people like dirt. I would say they are vultures. |  |
| 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.
|
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 11:59 - Sep 21 with 2099 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 10:21 - Sep 21 by builthjack |
The Americans came in to make money. Simple as that.
They thought in a few years they could sell us on.
Some would say they are business people. Others would say they are vultures.
But it all went wrong. Relegated.
If they sold now they would have to take a huge hit. That may well be their best option.
They will not invest to get us back up. They just live in hope.
The sooner they are gone the better. They dont communicate. They treat Swansea people like dirt. I would say they are vultures. |
Your judgement is poor. If the US people just wanted to make money they should have invested in GlaxosmithKline Beecham PLC or Pfizer. 4% return every year sitting on their backsides. Kaplan retired from his normal business and Levien is a builder of sports businesses and very successful. They saw potential in Swansea city and still do. They will and have invested in Swansea and came close last season to returning to the PL. The EPL has global reach. The forum sages predicted a 'quick flip' and 4-5 years laters are still predicting a quick flip. Levien has been at DC for 8 years.
When Covid 19 hit the club was in trouble. The sick Swan was struggling. The Trust looked the other way sipping sherry with the QC while Mr Silverstein and the other Americans found the cash to keep it going. Not the characteristics of a vulture is it really? At least you call them Americans not 'Yanks'. Why did the Trust not contribute to the emergency loan.? The only people they invest in are London legal firms. The Vultures are the people the Trust drink sherry with and their bills are eyewatering. A Trust win in court will see tham with a 40-50% cut of the cake based on precident. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 12:04 - Sep 21 with 2092 views | BillyChong |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 07:22 - Sep 21 by Chief |
You speak ResolvenSwan about the trust in the same terms as a multimillion pound corporation. They are not a an investment company, a hedgefund or a multinational. Their focus is SCFC - expecting them to be involved in stocks and investments is cloud cuckoo - they are volunteers working outside of their day jobs.
Some of the things though you mention such as investment matching while not being reality currently is now a possibility under our current majority owners.
The sell outs brought such complications to our club and the trust's table - with whom they had a shareholders agreement&actively deceived to push the deal through.
Your criticism is misplaced. |
Spot on. Resloven will ignore this post as it hits the nail on the head as far as the purpose of the Trust is concerned. | | | |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 12:07 - Sep 21 with 2086 views | BillyChong |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 03:39 - Sep 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
Yes as I stated under my previous name, I am not too sure where this ''next level'' thing came from in the context it is being described, reminds me of the Trump ''fine people'' hoax that is still repeated today.
When Jenkins stated that, he was talking about not having the funds as owners to lend to the club on favourable terms which is why they needed bank loans to solve cashflow issues. I am pretty sure he also alluded to the fact their experience running clubs may lead to extra commercial revenue, hence the introduction of Pearlman.
So the next level as I understood it at the time was the next level of self sufficiency, not us turning into a Champions league club as many seem to be suggesting these days.
This was instrumental in us getting the stadium deal done (argument whether that is a good thing now relegated) which would have paved the way for stadium naming rights to be earned by the club had we have stayed up. [Post edited 21 Sep 2020 4:14]
|
Jenkins himself stated that the sale would help the club progress both on and off the pitch. | | | |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 12:39 - Sep 21 with 2077 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 07:22 - Sep 21 by Chief |
You speak ResolvenSwan about the trust in the same terms as a multimillion pound corporation. They are not a an investment company, a hedgefund or a multinational. Their focus is SCFC - expecting them to be involved in stocks and investments is cloud cuckoo - they are volunteers working outside of their day jobs.
Some of the things though you mention such as investment matching while not being reality currently is now a possibility under our current majority owners.
The sell outs brought such complications to our club and the trust's table - with whom they had a shareholders agreement&actively deceived to push the deal through.
Your criticism is misplaced. |
The Trust in the lower leagues was a group of men and women putting £10 in the Trust going through some paperwork rituals with meetings and nominating an accountant to sit on the board to observe and have an occasional darts night at somewhere in a local boozer.
THEN EVERYTHING CHANGED. The sporting football superstar Roberto Martinez walked through the door and every thng apart from the Trust went on to a different level. The Trust was given £600,000 to handle quite extra ordinary.
At 2011 the Trust actually was and still is A MULTI MILLIION POUND ORGANISATION as a FACT.
Worth £21m in 2016 worth about £7-8M today. They desperately needed advice on how to handle their asset. No QC on £3000 per hour was needed just a simple financial consultant on £250 an hour for a days work. Their focus is not the best interests of the Club but the best interests of themselves. Its obvious. They have gone very badly astray and the members need to bring it back to common sense with the approintment of an independant assessment to set out the future. There is serious money to be made if the constitution allows it. From what I have read it does.The CV for the new leadership seem very impressive and should be able to do more than organised dart nights and the occasional curry. [Post edited 21 Sep 2020 12:44]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 12:46 - Sep 21 with 2066 views | Chief |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 11:59 - Sep 21 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Your judgement is poor. If the US people just wanted to make money they should have invested in GlaxosmithKline Beecham PLC or Pfizer. 4% return every year sitting on their backsides. Kaplan retired from his normal business and Levien is a builder of sports businesses and very successful. They saw potential in Swansea city and still do. They will and have invested in Swansea and came close last season to returning to the PL. The EPL has global reach. The forum sages predicted a 'quick flip' and 4-5 years laters are still predicting a quick flip. Levien has been at DC for 8 years.
When Covid 19 hit the club was in trouble. The sick Swan was struggling. The Trust looked the other way sipping sherry with the QC while Mr Silverstein and the other Americans found the cash to keep it going. Not the characteristics of a vulture is it really? At least you call them Americans not 'Yanks'. Why did the Trust not contribute to the emergency loan.? The only people they invest in are London legal firms. The Vultures are the people the Trust drink sherry with and their bills are eyewatering. A Trust win in court will see tham with a 40-50% cut of the cake based on precident. |
Wasn't there a stat a few years ago stating that every team they are involved with was near the bottom of their divisions. DC United a traditional MLS powerhouse are still in a dire league position now. So while they maybe in a decent financial position (I've seen supporters claim the decline has been due to indifference&lack funds put into the squad - sound familiar? ), in a sporting sense they are not.
If we were that sick, should we really have bought Lowe? A player that realistically we could have done without in a position that shouldn't have been priority?
As for the legal bills, again you're criticism is misplaced - this could have been sorted now if the majority owners had engaged/participated/not withdrawn offers. | |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 12:57 - Sep 21 with 2051 views | Chief |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 12:39 - Sep 21 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The Trust in the lower leagues was a group of men and women putting £10 in the Trust going through some paperwork rituals with meetings and nominating an accountant to sit on the board to observe and have an occasional darts night at somewhere in a local boozer.
THEN EVERYTHING CHANGED. The sporting football superstar Roberto Martinez walked through the door and every thng apart from the Trust went on to a different level. The Trust was given £600,000 to handle quite extra ordinary.
At 2011 the Trust actually was and still is A MULTI MILLIION POUND ORGANISATION as a FACT.
Worth £21m in 2016 worth about £7-8M today. They desperately needed advice on how to handle their asset. No QC on £3000 per hour was needed just a simple financial consultant on £250 an hour for a days work. Their focus is not the best interests of the Club but the best interests of themselves. Its obvious. They have gone very badly astray and the members need to bring it back to common sense with the approintment of an independant assessment to set out the future. There is serious money to be made if the constitution allows it. From what I have read it does.The CV for the new leadership seem very impressive and should be able to do more than organised dart nights and the occasional curry. [Post edited 21 Sep 2020 12:44]
|
Agreed, the trust have humble beginnings&with the rise through the league's precipitated by the likes of Flynn, Jackett and Martinez of course the stakes got higher.
But the trust is still a supporters trust, not an investment vehicle - I have no idea as to the legality of trusts embarking on investment ventures that you keep banging on about. If it is allowed and a viable idea, why not try and get more involved in the trust&try to help out with these ideas of yours?
But again, you're basing this theory on the trust 1) wanting to sell their stake back then (why would they want to? ) and 2) finding a buyer. | |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 13:48 - Sep 21 with 2034 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 12:07 - Sep 21 by BillyChong |
Jenkins himself stated that the sale would help the club progress both on and off the pitch. |
Do you have a link to that? I’m pretty sure the only time he mentioned that was when discussing becoming self sufficient. | |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 13:55 - Sep 21 with 2026 views | builthjack |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 11:59 - Sep 21 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Your judgement is poor. If the US people just wanted to make money they should have invested in GlaxosmithKline Beecham PLC or Pfizer. 4% return every year sitting on their backsides. Kaplan retired from his normal business and Levien is a builder of sports businesses and very successful. They saw potential in Swansea city and still do. They will and have invested in Swansea and came close last season to returning to the PL. The EPL has global reach. The forum sages predicted a 'quick flip' and 4-5 years laters are still predicting a quick flip. Levien has been at DC for 8 years.
When Covid 19 hit the club was in trouble. The sick Swan was struggling. The Trust looked the other way sipping sherry with the QC while Mr Silverstein and the other Americans found the cash to keep it going. Not the characteristics of a vulture is it really? At least you call them Americans not 'Yanks'. Why did the Trust not contribute to the emergency loan.? The only people they invest in are London legal firms. The Vultures are the people the Trust drink sherry with and their bills are eyewatering. A Trust win in court will see tham with a 40-50% cut of the cake based on precident. |
I think i am spot on. Time will tell. | |
| 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.
|
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 21:54 - Sep 21 with 1934 views | Dr_Parnassus |
“Progress” is what he said. We were going backwards as we had reached our financial maximum. Our wage bill at pretty much maxed out and we needed to find new revenue streams.
This next level thing is nonsense with how is talked about today. | |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 22:06 - Sep 21 with 1926 views | Chief |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 21:54 - Sep 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
“Progress” is what he said. We were going backwards as we had reached our financial maximum. Our wage bill at pretty much maxed out and we needed to find new revenue streams.
This next level thing is nonsense with how is talked about today. |
And we've done the opposite - we've regressed on (relegated, stayed down for two seasons after&with no more than an outside chance this season) & off the pitch (scouting&signing young talent all but dried up,academy downgraded, stadium becoming a mess, etc, etc) | |
| |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 22:30 - Sep 21 with 1906 views | Garyjack |
| When Huw Jenkins talked about on 21:54 - Sep 21 by Dr_Parnassus |
“Progress” is what he said. We were going backwards as we had reached our financial maximum. Our wage bill at pretty much maxed out and we needed to find new revenue streams.
This next level thing is nonsense with how is talked about today. |
So with our wage bill 'maxed out' we resign Bony and Ayew on a combined wage of 200k a week. Did the yanks fund that then did they? Did they hell! They allowed their best signing 'Huw' as i recall them stating, to blow every single penny of the money we received on outgoing players, on two signings who have had a major impact on crippling the club financially. The Yanks have put zero revenue into the club as is evident from the 'loan' from Silverstein. Why didn't Kaplan and Levein themselves loan the club cash? There's not a good picture being painted here is there! |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
