| Trust Issues 10:45 - Feb 27 with 3489 views | KeithHaynes |
I don’t know the chap, but I assume someone does ?
The strong performances make it even harder to sit and watch from home, but credit to Steve Cooper and the players for their efforts in what must sometimes feel like a training exercise (in atmosphere, if not intensity).
Like Swansea’s defence on Wednesday night, the Trust Board is really clicking at the moment with great levels of involvement both in the Trust’s activities and with the club. In the last few weeks we’ve had a number of productive discussions with Julian Winter and Swansea’s Head of Commercial, Rebecca Edwards-Symmons; we have also continued to progress with Trust initiatives at our monthly board meetings and sub-group forums.
As I’ve mentioned previously, a huge part of my work with the Trust has been on modernising how we communicate with fans and members, and the frequency with which we do that.
It’s been great to engage with so many of you through our social media channels — I’ve enjoyed reading your pre-match score predictions on Instagram, some of which have been spot on. It’s clear that the optimism runs pretty deep right now amongst the Jack Army. If you’d like to get involved, you can follow us @SwansTrust.
This increased engagement feels especially important when we aren’t able to meet with you all face to face at the Pod, a position I look forward to taking up with some of my fellow Board Members as soon as it’s safe to do so. Rest assured, I’ll still want those score predictions.
We recognise that social media isn’t for everyone however, and so you can always reach us by email if you have any questions — communications@swanstrust.co.uk. We are always open to hearing your thoughts on what more we can do, so keep those suggestions and comments coming in for us.
Looking backwards to look forwards…
2021 is a year of milestones for the Club and the Supporters’ Trust — 10 years ago we were promoted to the Premier League. 20 years ago, in July, the Swansea City Supporters’ Trust was officially formed. This is a significant milestone, and one we are looking to celebrate throughout the 2021/2022 season — preparations for this are well under way and you will hear more about this throughout the summer.
On the pitch, it was great to see us get back to winning ways against Coventry. It’s fair to say the boys are flying, especially at home, and long may that continue. Ben Cabango has been superb of late, and he is good for his four goals this season — that’s also testament to our great improvement in set pieces.
Bristol City are a team on the up, and another with a new manager. Let’s hope we can do what we did when we last played at home versus a new manager (Watford) — we’ll take a 2-0 win please boys.
Enjoy the game.
Adam
|  |
| |  |
| Trust Issues on 14:18 - Mar 3 with 559 views | Joe_bradshaw |
| Trust Issues on 13:27 - Mar 3 by ReslovenSwan1 |
There are a few issues I would like to explore with you on this.
So what does a 'strong case' actually mean? Interestingly he did not say "very strong case". The 99.9% chance of wining from 'Me learned P- Paul' is clearly laughable. I would guess anything between 40% to 95% of wining perhaps?
I have been advised "no win no fee" arrangements only apply for near certain wins. The time taken to get to this point suggests this probably does not apply here. It is probably a hybid deal. I would assume the longer talks progress the more the funders will add to their fees in the case of winning and losing. The Trusts only assets are its cash and its shares.
Defenders of legal action must outline the consequences of losing a case which clearly is not certain. That would be communication. The funders and insurers will have a much clearer understanding of the case than the QC who presumably had only a short window to work in.
I supported the remark that the QC said the case should be seem as a 'last resort' from the 2017. With no 'formal ' mediation having taken place going to court is clearly not a 'last resort '.
The idea that there is no alternative to legal action is not at all true in my opinion.
For example in Burnley was sold between £170-200m why would SCST sell for an 'equivalent value' of £65m for their 21%. This I have argued only makes sense if Swansea is in league 2. The value of Derby county was quoted at £60m in the Championship in 2020. You discount the Burnley example. Why? Swansea could be in the PL in 6 months time. (35% chance perhaps)
I argue the Trust by agreeing a tag on / drag on deal with the US will within the next 10 years be guarenteed at least the return equivalent from legal action simply by doing nothing assuming inflation and maintaining a championship place. With a tag on drag on deal in the premier league £40m+ for their shares in not unrealistic.
Legal action makes no economic sense for what I can see if there is a long term vision. |
Why do you keep giving Burnley as an example for Swansea City?
Burnley has been bought for a ludicrous price. Why? Because it’s a leveraged buyout which has saddled Burnley FC with seven times the debt that the club had before the deal. If Burnley FC can’t pay back the debt the owners have saddled it with it will go bust and the owners will walk away scott free.
Why would you want Swansea City to go down this path? You’re clearly not a supporter of the football club. |  |
| |
| Trust Issues on 14:53 - Mar 3 with 525 views | swancity |
| Trust Issues on 14:18 - Mar 3 by Joe_bradshaw |
Why do you keep giving Burnley as an example for Swansea City?
Burnley has been bought for a ludicrous price. Why? Because it’s a leveraged buyout which has saddled Burnley FC with seven times the debt that the club had before the deal. If Burnley FC can’t pay back the debt the owners have saddled it with it will go bust and the owners will walk away scott free.
Why would you want Swansea City to go down this path? You’re clearly not a supporter of the football club. |
And of course Burnley FC own their own ground at Turf Moor and land around it. I’d expect that would be a consideration . |  |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| Trust Issues on 14:56 - Mar 3 with 523 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust Issues on 14:18 - Mar 3 by Joe_bradshaw |
Why do you keep giving Burnley as an example for Swansea City?
Burnley has been bought for a ludicrous price. Why? Because it’s a leveraged buyout which has saddled Burnley FC with seven times the debt that the club had before the deal. If Burnley FC can’t pay back the debt the owners have saddled it with it will go bust and the owners will walk away scott free.
Why would you want Swansea City to go down this path? You’re clearly not a supporter of the football club. |
The Trust cannot control who owns the club without co-operation from other shareholders. They already in a very priivedged position of owning 21% of the club having paid only £200,000 of its own money. This was peanuts.
They are working with good kind people. Mr Silverstein is projecting himself as an 'ethical' owner. All his background is in 'ethical investments'. Not a 'ruthless money grabbing Yank asset stripper' projected on the forums for years.
The selling price of Burnley is the 'market value'. It is not ludicrous. Quoted as anything between £170m to £200m. Where they got the money to pay the market fee is a side issue. The debt is to the Dell Corporation who you might be familar with. If they went bust the Dell would pick up Burnley for a song.
It does not matter to the seller where the money comes from as long as it is not illegal or of dubious morals. I would imagine the like of Silverstein would not deal with such people.
The Trust if they are true to their objective of preserving football in Swansea cannot simply be bucket carriers looking for £5 donations from fans in 50p buckets getting 0.15% interest from Santander.
The target should be £40m from good free trading by agreement not £13m with huge commissions from sharp private school educated Home counties ambulance chasers. The chances of Swansea getting to the PL are pretty good. The legal case was prepared when the club was under financial strain and heading down the leagues. The ship has been stabilised and no need for the passengers to embark the life boats anymore.
What sort of fool sells his house in 2021, at 2016 prices and pays the estate agent 40% commission? He must be really dim right? |  |
| |
| Trust Issues on 14:59 - Mar 3 with 521 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 14:56 - Mar 3 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The Trust cannot control who owns the club without co-operation from other shareholders. They already in a very priivedged position of owning 21% of the club having paid only £200,000 of its own money. This was peanuts.
They are working with good kind people. Mr Silverstein is projecting himself as an 'ethical' owner. All his background is in 'ethical investments'. Not a 'ruthless money grabbing Yank asset stripper' projected on the forums for years.
The selling price of Burnley is the 'market value'. It is not ludicrous. Quoted as anything between £170m to £200m. Where they got the money to pay the market fee is a side issue. The debt is to the Dell Corporation who you might be familar with. If they went bust the Dell would pick up Burnley for a song.
It does not matter to the seller where the money comes from as long as it is not illegal or of dubious morals. I would imagine the like of Silverstein would not deal with such people.
The Trust if they are true to their objective of preserving football in Swansea cannot simply be bucket carriers looking for £5 donations from fans in 50p buckets getting 0.15% interest from Santander.
The target should be £40m from good free trading by agreement not £13m with huge commissions from sharp private school educated Home counties ambulance chasers. The chances of Swansea getting to the PL are pretty good. The legal case was prepared when the club was under financial strain and heading down the leagues. The ship has been stabilised and no need for the passengers to embark the life boats anymore.
What sort of fool sells his house in 2021, at 2016 prices and pays the estate agent 40% commission? He must be really dim right? |
The current 2021 value is less than the 2016 value though is it not!? |  |
| |
| Trust Issues on 15:28 - Mar 3 with 513 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust Issues on 14:59 - Mar 3 by Chief |
The current 2021 value is less than the 2016 value though is it not!? |
I have not followed the housing market in detail but it generally increases in value at around 3-5% per annum on average. My argument on this matter is that inflation has to be taken into account. Trust thinking seems to exlude inflation.
The Burnley price which seems to me to be a reasonable benchmark may be much more expensive than Swansea in 2016 either due to two things.
a) Inflation. This would need to be at a rate of around 12% annual growth to see that lower £170m price.
b) Swansea city was sold on the cheap and a seriously discounted price in 2016. Some people have put forward this argument.
In either case the 2016 price is a 'low ball' price is you consider Swansea has a chance of returning to the PL.
Therefore suing on the 2016 price is bad businees. If is much much worse when it come with huge fees and commisions associated from forcing a sale. The legal win in court would value the club at around only £66m after deductions of fees and commissions. This is the equivant price the club would have had to be sold at without fees to match the trusts legal win. It does make sense however the Trust are in a rush to bail out as the club is falling down the leagues heading for adminstration.
The world has changed an no one can stand still. [Post edited 3 Mar 2021 15:46]
| |
| |
| Trust Issues on 15:35 - Mar 3 with 509 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 15:28 - Mar 3 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I have not followed the housing market in detail but it generally increases in value at around 3-5% per annum on average. My argument on this matter is that inflation has to be taken into account. Trust thinking seems to exlude inflation.
The Burnley price which seems to me to be a reasonable benchmark may be much more expensive than Swansea in 2016 either due to two things.
a) Inflation. This would need to be at a rate of around 12% annual growth to see that lower £170m price.
b) Swansea city was sold on the cheap and a seriously discounted price in 2016. Some people have put forward this argument.
In either case the 2016 price is a 'low ball' price is you consider Swansea has a chance of returning to the PL.
Therefore suing on the 2016 price is bad businees. If is much much worse when it come with huge fees and commisions associated from forcing a sale. The legal win in court would value the club at around only £66m after deductions of fees and commissions. This is the equivant price the club would have had to be sold at without fees to match the trusts legal win. It does make sense however the Trust are in a rush to bail out as the club is falling down the leagues heading for adminstration.
The world has changed an no one can stand still. [Post edited 3 Mar 2021 15:46]
|
So that's a lot of waffle to say that yes, the 2016 value exceeds the current 2021 value. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 15:42 - Mar 3 with 505 views | Badlands |
Will the sale of shares, if it comes to that, by the Trust result in four years of comments saying the money should be given to the club? |  |
| |
| Trust Issues on 15:44 - Mar 3 with 505 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust Issues on 15:35 - Mar 3 by Chief |
So that's a lot of waffle to say that yes, the 2016 value exceeds the current 2021 value. |
Nationwide house price index. They provide average house price data and are respected.
Second quarter 2016 to 4th quarter 2020 shows a national 16% rise. This is generally slower than the average.
If you call it waffle go ahead. If you bought a house for £200,000 in the UK in June 2016 on average you would be a bit of an idiot to sell it for £200,000 in the UK in December 2020.
The market value was £232,000. You would have lost yourself £32,000. [Post edited 3 Mar 2021 15:46]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust Issues on 15:53 - Mar 3 with 499 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 15:44 - Mar 3 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Nationwide house price index. They provide average house price data and are respected.
Second quarter 2016 to 4th quarter 2020 shows a national 16% rise. This is generally slower than the average.
If you call it waffle go ahead. If you bought a house for £200,000 in the UK in June 2016 on average you would be a bit of an idiot to sell it for £200,000 in the UK in December 2020.
The market value was £232,000. You would have lost yourself £32,000. [Post edited 3 Mar 2021 15:46]
|
The trust aren't selling a house.
But if you want to go down this route. The closest comparison would be that the house that trust had in 2016 is no longer as nice anymore, some of the fittings have been removed&the gutters leaking.
And it's been airlifted to a less desirable location down the road where house prices naturally aren't as high as where it previously was.
You forget these changes in your comparison. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 16:10 - Mar 3 with 490 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 15:42 - Mar 3 by Badlands |
Will the sale of shares, if it comes to that, by the Trust result in four years of comments saying the money should be given to the club? |
You'll have to rephrase or clarify that question. What's the significance of 4 years? | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 16:23 - Mar 3 with 486 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust Issues on 15:53 - Mar 3 by Chief |
The trust aren't selling a house.
But if you want to go down this route. The closest comparison would be that the house that trust had in 2016 is no longer as nice anymore, some of the fittings have been removed&the gutters leaking.
And it's been airlifted to a less desirable location down the road where house prices naturally aren't as high as where it previously was.
You forget these changes in your comparison. |
It all depends on your vision. Swansea are a competetive football team challenging to get into the Premier league. I believe thay will get there, you do not.
Your 'legal case model' is one based on a pessimistic model thought out by the previous regime, who I believe failed to network properly, and in 2015 -2016 and did not sell their shares due to their own decisions.
The legal case model has credibility only if Swansea city became Exeter city marooned in the lower leagues. In 5 years of inflation the Trust could sell their holding in the championship for the same money they would get from years and years in court rooms.
Derby was quoted at being bought for £60m. 21% of £60m projected value after inflation is £12.6m the sort of money the Trust could recover after fees and commisions (if they are lucky)
If the Trust is run by pessimists it has no role to play in Swansea city. It just becomes a burden on the club. I suspect that is how it is seen by other shareholders. [Post edited 3 Mar 2021 16:24]
| |
| |
| Trust Issues on 16:26 - Mar 3 with 484 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 16:23 - Mar 3 by ReslovenSwan1 |
It all depends on your vision. Swansea are a competetive football team challenging to get into the Premier league. I believe thay will get there, you do not.
Your 'legal case model' is one based on a pessimistic model thought out by the previous regime, who I believe failed to network properly, and in 2015 -2016 and did not sell their shares due to their own decisions.
The legal case model has credibility only if Swansea city became Exeter city marooned in the lower leagues. In 5 years of inflation the Trust could sell their holding in the championship for the same money they would get from years and years in court rooms.
Derby was quoted at being bought for £60m. 21% of £60m projected value after inflation is £12.6m the sort of money the Trust could recover after fees and commisions (if they are lucky)
If the Trust is run by pessimists it has no role to play in Swansea city. It just becomes a burden on the club. I suspect that is how it is seen by other shareholders. [Post edited 3 Mar 2021 16:24]
|
This comparison was nothing to do with vision, its how the current situation stands. Yours was false and mine was a truer reflection. Some serious straw clutching going on again there though Resolven again.
And the rest again is waffle and inaccuracies that have been repeatedly disproved. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 16:47 - Mar 3 with 475 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust Issues on 16:26 - Mar 3 by Chief |
This comparison was nothing to do with vision, its how the current situation stands. Yours was false and mine was a truer reflection. Some serious straw clutching going on again there though Resolven again.
And the rest again is waffle and inaccuracies that have been repeatedly disproved. |
You were under the impression that house prices had dropped over the last five years. Your grasp on reallity is questionable. No actually a 16% increase.
The longer the Trust wastes time on it legal case the less viable it becomes. It just life. This is a bit high brow for forum dwellers but it is still true. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 16:52 - Mar 3 with 472 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 16:47 - Mar 3 by ReslovenSwan1 |
You were under the impression that house prices had dropped over the last five years. Your grasp on reallity is questionable. No actually a 16% increase.
The longer the Trust wastes time on it legal case the less viable it becomes. It just life. This is a bit high brow for forum dwellers but it is still true. |
Like for like house prices have increased. Houses that aren't as desirable and more dilapidated than they were 5 years will not have had an increase. Quite the opposite.
Silly comparison for you to make really, as it really does demonstrate the need for legal action. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 16:54 - Mar 3 with 471 views | onehunglow |
I am of the opinion that too many ,possibly Trust supporters,accept we cannot get back to the Prem with
a.the current owners and
b.Cooper at the club.
We need to be sold and we need to make ourselves attractive. Parts of a club suing the others isn't. Im astonished people cannot see how this looks.Best ask people from outside what they think. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 17:02 - Mar 3 with 467 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 16:54 - Mar 3 by onehunglow |
I am of the opinion that too many ,possibly Trust supporters,accept we cannot get back to the Prem with
a.the current owners and
b.Cooper at the club.
We need to be sold and we need to make ourselves attractive. Parts of a club suing the others isn't. Im astonished people cannot see how this looks.Best ask people from outside what they think. |
Parts of the club aren't suing other parts of the club. That's a completely false statement to make.
And if it doesn't look good, the Americans should have thought of that. If they'd carried out their purchase in the proper manner that didn't leave doors open to future legal action, this situation wouldn't exist. [Post edited 3 Mar 2021 17:04]
| |
| |
| Trust Issues on 17:35 - Mar 3 with 447 views | BillyChong |
| Trust Issues on 14:56 - Mar 3 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The Trust cannot control who owns the club without co-operation from other shareholders. They already in a very priivedged position of owning 21% of the club having paid only £200,000 of its own money. This was peanuts.
They are working with good kind people. Mr Silverstein is projecting himself as an 'ethical' owner. All his background is in 'ethical investments'. Not a 'ruthless money grabbing Yank asset stripper' projected on the forums for years.
The selling price of Burnley is the 'market value'. It is not ludicrous. Quoted as anything between £170m to £200m. Where they got the money to pay the market fee is a side issue. The debt is to the Dell Corporation who you might be familar with. If they went bust the Dell would pick up Burnley for a song.
It does not matter to the seller where the money comes from as long as it is not illegal or of dubious morals. I would imagine the like of Silverstein would not deal with such people.
The Trust if they are true to their objective of preserving football in Swansea cannot simply be bucket carriers looking for £5 donations from fans in 50p buckets getting 0.15% interest from Santander.
The target should be £40m from good free trading by agreement not £13m with huge commissions from sharp private school educated Home counties ambulance chasers. The chances of Swansea getting to the PL are pretty good. The legal case was prepared when the club was under financial strain and heading down the leagues. The ship has been stabilised and no need for the passengers to embark the life boats anymore.
What sort of fool sells his house in 2021, at 2016 prices and pays the estate agent 40% commission? He must be really dim right? |
Are there any owners who do not project themselves as being ethical?
This house you refer to. Was it a shared ownership with one part owner unethically selling without the prior knowledge of the other part owner? | | | |
| Trust Issues on 18:12 - Mar 3 with 434 views | onehunglow |
| Trust Issues on 17:02 - Mar 3 by Chief |
Parts of the club aren't suing other parts of the club. That's a completely false statement to make.
And if it doesn't look good, the Americans should have thought of that. If they'd carried out their purchase in the proper manner that didn't leave doors open to future legal action, this situation wouldn't exist. [Post edited 3 Mar 2021 17:04]
|
So who is suing whom and are they linked in any way to the club? | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 18:22 - Mar 3 with 426 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 18:12 - Mar 3 by onehunglow |
So who is suing whom and are they linked in any way to the club? |
The supporters trust are taking action against the sellouts and kaplan and Levein as individuals. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 18:25 - Mar 3 with 422 views | onehunglow |
| Trust Issues on 18:22 - Mar 3 by Chief |
The supporters trust are taking action against the sellouts and kaplan and Levein as individuals. |
So owners being sued by fans | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 18:28 - Mar 3 with 421 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 18:25 - Mar 3 by onehunglow |
So owners being sued by fans |
Indeed, which is a sad indictment on the way the owners and sellers conducted themselves. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 18:34 - Mar 3 with 419 views | onehunglow |
| Trust Issues on 18:28 - Mar 3 by Chief |
Indeed, which is a sad indictment on the way the owners and sellers conducted themselves. |
So let's say Im a bored billionaire looking for a club to buy and increase my personal profile in the English League upper echelons.
I look around for a club with a common goal with Owners and fans with the same mindset.
Nope,it makes even less sense now.
People wanting revenge is no selling tool and we desperately need to get rid of these Owners and start afresh with a balls out experience manager who knows his @arse from his elbow
Thanks anyway Chief | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 18:40 - Mar 3 with 417 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 18:34 - Mar 3 by onehunglow |
So let's say Im a bored billionaire looking for a club to buy and increase my personal profile in the English League upper echelons.
I look around for a club with a common goal with Owners and fans with the same mindset.
Nope,it makes even less sense now.
People wanting revenge is no selling tool and we desperately need to get rid of these Owners and start afresh with a balls out experience manager who knows his @arse from his elbow
Thanks anyway Chief |
Why would a new owner care about the goals of the current (outgoing) selling owners shareholders? | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 20:09 - Mar 3 with 399 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust Issues on 18:22 - Mar 3 by Chief |
The supporters trust are taking action against the sellouts and kaplan and Levein as individuals. |
They are not taking anyone to court as we speak. You are a little ahead of yourself Chief. Last I heard they were getting along real swell. i hope it stays that way. The road to wealth and sucess is by people working together. | |
| |
| Trust Issues on 21:14 - Mar 3 with 385 views | Chief |
| Trust Issues on 20:09 - Mar 3 by ReslovenSwan1 |
They are not taking anyone to court as we speak. You are a little ahead of yourself Chief. Last I heard they were getting along real swell. i hope it stays that way. The road to wealth and sucess is by people working together. |
Not really, there is no indication that it isn't happening, as I've told you, the very recent update stayed preparations are ongoing. So yes, as it stands they aren't in court but are going to court.
You're 'heard' have you?? Hmm. From who would that be then i wonder!?
But yes all accounts suggest the trust are working closely with the high ranking club employees like Winter & the board members on the day to day running of the club.
That however, as you know is entirely separate to and has no bearing on relations with the majority across the Atlantic on matters pertaining to the ownership of the club & what the future holds on that subject. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
