| Money being moved around? 09:40 - Jan 13 with 10899 views | Chief |
Poster seems to think 5million has been sent over to America from the football club:
Anyone make any sense of it? |  |
| |  |
| Money being moved around? on 22:42 - Jan 14 with 1393 views | Catullus |
| Money being moved around? on 22:00 - Jan 14 by AndyCole |
"All I know is in all these things good relations with other shareholders is essential for cooperation."
This.
It seems the trust as we know it and their ilk (as seen on this very thread) is ill equipped, amateurish and uncouth. The responses to your posts says it all. |
Well I don't particulalrly like getting personal, I try not to but even so, amateurish and ill equipped?
Res admits he isn't a financial expert, maybe Lisa could remind where her skillset lays ?
I could be wrong but I think she knows more about it than Res. |  |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 22:43 - Jan 14 with 1393 views | Badlands |
| Money being moved around? on 17:29 - Jan 14 by Chief |
You can say it failed, but what conceivable way could it have prevented it? They can't have power over the actions of other people influenced by personal enrichment.
Not sure why you're linking the trust suing the owners and club being skint. You know the club isn't the entity being taken to court.
Easy for the weak moaners who enjoy to stick their head in the sand to say they're an irrelevance. Winter has said they're working closely with the trust so they must have some say. And they still own 21% of the club. No doubt though you'll be happy to enjoy the fruit of the trust's labour's in future if they achieve their aims though. |
I was a member but could see no point in putting any more cash into it. Once the club realised it was going to be massively overspent the Trust should have agreed to either sell its shares along with Jenkins et al or negotiated buy out sufficient shares to make itself a relevant shareholder.
Agreeing to sell could well have seen more interest in a purchase buying some control may have prevented any sale. It seems many would like us continued to be owned locally and bankrupt rather than partially owned by foreigners and solvent.
Winter is working with the Trust as previous Chairmen have but in much the same way as many chairmen work with strong and well organised supporters groups.
fruits of labour!
What fruits? It seems to me the moaners are the ones who think the majority shareholders should be handing over their own cash to satisfy the ambitions (but not commitment) of fans who have somehow forgotten who we are and believe we have a god given right to be in the top division.
Should we aim to be there? Yes.
Does our history dictate we are a top division club? No.
Are we in a better position in our history bar 12 season? Yes.
As I have stated many, many times if the moaners and Trust want to run the club buy out the shares. Pearlman and Birch both stated the US shareholders would always be prepared to listen to sensible business deals. |  |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 22:50 - Jan 14 with 1371 views | Catullus |
| Money being moved around? on 22:43 - Jan 14 by Badlands |
I was a member but could see no point in putting any more cash into it. Once the club realised it was going to be massively overspent the Trust should have agreed to either sell its shares along with Jenkins et al or negotiated buy out sufficient shares to make itself a relevant shareholder.
Agreeing to sell could well have seen more interest in a purchase buying some control may have prevented any sale. It seems many would like us continued to be owned locally and bankrupt rather than partially owned by foreigners and solvent.
Winter is working with the Trust as previous Chairmen have but in much the same way as many chairmen work with strong and well organised supporters groups.
fruits of labour!
What fruits? It seems to me the moaners are the ones who think the majority shareholders should be handing over their own cash to satisfy the ambitions (but not commitment) of fans who have somehow forgotten who we are and believe we have a god given right to be in the top division.
Should we aim to be there? Yes.
Does our history dictate we are a top division club? No.
Are we in a better position in our history bar 12 season? Yes.
As I have stated many, many times if the moaners and Trust want to run the club buy out the shares. Pearlman and Birch both stated the US shareholders would always be prepared to listen to sensible business deals. |
Your first paragraph, we already know the trust was kept out of the sale.
I think we also know the trust had hoped to increase it's holding but weren't allowed to because if they owned above a certian amount the club couldn't have been sold without their OK.
The second part, somebody who knows more than me will have to confirm but I think it's right.
Your second paragraph is where a large amount of anger comes from. Our local owners screwed us. They overspent, misspent and mismanaged then sold the club in a very sneaky manner, screwing the trust over.
I have nothing against our new owners. I think they have done a pretty good job, all things considered. Better than I'd expected anyway.
Our previous owners however, best leave it there. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 22:52 - Jan 14 with 1369 views | Garyjack |
| Money being moved around? on 22:00 - Jan 14 by AndyCole |
"All I know is in all these things good relations with other shareholders is essential for cooperation."
This.
It seems the trust as we know it and their ilk (as seen on this very thread) is ill equipped, amateurish and uncouth. The responses to your posts says it all. |
Why not post your own opinions instead of hanging on to someone else's coat tails?
Andy Cole?  |  | | |
| Money being moved around? on 23:03 - Jan 14 with 1350 views | AndyCole |
| Money being moved around? on 22:42 - Jan 14 by Catullus |
Well I don't particulalrly like getting personal, I try not to but even so, amateurish and ill equipped?
Res admits he isn't a financial expert, maybe Lisa could remind where her skillset lays ?
I could be wrong but I think she knows more about it than Res. |
Amateurish and uncouth was a direct reference to the responses made to Res, parallels drawn to the way in which the trust behaves.
It's not about who's the best book-keeper. Technical financial jargon is a deflection from the real issues. A shield used by those that are out of their depth in the real issues.
Res seems to give it his best shot and yet gets pilloried by some random book-keeper, swooping in from the dark side. | |
| Pro free speech and alternative opinions -
Anti gang-bullying and poor modding thereof -
Will always make a stand against those who consistently choose to turn a blind eye |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 23:58 - Jan 14 with 1321 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 22:00 - Jan 14 by AndyCole |
"All I know is in all these things good relations with other shareholders is essential for cooperation."
This.
It seems the trust as we know it and their ilk (as seen on this very thread) is ill equipped, amateurish and uncouth. The responses to your posts says it all. |
Was the Americans keeping the trust excluded from their negotiations a good way to kick off a relationship with their fellow shareholders then?
If they are so ill equipped, why has Winter recently said he is working productively with the trust at present?
Your statement was pretty unfounded wasn't it? | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 00:13 - Jan 15 with 1313 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 22:43 - Jan 14 by Badlands |
I was a member but could see no point in putting any more cash into it. Once the club realised it was going to be massively overspent the Trust should have agreed to either sell its shares along with Jenkins et al or negotiated buy out sufficient shares to make itself a relevant shareholder.
Agreeing to sell could well have seen more interest in a purchase buying some control may have prevented any sale. It seems many would like us continued to be owned locally and bankrupt rather than partially owned by foreigners and solvent.
Winter is working with the Trust as previous Chairmen have but in much the same way as many chairmen work with strong and well organised supporters groups.
fruits of labour!
What fruits? It seems to me the moaners are the ones who think the majority shareholders should be handing over their own cash to satisfy the ambitions (but not commitment) of fans who have somehow forgotten who we are and believe we have a god given right to be in the top division.
Should we aim to be there? Yes.
Does our history dictate we are a top division club? No.
Are we in a better position in our history bar 12 season? Yes.
As I have stated many, many times if the moaners and Trust want to run the club buy out the shares. Pearlman and Birch both stated the US shareholders would always be prepared to listen to sensible business deals. |
How could they agree to selling their shares 'along with Jenkins et al' when (and you must surely be aware of this now) that the trust were only made aware thar Jenkins et al were selling their shares at a very late stage of the proceedings?.
Buy shares off who exactly? The trust has always stated its aim was to make it 25%.
Well seeing as the Americans haven't invested any of their own money into the club's accounts (besides recent probably unrequired loans), this means the club is being run along the same lines as the previous owners who also didn't invest their own money. So what makes you think we'd be bankrupt? There's no evidence to suggest we would be. Just like in the previous regime we get by by selling players.
A fruit of the trust's labour in many years to come could be still having a professional football team in Swansea. As i said, all the moaners and defeatists will be happy to enjoy that then.
Well im not one of those moaners, i do not want the club in the pocket of a hedgefund thanks. I do not want their money.
Where has anyone ever said that the trust want to run the whole club!?
Pearlman? Business deals? What are you on about? You do realise what Pearlman's role was? Are you expecting the trust to become the shirt sponsor or something?
I know you'll probably ignore this as you tend to do, but I'm still waiting for a reply from another post i made in response to one of yours further up the thread.
Easy to make spurious and outlandish posts and then run away when questioned as to the validity of them i suppose. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 00:18 - Jan 15 with 1306 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 23:03 - Jan 14 by AndyCole |
Amateurish and uncouth was a direct reference to the responses made to Res, parallels drawn to the way in which the trust behaves.
It's not about who's the best book-keeper. Technical financial jargon is a deflection from the real issues. A shield used by those that are out of their depth in the real issues.
Res seems to give it his best shot and yet gets pilloried by some random book-keeper, swooping in from the dark side. |
Do you have any examples of how the trust has acted in an 'uncouth and amateurish' manner then?
Or is that another random unfounded statement?
If you'd been keeoing track of Resolvens previous (numerous) posts on this topic is the only he does is best to do is to discredit the trust at every conceivable juncture, while also being completely blinkered and oblivious to the American's conduct and shortcomings.
And theres absolutely no one that loves to show off his love of stocks, shares and finance more than Resolven by throwing in soundbytes, clichés and jargon. [Post edited 15 Jan 2021 0:23]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Money being moved around? on 13:46 - Jan 15 with 1221 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
My perspective.
The Trust people quite naturally do no like people like me questioning their performance and I am not surprised. I never get personal and never will. They are volunteers and deserve credit for picking up the baton. When using MS word I get by with spell check.
Its a simple fact that if Swansea city return to the Premier league the club would be worth £200m based on the valuation of Burnley bought by US sports investors. Based on that the Trusts shares would be worth in an around a whopping £42m. (if a buyer could be found)
Selling the shares for £42m is in my opinion not 'pie in the sky' as some would like to think. Takeovers are quite often for 100% ownership. The Trust were not ready to sell in 2016 and are not ready now. Clearly the best strategy is to get the ducks in line with a mandate to sell off the members and get networking. Are they doing this? Why not?
The argument that their holding is 'unsellible' is simply wrong and lazy thinking. Only a fool would buy that nonscence. Like all sales it is simply a matter of price. If the buyers of Swansea city LLP (USA) are willing to pay £2m per 1% to the "Yankees" you might think buying the Trust s shares for £1.8m per 1% might be of interest to them would you not? Unsellable I do not think so. The Trust share are as valuable as anyone else's.
If you consider Levien and co will want to sell their shares in the Premier League for say £200m like Burnley the Trust could have a little word with them and tell them they will be putting their shares up for sale in the Premier League for £1.8m per 1%. A selling agent has been emplyed and an advert will be put in the Wall Street Journal, South East Asia Times and New York Times. I am not financial guru but It seem to me the buyer would buy the Trust's shares first saving themselves £4,2m. To avoid being undercut Levien and co would want either to buy those shares themselves or include the Trust in the sale. It does not matter if you are selling lambs in Carmarthen or football clubs in New York the principlesare the same.
The arguments for the legal case are well and truly shot to bits. (in my opinion).
The legal case was based on a false projection of the club tumbling donw the leagues heading for administration. The US people have loaned their own money to prevent that happening.
Why force as sale for £14-15m before tax when the valuation is £42m? You not not need to be an accountant and a SE1 post code to see that. I know how to spell 'bonkers'. The QC was right it is a 'last resort'. It is not time to eat the family dog. 'Set Bonzo free' as Stan Stennett used to say. [Post edited 15 Jan 2021 13:48]
|  |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 14:00 - Jan 15 with 1207 views | onehunglow |
| Money being moved around? on 13:46 - Jan 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
My perspective.
The Trust people quite naturally do no like people like me questioning their performance and I am not surprised. I never get personal and never will. They are volunteers and deserve credit for picking up the baton. When using MS word I get by with spell check.
Its a simple fact that if Swansea city return to the Premier league the club would be worth £200m based on the valuation of Burnley bought by US sports investors. Based on that the Trusts shares would be worth in an around a whopping £42m. (if a buyer could be found)
Selling the shares for £42m is in my opinion not 'pie in the sky' as some would like to think. Takeovers are quite often for 100% ownership. The Trust were not ready to sell in 2016 and are not ready now. Clearly the best strategy is to get the ducks in line with a mandate to sell off the members and get networking. Are they doing this? Why not?
The argument that their holding is 'unsellible' is simply wrong and lazy thinking. Only a fool would buy that nonscence. Like all sales it is simply a matter of price. If the buyers of Swansea city LLP (USA) are willing to pay £2m per 1% to the "Yankees" you might think buying the Trust s shares for £1.8m per 1% might be of interest to them would you not? Unsellable I do not think so. The Trust share are as valuable as anyone else's.
If you consider Levien and co will want to sell their shares in the Premier League for say £200m like Burnley the Trust could have a little word with them and tell them they will be putting their shares up for sale in the Premier League for £1.8m per 1%. A selling agent has been emplyed and an advert will be put in the Wall Street Journal, South East Asia Times and New York Times. I am not financial guru but It seem to me the buyer would buy the Trust's shares first saving themselves £4,2m. To avoid being undercut Levien and co would want either to buy those shares themselves or include the Trust in the sale. It does not matter if you are selling lambs in Carmarthen or football clubs in New York the principlesare the same.
The arguments for the legal case are well and truly shot to bits. (in my opinion).
The legal case was based on a false projection of the club tumbling donw the leagues heading for administration. The US people have loaned their own money to prevent that happening.
Why force as sale for £14-15m before tax when the valuation is £42m? You not not need to be an accountant and a SE1 post code to see that. I know how to spell 'bonkers'. The QC was right it is a 'last resort'. It is not time to eat the family dog. 'Set Bonzo free' as Stan Stennett used to say. [Post edited 15 Jan 2021 13:48]
|
I am no accounant Res.
We seem to have forensic accountants like lisa in london who are fully aware of what we are ,where we are going as well as what we went wrong.
Question is why did these people not invest anything into the club.At least Jenks and Dineen and the Clog did so.The main reason for this action is pure envy and jealousy with of course revenge- and this is going to help the club .
My take. We are where we are because,a people and a fan base ,we are a glorious rabble who cannot decide on anything. Whilst professing to be "working class" and all for equality,the first thing we do is to fook off and take the foreman' job.
The Trust was there to protect and manifestly failed. Too many simply didnt know,apparently.
Too many in Wales look backwards and our situation is a perfect example.
No wonder why we haven't been sold by the Yanks as ,football n=being a small world,must see us and our squabbles as toxic.
We were toxic in the 80s too | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 14:33 - Jan 15 with 1190 views | pikeypaul |
| Money being moved around? on 22:50 - Jan 14 by Catullus |
Your first paragraph, we already know the trust was kept out of the sale.
I think we also know the trust had hoped to increase it's holding but weren't allowed to because if they owned above a certian amount the club couldn't have been sold without their OK.
The second part, somebody who knows more than me will have to confirm but I think it's right.
Your second paragraph is where a large amount of anger comes from. Our local owners screwed us. They overspent, misspent and mismanaged then sold the club in a very sneaky manner, screwing the trust over.
I have nothing against our new owners. I think they have done a pretty good job, all things considered. Better than I'd expected anyway.
Our previous owners however, best leave it there. |
Perfectly summed up.
Thank you.
His comment earlier saying “why should the yanks invest their own money” says it all and the fact that they only came here to take and plunder whilst giving nothing, that’s how edge funds work, it’s only about the money to them.
[Post edited 15 Jan 2021 15:11]
|  |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 14:47 - Jan 15 with 1180 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Money being moved around? on 12:54 - Jan 14 by Chief |
Hes right, his words are queasy. Just a continuation of his cheer leading agenda of the American owners&he thinks they can do no wrong. While there a lot of worse owners around, they should be rightfully called out when do drop a clanger. And as per my post further up the thread grossly underselling our best asset while around the same time taking on debt for the club cannot be a good thing. Especially when Winter himself stated the finances are ok and there was no debt. [Post edited 14 Jan 2021 13:05]
|
I used the word queasy because praising the US ownership will have a strong negative "emmotional" reaction in some section of the South Wales political community. It is based on political not football or business factors. I wondered if I would be accused of being a 'boot licker' but credit to the posters for not doing that.
A Convertible Loan note CLN of £10m? to keep the club in the black therefore becomes "cash dumping". The alternative is the club going into adminsitrattion when you again would jump up and down saying you were right along and the Swansea council should intervene. This would fall into the traditional local narrative.
The £10m CLN was good business. It came before the Rodon sale and gave the CEO reassurance that his back was covered. Birch said offer £7m and "they will have to bite you hand off. Believe me Ive seen the books" . He did not factor in the CLN. Great guy by the way. I hope Winter does not go to Spurs. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 16:13 - Jan 15 with 1157 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 13:46 - Jan 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
My perspective.
The Trust people quite naturally do no like people like me questioning their performance and I am not surprised. I never get personal and never will. They are volunteers and deserve credit for picking up the baton. When using MS word I get by with spell check.
Its a simple fact that if Swansea city return to the Premier league the club would be worth £200m based on the valuation of Burnley bought by US sports investors. Based on that the Trusts shares would be worth in an around a whopping £42m. (if a buyer could be found)
Selling the shares for £42m is in my opinion not 'pie in the sky' as some would like to think. Takeovers are quite often for 100% ownership. The Trust were not ready to sell in 2016 and are not ready now. Clearly the best strategy is to get the ducks in line with a mandate to sell off the members and get networking. Are they doing this? Why not?
The argument that their holding is 'unsellible' is simply wrong and lazy thinking. Only a fool would buy that nonscence. Like all sales it is simply a matter of price. If the buyers of Swansea city LLP (USA) are willing to pay £2m per 1% to the "Yankees" you might think buying the Trust s shares for £1.8m per 1% might be of interest to them would you not? Unsellable I do not think so. The Trust share are as valuable as anyone else's.
If you consider Levien and co will want to sell their shares in the Premier League for say £200m like Burnley the Trust could have a little word with them and tell them they will be putting their shares up for sale in the Premier League for £1.8m per 1%. A selling agent has been emplyed and an advert will be put in the Wall Street Journal, South East Asia Times and New York Times. I am not financial guru but It seem to me the buyer would buy the Trust's shares first saving themselves £4,2m. To avoid being undercut Levien and co would want either to buy those shares themselves or include the Trust in the sale. It does not matter if you are selling lambs in Carmarthen or football clubs in New York the principlesare the same.
The arguments for the legal case are well and truly shot to bits. (in my opinion).
The legal case was based on a false projection of the club tumbling donw the leagues heading for administration. The US people have loaned their own money to prevent that happening.
Why force as sale for £14-15m before tax when the valuation is £42m? You not not need to be an accountant and a SE1 post code to see that. I know how to spell 'bonkers'. The QC was right it is a 'last resort'. It is not time to eat the family dog. 'Set Bonzo free' as Stan Stennett used to say. [Post edited 15 Jan 2021 13:48]
|
Some good points there in fairness.
But:
- Not sure we'd be quite worth same as Burnley. They own the ground and have been in the Prem for several years now.
- Some takeovers are 100% yes. We know from experience that this is not always the case. Especially where the club ownership is fractured & a portion under the ownership of a holding company.
- getting a mandate on selling shares probably isn't vert practical at the present time with preparation for the legal case ongoing. However, the trust has a mandate for legal action that could possibly result in a share sale. So the members aren't averse to the prospect & that's also no secret to any potential buyers.
- Id argue that the trust's shares in isolation are not as valuable as the others as they do not come with voting rights, buying the holding companies shares does.
- paragraph 5 assumes the Americans will let the trust know if / when they want to or are planning to sell. They've been part of a plot excluding them previously so im not confident they would.
- The Americans are going to great lengths to not buy the trust's shares at 2016 figures, i think its extremely unlikely as you suggest that they'll be interested in buying them in the event of promotion.
- The QC said the trust have a good case - they would have taken absolutely no notice of the fact that we haven't been relegated further, so not sure how the arguments are shot to bits. The events that occurred during the sale haven't changed.
- oh i thought the loan was to see us through Covid?
- The valuation isn't £42Million.
- you know this, but just to put right your misrepresentation of the 'last resort' term - that was merely in relation to exhausting other dispute resolution options in order to try and get an out of court settlement to save on fees and not take a case to court that doesn't need to be. Courts look kindly on such conduct. Its nothing to do with the strength of the case itself. Which were told is strong. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 16:22 - Jan 15 with 1152 views | onehunglow |
| Money being moved around? on 11:55 - Jan 13 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Have you ever taken legal action of you own Paul? I am always suspect of people advocating legal action relying on other people's money and other peoples time. Its even worse when its other other people's borrowed money and other other peoples time. All underwritten by the Trust asset valuation which is not owned by anyone.
Legal action is serious business and no place for volunteers or people placed into the firing line involuntarily. |
Legal action means placing oneself into the hands of those who would rob their own mother’s breast milk | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 16:23 - Jan 15 with 1152 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 14:47 - Jan 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I used the word queasy because praising the US ownership will have a strong negative "emmotional" reaction in some section of the South Wales political community. It is based on political not football or business factors. I wondered if I would be accused of being a 'boot licker' but credit to the posters for not doing that.
A Convertible Loan note CLN of £10m? to keep the club in the black therefore becomes "cash dumping". The alternative is the club going into adminsitrattion when you again would jump up and down saying you were right along and the Swansea council should intervene. This would fall into the traditional local narrative.
The £10m CLN was good business. It came before the Rodon sale and gave the CEO reassurance that his back was covered. Birch said offer £7m and "they will have to bite you hand off. Believe me Ive seen the books" . He did not factor in the CLN. Great guy by the way. I hope Winter does not go to Spurs. |
- To suggest that we'd have gone into administration without this loan is complete scaremongering. Why are you ignoring what Winter said?
- yea the CLN was set in motion prior to selling Rodon. You said it would help to get us a good price. That evidently didn't happen. He was still sold for well below what he's actually worth.
- Why not give the £10mill back then, seeing as you're trying to frame as it just so happened to go through before we sold Rodon. It'll save the club interest. So Birch a great bloke and businessman was unaware of the loan? | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 16:28 - Jan 15 with 1145 views | onehunglow |
| Money being moved around? on 22:42 - Jan 14 by Catullus |
Well I don't particulalrly like getting personal, I try not to but even so, amateurish and ill equipped?
Res admits he isn't a financial expert, maybe Lisa could remind where her skillset lays ?
I could be wrong but I think she knows more about it than Res. |
You might be wrong. Lisa was involved in the Trust,if my memory serves me correctly, yet the organisation seems to be flaky to say the least.
Why is Res getting this unfettered filth.
There are arses uplenty up each other’s on this subject.
Experts like Lisa ,our omnipotent expert effectively helping the club not one bit.We have more interaction with fans insulting each other when what we should be asking is where has the big money gone and why was the Trust impotent in ensuring the money did vanish. An organisation to oversee the club and ensure it was protected.
No way. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 16:31 - Jan 15 with 1141 views | onehunglow |
| Money being moved around? on 23:03 - Jan 14 by AndyCole |
Amateurish and uncouth was a direct reference to the responses made to Res, parallels drawn to the way in which the trust behaves.
It's not about who's the best book-keeper. Technical financial jargon is a deflection from the real issues. A shield used by those that are out of their depth in the real issues.
Res seems to give it his best shot and yet gets pilloried by some random book-keeper, swooping in from the dark side. |
It’s gang culture Andy. We are not chums,nor do we know each other but we think objectively and not like the pitiful cadre of smartarses who do nothing at all apart from alienate fans.
Majority of fans are outside these sites so the legends are known by very few . | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 16:42 - Jan 15 with 1134 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Money being moved around? on 16:23 - Jan 15 by Chief |
- To suggest that we'd have gone into administration without this loan is complete scaremongering. Why are you ignoring what Winter said?
- yea the CLN was set in motion prior to selling Rodon. You said it would help to get us a good price. That evidently didn't happen. He was still sold for well below what he's actually worth.
- Why not give the £10mill back then, seeing as you're trying to frame as it just so happened to go through before we sold Rodon. It'll save the club interest. So Birch a great bloke and businessman was unaware of the loan? |
Eric Garcia 6 ft tall . A little younger than Rodon.
Highly promising 16 games Manchester city. Spanish international. 4 caps.
Manchester city will sell for £8.9m Two payments of around £4.5m.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport
You have to take you hat of to Norwich for Godfrey. Then gain Everton spent £45m for Gylfi. [Post edited 15 Jan 2021 16:45]
| |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 16:45 - Jan 15 with 1130 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 14:00 - Jan 15 by onehunglow |
I am no accounant Res.
We seem to have forensic accountants like lisa in london who are fully aware of what we are ,where we are going as well as what we went wrong.
Question is why did these people not invest anything into the club.At least Jenks and Dineen and the Clog did so.The main reason for this action is pure envy and jealousy with of course revenge- and this is going to help the club .
My take. We are where we are because,a people and a fan base ,we are a glorious rabble who cannot decide on anything. Whilst professing to be "working class" and all for equality,the first thing we do is to fook off and take the foreman' job.
The Trust was there to protect and manifestly failed. Too many simply didnt know,apparently.
Too many in Wales look backwards and our situation is a perfect example.
No wonder why we haven't been sold by the Yanks as ,football n=being a small world,must see us and our squabbles as toxic.
We were toxic in the 80s too |
Your posts are always interesting and strange fair play:
- Jenkins and Clog didn't invest anything in the club. They bought shares.
- Envy? From who? The main reason for the action is to safeguard the trust's and the club's future. Why would the trust spend money on legal fees etc just to see the sellouts have a ticking off? Makes no sense.
- where we are in what sense? The championship? How's that down to the fans not deciding what we want? If we all came to a consensus - not sure what the options are mind, would that automatically promote us to the Prem?
- how do you suggest the trust were meant to stop the sellouts breaking a shareholders agreement and the new owners setting up a holding company?
- the trust is exactly looking forward - getting funds is exactly that. Not sitting stewinh doing nothing.
- do you think the yanks have tried to sell us then? And wouldn't you think that the club getting relegated and consequently not being worth anywhere near what they paid for it would be a more likely reason for them not selling? | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 16:59 - Jan 15 with 1122 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 16:42 - Jan 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Eric Garcia 6 ft tall . A little younger than Rodon.
Highly promising 16 games Manchester city. Spanish international. 4 caps.
Manchester city will sell for £8.9m Two payments of around £4.5m.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport
You have to take you hat of to Norwich for Godfrey. Then gain Everton spent £45m for Gylfi. [Post edited 15 Jan 2021 16:45]
|
Yea don't really think you can compare Garcia to Rodon. Hes from Barcelona, surplus to requirements at City & the two clubs have a relationship.
And he rejected a contract extension in August.... | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 17:22 - Jan 15 with 1102 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Money being moved around? on 16:59 - Jan 15 by Chief |
Yea don't really think you can compare Garcia to Rodon. Hes from Barcelona, surplus to requirements at City & the two clubs have a relationship.
And he rejected a contract extension in August.... |
City had to sell and cut the price from £18m to £9m. A player good enough to play for city and Barcelona and Spain. 16 PL games under his belt.
Swansea had to sell Rodon and cut the price from £25m to £15m (on appearnces). Zero games in the PL. Swansea have a relationship with Spurs Levy and Birch. Gylfi Naughton Carrol etc. Replacements in place from academy. Cabango and Cooper. Rodon has a job to convince Mr M I genuinely wish him the best of luck. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 17:31 - Jan 15 with 1099 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 17:22 - Jan 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
City had to sell and cut the price from £18m to £9m. A player good enough to play for city and Barcelona and Spain. 16 PL games under his belt.
Swansea had to sell Rodon and cut the price from £25m to £15m (on appearnces). Zero games in the PL. Swansea have a relationship with Spurs Levy and Birch. Gylfi Naughton Carrol etc. Replacements in place from academy. Cabango and Cooper. Rodon has a job to convince Mr M I genuinely wish him the best of luck. |
City chose to cash in on a fringe player who could go for a much smaller fee when out of contract.
Why did we have to sell Rodon? As you keep saying we by that point had the loan. Rodon wss under contract. Imagine his value in the Premier league if we get promoted? What replacement is in place from the academy?
We've received 11million. That's it currently. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 17:42 - Jan 15 with 1096 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Money being moved around? on 17:31 - Jan 15 by Chief |
City chose to cash in on a fringe player who could go for a much smaller fee when out of contract.
Why did we have to sell Rodon? As you keep saying we by that point had the loan. Rodon wss under contract. Imagine his value in the Premier league if we get promoted? What replacement is in place from the academy?
We've received 11million. That's it currently. |
Cabango and Cooper are good to go when fit obviously. If you believe in the academy system you need vacancies.
I suggest selling Rodon was definately required before the CLN. What is unknown was what Rodon was saying with regards to a new contract. Selling with 2 years on the deal is ideal.
SCFC alsmost certainly have not recieved £11m. Some of this will be Tottenham's debt. I doubt it was an up front payment. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 18:18 - Jan 15 with 1084 views | Chief |
| Money being moved around? on 17:42 - Jan 15 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Cabango and Cooper are good to go when fit obviously. If you believe in the academy system you need vacancies.
I suggest selling Rodon was definately required before the CLN. What is unknown was what Rodon was saying with regards to a new contract. Selling with 2 years on the deal is ideal.
SCFC alsmost certainly have not recieved £11m. Some of this will be Tottenham's debt. I doubt it was an up front payment. |
Cabango was playing alongside Rodon and Cooper wss on loan at Newport (only recalled due to an injury crisis) so neither will or have stepped into the vacancy.
But you're saying the CLN was before the sale. So we didn't really need to sell him.
Again that makes it an even worse deal. If i was flogging him on deadline day I'd certainly want a huge chunk up front.
I'm not saying never sell him or our assets, that's how we survive, but wait until an acceptable offer comes which im in no doubt would have come. We should have kept our nerve. | |
| |
| Money being moved around? on 18:41 - Jan 15 with 1075 views | BillyChong |
| Money being moved around? on 00:13 - Jan 15 by Chief |
How could they agree to selling their shares 'along with Jenkins et al' when (and you must surely be aware of this now) that the trust were only made aware thar Jenkins et al were selling their shares at a very late stage of the proceedings?.
Buy shares off who exactly? The trust has always stated its aim was to make it 25%.
Well seeing as the Americans haven't invested any of their own money into the club's accounts (besides recent probably unrequired loans), this means the club is being run along the same lines as the previous owners who also didn't invest their own money. So what makes you think we'd be bankrupt? There's no evidence to suggest we would be. Just like in the previous regime we get by by selling players.
A fruit of the trust's labour in many years to come could be still having a professional football team in Swansea. As i said, all the moaners and defeatists will be happy to enjoy that then.
Well im not one of those moaners, i do not want the club in the pocket of a hedgefund thanks. I do not want their money.
Where has anyone ever said that the trust want to run the whole club!?
Pearlman? Business deals? What are you on about? You do realise what Pearlman's role was? Are you expecting the trust to become the shirt sponsor or something?
I know you'll probably ignore this as you tend to do, but I'm still waiting for a reply from another post i made in response to one of yours further up the thread.
Easy to make spurious and outlandish posts and then run away when questioned as to the validity of them i suppose. |
Any mention of the below gets ignored by the sellout fan club:
1) the trust being kept in the dark about the sale
2) the shareholders agreement
3) the model/purpose of a supporters trust when it comes to investment | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.