| Badlands 16:29 - Jan 31 with 8390 views | swancity |
Who is he ? A genuine fan ?
And why the hatred of our manager? Why try to desperately find things to criticise him constantly? And yet offer no praise whatsoever?
It’s weird. Very weird. Intriguing.
Just why ?
|  |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |  |
| Badlands on 13:38 - Feb 2 with 1009 views | onehunglow |
| Badlands on 13:35 - Feb 2 by KeithHaynes |
The benefits of being in the premier league will appeal to them. |
They appeal to me.
It's the only place to be | |
| |
| Badlands on 13:58 - Feb 2 with 1001 views | Chief |
| Badlands on 13:14 - Feb 2 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Any organisation that has 95% of its assets in a medium ranked football team should at all times be looking to lower their risk profile. Any financial advisor would tell them the risk profile is the pinnacle of the risk piramid. It is one level hgher than 'very high risk'. "bonkers risk" (my classification) in fact. Speak to your local friendly financial advisor.
Despite this the Trust in 2015 -2016 said either they did not want to sell or selling "was not prefered option". They did not understand risk. If they wanted to sell in 2015 -2016 they should have put themselves up for sale. They had no coherent strategy.
The sale to the US people has forced them to give some thought about a 'strategy' and true to form they have come up with a bad strategy. This involves forcing a sale by legal means and paying prohibitive fees to third party insurers, funder, lenders. They cannot themselves afford legal action.
The strategy only makes sense if Swansea city are perforing badly and falling down the leagues and residing in league 2 for a decade or two like Notts County. This would have happened if as expected the "yankee asset strippers" had taken money out of the club sold all the players. Instead they have put in £5m-£10m brought in two full internationals at discount prices, replaced the playing surface and maintained the stadium. Levien was never an asset stripper. One look at CV tells you that. He has been at DC for almost a decade.
The Trust will get a mark up on their shares if they win their case of course. It will however be 40-50% less that it would have been if the Trust had put themselves up for sale in 2015. The Trust argued that there was "no alternativves left" . The members bought this argument. They have been proven wrong.
The new leadership of the Trust should be brave enough to ditch old failed strategies and start networking. Inflation and the success of the team has destroyed the logic of a legal case. They should stop wasting money on third party organisations / advisors and back the club. Employing a respected business strategist to give recommendations and look at their options would give them a way out of following the existing questionable strategy.
The US owners could be at this club for another 10 years or more. [Post edited 2 Feb 2021 13:18]
|
Oh dear. Today's monologue has been posted. Ah well here we go. Although none of this is new to you:
Of course you're completely ignoring the fact of what type of entity the trust are. They aren't an investment body or venture capitalists etc they are a supporters trust. Thus i doubt they cared at what their shares were worth or how risky they could be perceived to be when working alongside mainly local shareholders they trusted (incorrectly) backed up by a shareholders agreement which should have protected them (&still may). So you're just clutching at another straw with little relevance to anything at this moment to bash them with.
They had a coherent strategy. You've been told it repeatedly, yet ignore it.
How can it be a bad course of action? The case (which a QC has stated is strong) may result in them receiving funds for their shares. How much of a mark up will they have on them? If the fees were prohibitive the action wouldn't or won't be going ahead. So at present that's inaccurate.
Incorrect. As usual you are ignoring key facts that are not suited to your agenda. As far as we know there is no obligation for the majority shareholders to include or make the aware of any trust in any sale negotiations meaning they can sell to anyone who'll gain full control of the club without the trust receiving any money or input at all. We're down a division from when the Americans took over as it stands so their investment and the trust's shares are worth less. The trust has an opportunity to monetise those shares at Premier league prices. The rest of the stuff you right about some fans thinking we'll tumble down the divisions is completely irrelevant. Similarly are all the good things that you like to list as the Americans bringing to the club.
Figures completely plucked out of the air there so i won't comment apart from your past record and lack of balance says to me those figures are probably underplayed to further you agenda. But i will say the fact that they're being sold means there's a buyer. A factor crucially missing from your beloved Burnley masterplan.
The trust has a mandate for court action and are going through with it, so stop dreaming. Inflation has in no way remedied anything surrounding the sale of the club. And if the club was for example to be sold tomorrow, inflation wouldn't much help would it? Nope as ever you're ignoring all the actual practicalities and the stars that would have to align to become beloved Burnley.
Haha you want them to stop wasting money on third party organisations but prepared for them to engage a business advisor. I sense you only wish this because you think it'll take the heat off the Americans and / sell outs.
Yes they could be there for that amount of time. They could just as easily not be. |  |
| |
| Badlands on 14:00 - Feb 2 with 987 views | onehunglow |
| Badlands on 13:58 - Feb 2 by Chief |
Oh dear. Today's monologue has been posted. Ah well here we go. Although none of this is new to you:
Of course you're completely ignoring the fact of what type of entity the trust are. They aren't an investment body or venture capitalists etc they are a supporters trust. Thus i doubt they cared at what their shares were worth or how risky they could be perceived to be when working alongside mainly local shareholders they trusted (incorrectly) backed up by a shareholders agreement which should have protected them (&still may). So you're just clutching at another straw with little relevance to anything at this moment to bash them with.
They had a coherent strategy. You've been told it repeatedly, yet ignore it.
How can it be a bad course of action? The case (which a QC has stated is strong) may result in them receiving funds for their shares. How much of a mark up will they have on them? If the fees were prohibitive the action wouldn't or won't be going ahead. So at present that's inaccurate.
Incorrect. As usual you are ignoring key facts that are not suited to your agenda. As far as we know there is no obligation for the majority shareholders to include or make the aware of any trust in any sale negotiations meaning they can sell to anyone who'll gain full control of the club without the trust receiving any money or input at all. We're down a division from when the Americans took over as it stands so their investment and the trust's shares are worth less. The trust has an opportunity to monetise those shares at Premier league prices. The rest of the stuff you right about some fans thinking we'll tumble down the divisions is completely irrelevant. Similarly are all the good things that you like to list as the Americans bringing to the club.
Figures completely plucked out of the air there so i won't comment apart from your past record and lack of balance says to me those figures are probably underplayed to further you agenda. But i will say the fact that they're being sold means there's a buyer. A factor crucially missing from your beloved Burnley masterplan.
The trust has a mandate for court action and are going through with it, so stop dreaming. Inflation has in no way remedied anything surrounding the sale of the club. And if the club was for example to be sold tomorrow, inflation wouldn't much help would it? Nope as ever you're ignoring all the actual practicalities and the stars that would have to align to become beloved Burnley.
Haha you want them to stop wasting money on third party organisations but prepared for them to engage a business advisor. I sense you only wish this because you think it'll take the heat off the Americans and / sell outs.
Yes they could be there for that amount of time. They could just as easily not be. |
It' s better than reading the Guardian though | |
| |
| Badlands on 15:27 - Feb 2 with 955 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Badlands on 13:58 - Feb 2 by Chief |
Oh dear. Today's monologue has been posted. Ah well here we go. Although none of this is new to you:
Of course you're completely ignoring the fact of what type of entity the trust are. They aren't an investment body or venture capitalists etc they are a supporters trust. Thus i doubt they cared at what their shares were worth or how risky they could be perceived to be when working alongside mainly local shareholders they trusted (incorrectly) backed up by a shareholders agreement which should have protected them (&still may). So you're just clutching at another straw with little relevance to anything at this moment to bash them with.
They had a coherent strategy. You've been told it repeatedly, yet ignore it.
How can it be a bad course of action? The case (which a QC has stated is strong) may result in them receiving funds for their shares. How much of a mark up will they have on them? If the fees were prohibitive the action wouldn't or won't be going ahead. So at present that's inaccurate.
Incorrect. As usual you are ignoring key facts that are not suited to your agenda. As far as we know there is no obligation for the majority shareholders to include or make the aware of any trust in any sale negotiations meaning they can sell to anyone who'll gain full control of the club without the trust receiving any money or input at all. We're down a division from when the Americans took over as it stands so their investment and the trust's shares are worth less. The trust has an opportunity to monetise those shares at Premier league prices. The rest of the stuff you right about some fans thinking we'll tumble down the divisions is completely irrelevant. Similarly are all the good things that you like to list as the Americans bringing to the club.
Figures completely plucked out of the air there so i won't comment apart from your past record and lack of balance says to me those figures are probably underplayed to further you agenda. But i will say the fact that they're being sold means there's a buyer. A factor crucially missing from your beloved Burnley masterplan.
The trust has a mandate for court action and are going through with it, so stop dreaming. Inflation has in no way remedied anything surrounding the sale of the club. And if the club was for example to be sold tomorrow, inflation wouldn't much help would it? Nope as ever you're ignoring all the actual practicalities and the stars that would have to align to become beloved Burnley.
Haha you want them to stop wasting money on third party organisations but prepared for them to engage a business advisor. I sense you only wish this because you think it'll take the heat off the Americans and / sell outs.
Yes they could be there for that amount of time. They could just as easily not be. |
The fact that they are a "Supporters trust" does not mean they can make poor choices with regards to investment without criticism. The supporters Trust was only formed as it was assumed that the club would be in the form of Exeter city. As stable un ambitious jobbing league 1 or 2 side that sells its best players for pennies to the big urban English giants. A team that gets exicted to meet Jurgen Klopp bring his reserve team down and thrashing the local in the FA cup 6-2.
It is for "know your place Welshmen and women" not the 'Jenkinista' team that said "we are coming to Old Trafford to win" while bringing along the man from the Trust, to have a socialist chat with Sir Alex. The Dutch Jack hothead told De Gaal to stick it. Do not pat us on the head.
The Trust has not changed despite the fact all around it has completly changed including moving from the Vetch and Llandarcy centres to the Liberty and Fairwood.
There is no reason why the Trust cannot be ambitious, progressive and focused on building up a strong bank balance investing, on global markets and doing a variety of good causes such as sponsoring uto 5 apprentices each year to learn skills from investment returns. Setting lower than the low targets and ambitions is a choice of yours not an obligation.
How can you explain £880,000 in the bank getting 0.15% interest. This should be at least 1% bring in £8,000 income a year. I get the excuse for a poor performance. "we are not an investment body " (we just want to be fans and have a game of darts in the railway every now and then). Those days went when Roberto's brown shoes entered HJ s office.
The coherent strategy was to get to 25% and be able to veto club decisions they do not like. OK for Exeter not the global brand that is Swansea. A big team cannot have it decisions made by those nice accountants with 'no skin in the game'. The strategy involved the chairman asking the US buyers for a £4m donation of 4% shares in the club. Not a good starting point to say the least. The Trust is not a charity.
The case is not so strong. If it was it would have gone ahead. There was some rumur of the Trust needing insurance against losing. This is not a good sign from what have read.
The Trust is a 'not for profit' and should not be in a rush to get out of the club. In fact selling up completely is not in their mission statement. They were encouraged to work closely with the board for their mutual interests. The old advisories causing friction have left executive positions. Handing over huge sums of money to third party insurers legal people and agents is definately not in the mission statement.
The best way to monetise the Trust's share at Premier league prices is to put the shares up for sale in the Premier league. This causes no acrimony and is looking like a reasonable propsect. Furthermore the the 2022-2025 price is at least 100% greater than the 2016
discounted price. This selling price does not include the unneccesaay legal cost of perhaps 40% of any award.
This is common sense. Perhaps you can excuse stupidity with the excuse that "They aren't an investment body or venture capitalists etc" . this is a very poor menatility and is why I am recommending the Trust should take advice of a financial strategist for say £20,000 out of their £880,000 holding.
If the club were sold tommorrow the US owners would be looking at the same prices as Derby who way down the Table. Derby price £60m. 21% of £60m is £12.6m. Legal action after deduction even with a 100% win will only see £13-£14m. Legal action simply makes no sense. It only maks sense for the third parties, not Swansea city, not the Trust, and not the fans.
Ax I explained earlier a Trust outside the club after an acrimonious court case will not be welcome back. With £14m in the bank they will have no choice to become "an investment body" as cash offers no protection against inflation. As the years go by inflation will see their holding decline in real terms. An inflation rate of only 3% with do serious devaluation. Investment Trusts offering lo risk investment commonly search for 4-5% returns obver 5-10 years. The Trust will need to be and "investment trust" simply to stand still.
I gree the Trust needs to change its outlook completely it has to morph into a differnt type of organisation. With £10m in the bank it requires professional management.
I do not hink this is what member want. |  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Badlands on 15:29 - Feb 2 with 959 views | vetchonian |
| Badlands on 15:27 - Feb 2 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The fact that they are a "Supporters trust" does not mean they can make poor choices with regards to investment without criticism. The supporters Trust was only formed as it was assumed that the club would be in the form of Exeter city. As stable un ambitious jobbing league 1 or 2 side that sells its best players for pennies to the big urban English giants. A team that gets exicted to meet Jurgen Klopp bring his reserve team down and thrashing the local in the FA cup 6-2.
It is for "know your place Welshmen and women" not the 'Jenkinista' team that said "we are coming to Old Trafford to win" while bringing along the man from the Trust, to have a socialist chat with Sir Alex. The Dutch Jack hothead told De Gaal to stick it. Do not pat us on the head.
The Trust has not changed despite the fact all around it has completly changed including moving from the Vetch and Llandarcy centres to the Liberty and Fairwood.
There is no reason why the Trust cannot be ambitious, progressive and focused on building up a strong bank balance investing, on global markets and doing a variety of good causes such as sponsoring uto 5 apprentices each year to learn skills from investment returns. Setting lower than the low targets and ambitions is a choice of yours not an obligation.
How can you explain £880,000 in the bank getting 0.15% interest. This should be at least 1% bring in £8,000 income a year. I get the excuse for a poor performance. "we are not an investment body " (we just want to be fans and have a game of darts in the railway every now and then). Those days went when Roberto's brown shoes entered HJ s office.
The coherent strategy was to get to 25% and be able to veto club decisions they do not like. OK for Exeter not the global brand that is Swansea. A big team cannot have it decisions made by those nice accountants with 'no skin in the game'. The strategy involved the chairman asking the US buyers for a £4m donation of 4% shares in the club. Not a good starting point to say the least. The Trust is not a charity.
The case is not so strong. If it was it would have gone ahead. There was some rumur of the Trust needing insurance against losing. This is not a good sign from what have read.
The Trust is a 'not for profit' and should not be in a rush to get out of the club. In fact selling up completely is not in their mission statement. They were encouraged to work closely with the board for their mutual interests. The old advisories causing friction have left executive positions. Handing over huge sums of money to third party insurers legal people and agents is definately not in the mission statement.
The best way to monetise the Trust's share at Premier league prices is to put the shares up for sale in the Premier league. This causes no acrimony and is looking like a reasonable propsect. Furthermore the the 2022-2025 price is at least 100% greater than the 2016
discounted price. This selling price does not include the unneccesaay legal cost of perhaps 40% of any award.
This is common sense. Perhaps you can excuse stupidity with the excuse that "They aren't an investment body or venture capitalists etc" . this is a very poor menatility and is why I am recommending the Trust should take advice of a financial strategist for say £20,000 out of their £880,000 holding.
If the club were sold tommorrow the US owners would be looking at the same prices as Derby who way down the Table. Derby price £60m. 21% of £60m is £12.6m. Legal action after deduction even with a 100% win will only see £13-£14m. Legal action simply makes no sense. It only maks sense for the third parties, not Swansea city, not the Trust, and not the fans.
Ax I explained earlier a Trust outside the club after an acrimonious court case will not be welcome back. With £14m in the bank they will have no choice to become "an investment body" as cash offers no protection against inflation. As the years go by inflation will see their holding decline in real terms. An inflation rate of only 3% with do serious devaluation. Investment Trusts offering lo risk investment commonly search for 4-5% returns obver 5-10 years. The Trust will need to be and "investment trust" simply to stand still.
I gree the Trust needs to change its outlook completely it has to morph into a differnt type of organisation. With £10m in the bank it requires professional management.
I do not hink this is what member want. |
What does this have to do with the original posting on this thread
Brian Conly described you well its a puppet | |
| |
| Badlands on 15:38 - Feb 2 with 939 views | Brynmill_Jack |
| Badlands on 15:27 - Feb 2 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The fact that they are a "Supporters trust" does not mean they can make poor choices with regards to investment without criticism. The supporters Trust was only formed as it was assumed that the club would be in the form of Exeter city. As stable un ambitious jobbing league 1 or 2 side that sells its best players for pennies to the big urban English giants. A team that gets exicted to meet Jurgen Klopp bring his reserve team down and thrashing the local in the FA cup 6-2.
It is for "know your place Welshmen and women" not the 'Jenkinista' team that said "we are coming to Old Trafford to win" while bringing along the man from the Trust, to have a socialist chat with Sir Alex. The Dutch Jack hothead told De Gaal to stick it. Do not pat us on the head.
The Trust has not changed despite the fact all around it has completly changed including moving from the Vetch and Llandarcy centres to the Liberty and Fairwood.
There is no reason why the Trust cannot be ambitious, progressive and focused on building up a strong bank balance investing, on global markets and doing a variety of good causes such as sponsoring uto 5 apprentices each year to learn skills from investment returns. Setting lower than the low targets and ambitions is a choice of yours not an obligation.
How can you explain £880,000 in the bank getting 0.15% interest. This should be at least 1% bring in £8,000 income a year. I get the excuse for a poor performance. "we are not an investment body " (we just want to be fans and have a game of darts in the railway every now and then). Those days went when Roberto's brown shoes entered HJ s office.
The coherent strategy was to get to 25% and be able to veto club decisions they do not like. OK for Exeter not the global brand that is Swansea. A big team cannot have it decisions made by those nice accountants with 'no skin in the game'. The strategy involved the chairman asking the US buyers for a £4m donation of 4% shares in the club. Not a good starting point to say the least. The Trust is not a charity.
The case is not so strong. If it was it would have gone ahead. There was some rumur of the Trust needing insurance against losing. This is not a good sign from what have read.
The Trust is a 'not for profit' and should not be in a rush to get out of the club. In fact selling up completely is not in their mission statement. They were encouraged to work closely with the board for their mutual interests. The old advisories causing friction have left executive positions. Handing over huge sums of money to third party insurers legal people and agents is definately not in the mission statement.
The best way to monetise the Trust's share at Premier league prices is to put the shares up for sale in the Premier league. This causes no acrimony and is looking like a reasonable propsect. Furthermore the the 2022-2025 price is at least 100% greater than the 2016
discounted price. This selling price does not include the unneccesaay legal cost of perhaps 40% of any award.
This is common sense. Perhaps you can excuse stupidity with the excuse that "They aren't an investment body or venture capitalists etc" . this is a very poor menatility and is why I am recommending the Trust should take advice of a financial strategist for say £20,000 out of their £880,000 holding.
If the club were sold tommorrow the US owners would be looking at the same prices as Derby who way down the Table. Derby price £60m. 21% of £60m is £12.6m. Legal action after deduction even with a 100% win will only see £13-£14m. Legal action simply makes no sense. It only maks sense for the third parties, not Swansea city, not the Trust, and not the fans.
Ax I explained earlier a Trust outside the club after an acrimonious court case will not be welcome back. With £14m in the bank they will have no choice to become "an investment body" as cash offers no protection against inflation. As the years go by inflation will see their holding decline in real terms. An inflation rate of only 3% with do serious devaluation. Investment Trusts offering lo risk investment commonly search for 4-5% returns obver 5-10 years. The Trust will need to be and "investment trust" simply to stand still.
I gree the Trust needs to change its outlook completely it has to morph into a differnt type of organisation. With £10m in the bank it requires professional management.
I do not hink this is what member want. |
That’s it - keep it light 👠|  |
| Each time I go to Bedd - au........................ |
| |
| Badlands on 15:41 - Feb 2 with 936 views | Treforys_Jack |
| Badlands on 15:27 - Feb 2 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The fact that they are a "Supporters trust" does not mean they can make poor choices with regards to investment without criticism. The supporters Trust was only formed as it was assumed that the club would be in the form of Exeter city. As stable un ambitious jobbing league 1 or 2 side that sells its best players for pennies to the big urban English giants. A team that gets exicted to meet Jurgen Klopp bring his reserve team down and thrashing the local in the FA cup 6-2.
It is for "know your place Welshmen and women" not the 'Jenkinista' team that said "we are coming to Old Trafford to win" while bringing along the man from the Trust, to have a socialist chat with Sir Alex. The Dutch Jack hothead told De Gaal to stick it. Do not pat us on the head.
The Trust has not changed despite the fact all around it has completly changed including moving from the Vetch and Llandarcy centres to the Liberty and Fairwood.
There is no reason why the Trust cannot be ambitious, progressive and focused on building up a strong bank balance investing, on global markets and doing a variety of good causes such as sponsoring uto 5 apprentices each year to learn skills from investment returns. Setting lower than the low targets and ambitions is a choice of yours not an obligation.
How can you explain £880,000 in the bank getting 0.15% interest. This should be at least 1% bring in £8,000 income a year. I get the excuse for a poor performance. "we are not an investment body " (we just want to be fans and have a game of darts in the railway every now and then). Those days went when Roberto's brown shoes entered HJ s office.
The coherent strategy was to get to 25% and be able to veto club decisions they do not like. OK for Exeter not the global brand that is Swansea. A big team cannot have it decisions made by those nice accountants with 'no skin in the game'. The strategy involved the chairman asking the US buyers for a £4m donation of 4% shares in the club. Not a good starting point to say the least. The Trust is not a charity.
The case is not so strong. If it was it would have gone ahead. There was some rumur of the Trust needing insurance against losing. This is not a good sign from what have read.
The Trust is a 'not for profit' and should not be in a rush to get out of the club. In fact selling up completely is not in their mission statement. They were encouraged to work closely with the board for their mutual interests. The old advisories causing friction have left executive positions. Handing over huge sums of money to third party insurers legal people and agents is definately not in the mission statement.
The best way to monetise the Trust's share at Premier league prices is to put the shares up for sale in the Premier league. This causes no acrimony and is looking like a reasonable propsect. Furthermore the the 2022-2025 price is at least 100% greater than the 2016
discounted price. This selling price does not include the unneccesaay legal cost of perhaps 40% of any award.
This is common sense. Perhaps you can excuse stupidity with the excuse that "They aren't an investment body or venture capitalists etc" . this is a very poor menatility and is why I am recommending the Trust should take advice of a financial strategist for say £20,000 out of their £880,000 holding.
If the club were sold tommorrow the US owners would be looking at the same prices as Derby who way down the Table. Derby price £60m. 21% of £60m is £12.6m. Legal action after deduction even with a 100% win will only see £13-£14m. Legal action simply makes no sense. It only maks sense for the third parties, not Swansea city, not the Trust, and not the fans.
Ax I explained earlier a Trust outside the club after an acrimonious court case will not be welcome back. With £14m in the bank they will have no choice to become "an investment body" as cash offers no protection against inflation. As the years go by inflation will see their holding decline in real terms. An inflation rate of only 3% with do serious devaluation. Investment Trusts offering lo risk investment commonly search for 4-5% returns obver 5-10 years. The Trust will need to be and "investment trust" simply to stand still.
I gree the Trust needs to change its outlook completely it has to morph into a differnt type of organisation. With £10m in the bank it requires professional management.
I do not hink this is what member want. |
Desperation !!! Very few agree with you, but you keep trying  |  | | |
| Badlands on 15:43 - Feb 2 with 917 views | onehunglow |
| Badlands on 15:29 - Feb 2 by vetchonian |
What does this have to do with the original posting on this thread
Brian Conly described you well its a puppet |
Short reply though.He has you speechless then | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Badlands on 15:46 - Feb 2 with 915 views | Chief |
| Badlands on 15:27 - Feb 2 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The fact that they are a "Supporters trust" does not mean they can make poor choices with regards to investment without criticism. The supporters Trust was only formed as it was assumed that the club would be in the form of Exeter city. As stable un ambitious jobbing league 1 or 2 side that sells its best players for pennies to the big urban English giants. A team that gets exicted to meet Jurgen Klopp bring his reserve team down and thrashing the local in the FA cup 6-2.
It is for "know your place Welshmen and women" not the 'Jenkinista' team that said "we are coming to Old Trafford to win" while bringing along the man from the Trust, to have a socialist chat with Sir Alex. The Dutch Jack hothead told De Gaal to stick it. Do not pat us on the head.
The Trust has not changed despite the fact all around it has completly changed including moving from the Vetch and Llandarcy centres to the Liberty and Fairwood.
There is no reason why the Trust cannot be ambitious, progressive and focused on building up a strong bank balance investing, on global markets and doing a variety of good causes such as sponsoring uto 5 apprentices each year to learn skills from investment returns. Setting lower than the low targets and ambitions is a choice of yours not an obligation.
How can you explain £880,000 in the bank getting 0.15% interest. This should be at least 1% bring in £8,000 income a year. I get the excuse for a poor performance. "we are not an investment body " (we just want to be fans and have a game of darts in the railway every now and then). Those days went when Roberto's brown shoes entered HJ s office.
The coherent strategy was to get to 25% and be able to veto club decisions they do not like. OK for Exeter not the global brand that is Swansea. A big team cannot have it decisions made by those nice accountants with 'no skin in the game'. The strategy involved the chairman asking the US buyers for a £4m donation of 4% shares in the club. Not a good starting point to say the least. The Trust is not a charity.
The case is not so strong. If it was it would have gone ahead. There was some rumur of the Trust needing insurance against losing. This is not a good sign from what have read.
The Trust is a 'not for profit' and should not be in a rush to get out of the club. In fact selling up completely is not in their mission statement. They were encouraged to work closely with the board for their mutual interests. The old advisories causing friction have left executive positions. Handing over huge sums of money to third party insurers legal people and agents is definately not in the mission statement.
The best way to monetise the Trust's share at Premier league prices is to put the shares up for sale in the Premier league. This causes no acrimony and is looking like a reasonable propsect. Furthermore the the 2022-2025 price is at least 100% greater than the 2016
discounted price. This selling price does not include the unneccesaay legal cost of perhaps 40% of any award.
This is common sense. Perhaps you can excuse stupidity with the excuse that "They aren't an investment body or venture capitalists etc" . this is a very poor menatility and is why I am recommending the Trust should take advice of a financial strategist for say £20,000 out of their £880,000 holding.
If the club were sold tommorrow the US owners would be looking at the same prices as Derby who way down the Table. Derby price £60m. 21% of £60m is £12.6m. Legal action after deduction even with a 100% win will only see £13-£14m. Legal action simply makes no sense. It only maks sense for the third parties, not Swansea city, not the Trust, and not the fans.
Ax I explained earlier a Trust outside the club after an acrimonious court case will not be welcome back. With £14m in the bank they will have no choice to become "an investment body" as cash offers no protection against inflation. As the years go by inflation will see their holding decline in real terms. An inflation rate of only 3% with do serious devaluation. Investment Trusts offering lo risk investment commonly search for 4-5% returns obver 5-10 years. The Trust will need to be and "investment trust" simply to stand still.
I gree the Trust needs to change its outlook completely it has to morph into a differnt type of organisation. With £10m in the bank it requires professional management.
I do not hink this is what member want. |
Is there anything remotely interesting in all that? | |
| |
| Badlands on 15:49 - Feb 2 with 907 views | onehunglow |
| Badlands on 15:46 - Feb 2 by Chief |
Is there anything remotely interesting in all that? |
Not sure about that but it's rather verbose,in all honestly.
Id rather go down the "worraloadofshyte" road.  | |
| |
| Badlands on 15:51 - Feb 2 with 907 views | Dr_Winston |
| Badlands on 17:32 - Jan 31 by 1462jack |
Very odd, a little while ago a certain poster on here was pm’ing me trying to turn me against One of the old mods before the split , definitely some very strange people frequenting this place |
Which mod was it out of curiousity? Don't really care who the poster was. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Badlands on 15:53 - Feb 2 with 898 views | Chief |
| Badlands on 15:49 - Feb 2 by onehunglow |
Not sure about that but it's rather verbose,in all honestly.
Id rather go down the "worraloadofshyte" road. |
Fair enough | |
| |
| Badlands on 15:56 - Feb 2 with 889 views | onehunglow |
| Badlands on 15:53 - Feb 2 by Chief |
Fair enough |
You're a fair man.
I'm just filling in the time here until spring arrives .
Gloom all around | |
| |
| Badlands on 16:06 - Feb 2 with 882 views | AndyCole |
| Badlands on 15:53 - Feb 2 by Chief |
Fair enough |
Lol
Your ongoing dialogue with Res is excellent value and highly informative, however it spills over onto all threads..
Is there any chance we can have a Club Financials thread - to capture all this and most importantly get some common understanding of the Financials ? The analysis you did recently to get to grips with Financials was great but now lost. | |
| 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 |
| |
| Badlands on 16:10 - Feb 2 with 877 views | onehunglow |
| Badlands on 16:06 - Feb 2 by AndyCole |
Lol
Your ongoing dialogue with Res is excellent value and highly informative, however it spills over onto all threads..
Is there any chance we can have a Club Financials thread - to capture all this and most importantly get some common understanding of the Financials ? The analysis you did recently to get to grips with Financials was great but now lost. |
I thought I was getting mentioned in despatches then AC.
I want to be famous | |
| |
| Badlands on 16:54 - Feb 2 with 861 views | Treforys_Jack |
| Badlands on 16:06 - Feb 2 by AndyCole |
Lol
Your ongoing dialogue with Res is excellent value and highly informative, however it spills over onto all threads..
Is there any chance we can have a Club Financials thread - to capture all this and most importantly get some common understanding of the Financials ? The analysis you did recently to get to grips with Financials was great but now lost. |
Please make this happen ! | | | |
| Badlands on 18:21 - Feb 2 with 824 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Badlands on 16:54 - Feb 2 by Treforys_Jack |
Please make this happen ! |
I think there has been no proper debate about actually what the Trust want to be. I have tried encourage members to actually think about it and comment.
The members have in effect voted to:
a) Leave the club entirely
b) Become a moribund fans group with no financial nous holding a few million pounds on account.
c) Watch their holding rot on the vine to irrelevance.
d) Sell their shares at half price (PL) and give 1/3 of their award away to third parties in fees.
I have thought about it and the strategy only makes sense if Swansea is in league 1 or 2. In the Premier leagues it will be calamatous strategy and simply funnel even more profits to the selling group. It actually makes little sense in the Championship either.
If members are struggling with these concepts they can demand democratically that the Trust employ a respected business strategist to report on their strategy and alternative strategies. He/she would need to be given a free path with no influences one way or the other. This report would be presented to the members and the author cross examined in Q and A session.
Yes much of this is tedious. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Badlands on 18:28 - Feb 2 with 820 views | Chief |
| Badlands on 18:21 - Feb 2 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I think there has been no proper debate about actually what the Trust want to be. I have tried encourage members to actually think about it and comment.
The members have in effect voted to:
a) Leave the club entirely
b) Become a moribund fans group with no financial nous holding a few million pounds on account.
c) Watch their holding rot on the vine to irrelevance.
d) Sell their shares at half price (PL) and give 1/3 of their award away to third parties in fees.
I have thought about it and the strategy only makes sense if Swansea is in league 1 or 2. In the Premier leagues it will be calamatous strategy and simply funnel even more profits to the selling group. It actually makes little sense in the Championship either.
If members are struggling with these concepts they can demand democratically that the Trust employ a respected business strategist to report on their strategy and alternative strategies. He/she would need to be given a free path with no influences one way or the other. This report would be presented to the members and the author cross examined in Q and A session.
Yes much of this is tedious. |
****RANDOM UNWARRANTED DIG AT SUPPORTERS TRUST ALERT**** | |
| |
| Badlands on 18:35 - Feb 2 with 813 views | Chief |
How long are you going to keep up this bizarre crusade Resolven? You're just repeating the same stuff literally everyday that has been addressed&disproved by myself and others many many times.
I admire your persistence, but to keep posting the same things worded differently (at great length) &twisting every little event (some that have nothing to do with Swansea City) that occurs against the trust - to me such effort points to a very vested interest in the situation, far more than that of a normal fan. Maybe if you revealed your involvement in it all people may take you more seriously and see your point of view more? [Post edited 2 Feb 2021 19:25]
| |
| |
| Badlands on 18:47 - Feb 2 with 809 views | KeithHaynes |
| Badlands on 18:35 - Feb 2 by Chief |
How long are you going to keep up this bizarre crusade Resolven? You're just repeating the same stuff literally everyday that has been addressed&disproved by myself and others many many times.
I admire your persistence, but to keep posting the same things worded differently (at great length) &twisting every little event (some that have nothing to do with Swansea City) that occurs against the trust - to me such effort points to a very vested interest in the situation, far more than that of a normal fan. Maybe if you revealed your involvement in it all people may take you more seriously and see your point of view more? [Post edited 2 Feb 2021 19:25]
|
Maybe we should do an ex owners feature ?
Any views ? |  |
| |
| Badlands on 20:05 - Feb 2 with 777 views | swancity |
| Badlands on 18:35 - Feb 2 by Chief |
How long are you going to keep up this bizarre crusade Resolven? You're just repeating the same stuff literally everyday that has been addressed&disproved by myself and others many many times.
I admire your persistence, but to keep posting the same things worded differently (at great length) &twisting every little event (some that have nothing to do with Swansea City) that occurs against the trust - to me such effort points to a very vested interest in the situation, far more than that of a normal fan. Maybe if you revealed your involvement in it all people may take you more seriously and see your point of view more? [Post edited 2 Feb 2021 19:25]
|
That last sentence makes a very good point
It’s very clear that anyone who is or has gone to those lengths to try to shift peoples views on the matter would ordinarily have a reason for doing so. A motive.
In the same way that Badlands has done the same previously and also anonymously.
I could respect a view more if I knew the reason behind such unpopular opinions and standpoints ... | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| Badlands on 20:41 - Feb 2 with 759 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Badlands on 18:35 - Feb 2 by Chief |
How long are you going to keep up this bizarre crusade Resolven? You're just repeating the same stuff literally everyday that has been addressed&disproved by myself and others many many times.
I admire your persistence, but to keep posting the same things worded differently (at great length) &twisting every little event (some that have nothing to do with Swansea City) that occurs against the trust - to me such effort points to a very vested interest in the situation, far more than that of a normal fan. Maybe if you revealed your involvement in it all people may take you more seriously and see your point of view more? [Post edited 2 Feb 2021 19:25]
|
I am a Swansea fan and patriot. What i see is a group of people foolishly allowed to own 21% of the club not give a fig about its future or its money. This is evident in the lack of response. Lets face it they cannot spend it. Why should they care it does not affect them or their families? Its easier to role an emogi.
All you have demonstated is your lack of knowledge and poor judgement. You jumped on the accountant's reference to the Trust missing out on a sale if the US peole simply sell the holding fund. This was irrelevant. The Trust can sell their shares at any time to any buyer for any price they chose.
The best time to sell is when the club is in the Premier league not the championship. If the Trust sell in the championship they will recieve a 'championship price' for their shares becuse the 2016 price was depressed and one third will be going in fees to the third parties the member invited in.
The Trust is in no rush and will be around in 10 years time. They can afford to wait for the right circumstances, Swansea is back on an upward trajectory. [Post edited 3 Feb 2021 19:06]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Badlands on 20:54 - Feb 2 with 754 views | Chief |
| Badlands on 20:41 - Feb 2 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I am a Swansea fan and patriot. What i see is a group of people foolishly allowed to own 21% of the club not give a fig about its future or its money. This is evident in the lack of response. Lets face it they cannot spend it. Why should they care it does not affect them or their families? Its easier to role an emogi.
All you have demonstated is your lack of knowledge and poor judgement. You jumped on the accountant's reference to the Trust missing out on a sale if the US peole simply sell the holding fund. This was irrelevant. The Trust can sell their shares at any time to any buyer for any price they chose.
The best time to sell is when the club is in the Premier league not the championship. If the Trust sell in the championship they will recieve a 'championship price' for their shares becuse the 2016 price was depressed and one third will be going in fees to the third parties the member invited in.
The Trust is in no rush and will be around in 10 years time. They can afford to wait for the right circumstances, Swansea is back on an upward trajectory. [Post edited 3 Feb 2021 19:06]
|
Oh well, more repeated comments that have been repeatedly addressed. The case is going to court. You'll have to learn to accept it. No point you worrying about it anyway. You say they won't win so not sure why you're fretting so much. | |
| |
| Badlands on 21:00 - Feb 2 with 745 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Badlands on 20:54 - Feb 2 by Chief |
Oh well, more repeated comments that have been repeatedly addressed. The case is going to court. You'll have to learn to accept it. No point you worrying about it anyway. You say they won't win so not sure why you're fretting so much. |
Have you been told the case is going ahead? | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Badlands on 21:03 - Feb 2 with 737 views | Chief |
| Badlands on 21:00 - Feb 2 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Have you been told the case is going ahead? |
Still in the pipeline as of the last update yes. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
