| More information on the Convertible Loan note 19:41 - Dec 3 with 11244 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
This is an extract from the Structured dialogue held early this month. (presented on Planetswans) . Given in parenthesis
[Julian stated that last year ownership invested, via a loan note, around £10-13 million. Jake Silverstein invested half, Jason Levien and Steve Kaplan matched that and some of our other shareholders contributed smaller amounts, into a convertible loan note. This club is a debt free club, apart from the convertible loan note, which is designed to leave the club debt free. We have capacity in the loan note to be able to do more and there will be a need this year for them to do more. We need to understand what we need from the January window and get through the beginning of the summer window. Our financial year is from August, so if a player is sold in July, then it would go into this year’s numbers.]
It seems some of the local shareholders may also have contributed. Interesting.
[Post edited 3 Dec 2021 19:44]
|  |
| |  |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:26 - Dec 9 with 602 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 21:50 - Dec 8 by max936 |
Time this thread was locked, its tedious in the extreme now, just going around in circles, there's been threads and threads based around the tedious subject. |
I opened this thread to investigate the application of the CLN. At first to was presented as an unspecified amount limited to the US owners and a new investor Jake Silverstein. It was thought to be for £5m with 5% interest pa if not converted. Posters quoted that 5% was excessive and an example of US owners taking money out of the club.
Winter has recently revealed it was not limited to the US but 'other shareholders' as well. This suggests the local owners and sellers that remained. If it was open to 'other shareholders' it was probably open to the SCST as well. Chief tell this board that they were excluded with out any corroborating evidence.
Why should the US people and seller be able to access potential the 5% returns but not the SCST? Why did the SCST not raise the subject in the structured dialogue?
I do not understand why they would decline a potential 5% while in their last accounts reporting a 0.15% on their Santander account? The SCST got £1320 interest from the Santander. At 5% they would get a potential £44,000 pa.
The SCST either were excluded or declined the offer. Which is it? | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:35 - Dec 9 with 589 views | Catullus |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 21:50 - Dec 8 by max936 |
Time this thread was locked, its tedious in the extreme now, just going around in circles, there's been threads and threads based around the tedious subject. |
I blame the Chief for keeping on answering!  |  |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:43 - Dec 9 with 582 views | Chief |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:26 - Dec 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I opened this thread to investigate the application of the CLN. At first to was presented as an unspecified amount limited to the US owners and a new investor Jake Silverstein. It was thought to be for £5m with 5% interest pa if not converted. Posters quoted that 5% was excessive and an example of US owners taking money out of the club.
Winter has recently revealed it was not limited to the US but 'other shareholders' as well. This suggests the local owners and sellers that remained. If it was open to 'other shareholders' it was probably open to the SCST as well. Chief tell this board that they were excluded with out any corroborating evidence.
Why should the US people and seller be able to access potential the 5% returns but not the SCST? Why did the SCST not raise the subject in the structured dialogue?
I do not understand why they would decline a potential 5% while in their last accounts reporting a 0.15% on their Santander account? The SCST got £1320 interest from the Santander. At 5% they would get a potential £44,000 pa.
The SCST either were excluded or declined the offer. Which is it? |
Well you're assumption appears to be wrong. Just because some other shareholders were offered to contribute and apparently did, doesn't mean the trust were. And all the trust's correspondence make no mention of being asked to join. Just that Silverstein & K&L were 'investing'. The statements have been posted for your viewing. Perversely you seem to be ignoring them. Why?
I'm using what information has been released by the trust as evidence. The fact that they weren't informed of the involvement of the sellouts backs up my viewpoint.
You keep failing to answer and continuously ignore this - why would the trust want to take 5% out of the club? And of course they'd only be able to do so if they were offered to. All indications are that they weren't.
Obvious to everyone apart from you - the Trust were excluded.
AGAIN |  |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:45 - Dec 9 with 576 views | Chief |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:35 - Dec 9 by Catullus |
I blame the Chief for keeping on answering! |
Happy to be of service.
Reslovens inaccuracies, disingenuous comments and assumptions passed as fact shouldn't go unchallenged. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:48 - Dec 9 with 573 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:45 - Dec 9 by Chief |
Happy to be of service.
Reslovens inaccuracies, disingenuous comments and assumptions passed as fact shouldn't go unchallenged. |
Were the SCST excluded from the Convertible loan note? Yes or no.
I have asked you to find out for certain. You are a member. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:51 - Dec 9 with 570 views | Chief |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:48 - Dec 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Were the SCST excluded from the Convertible loan note? Yes or no.
I have asked you to find out for certain. You are a member. |
And I've told you, the trust's statements suggest they were.
If they were offered to join the trust would have stated as such.
I'm comfortable with the conclusion I've come to.
But you can ask around if you want. You've got all the contact details. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:04 - Dec 9 with 561 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:51 - Dec 9 by Chief |
And I've told you, the trust's statements suggest they were.
If they were offered to join the trust would have stated as such.
I'm comfortable with the conclusion I've come to.
But you can ask around if you want. You've got all the contact details. |
So you have not bothered to check your conclusion that they were excluded. The problem is that you declared this without checking. You can ask the question on the Trust linked provided giving your membership details. Too lazy? | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:06 - Dec 9 with 558 views | max936 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:26 - Dec 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I opened this thread to investigate the application of the CLN. At first to was presented as an unspecified amount limited to the US owners and a new investor Jake Silverstein. It was thought to be for £5m with 5% interest pa if not converted. Posters quoted that 5% was excessive and an example of US owners taking money out of the club.
Winter has recently revealed it was not limited to the US but 'other shareholders' as well. This suggests the local owners and sellers that remained. If it was open to 'other shareholders' it was probably open to the SCST as well. Chief tell this board that they were excluded with out any corroborating evidence.
Why should the US people and seller be able to access potential the 5% returns but not the SCST? Why did the SCST not raise the subject in the structured dialogue?
I do not understand why they would decline a potential 5% while in their last accounts reporting a 0.15% on their Santander account? The SCST got £1320 interest from the Santander. At 5% they would get a potential £44,000 pa.
The SCST either were excluded or declined the offer. Which is it? |
I DON'T CARE, you got two subjects, Sheep and poking a reaction from your utter nonsense about the Swansea City SUPPORTERS Trust.
Go and have a pint and a packet of Salted Peanuts, you be better for it. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:20 - Dec 9 with 546 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:06 - Dec 9 by max936 |
I DON'T CARE, you got two subjects, Sheep and poking a reaction from your utter nonsense about the Swansea City SUPPORTERS Trust.
Go and have a pint and a packet of Salted Peanuts, you be better for it. |
I am contesting forum myths and fake narratives promoted by the likes of Chief. He made accusations and declined to verify them when challenged.
I was pleased to get 4 votes in the recent poll. 33% more than Chief. Democracy at work. Democracy involves listening to opinions you do not like. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:21 - Dec 9 with 545 views | max936 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:14 - Dec 9 by Catullus |
Dogs with a bone eh, maybe Cat should stay away then. Sounds like a good idea. |
Get your claws out musher  | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:27 - Dec 9 with 543 views | Chief |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:04 - Dec 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
So you have not bothered to check your conclusion that they were excluded. The problem is that you declared this without checking. You can ask the question on the Trust linked provided giving your membership details. Too lazy? |
I'm just fully aware of how busy they are and are volunteers, so I don't need them to clarify something that me and everyone else is obvious from statements already released.
Are you to lazy to check? You've also come to a conclusion without checking that is contrary to the trust's correspondence. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:33 - Dec 9 with 541 views | Chief |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:20 - Dec 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I am contesting forum myths and fake narratives promoted by the likes of Chief. He made accusations and declined to verify them when challenged.
I was pleased to get 4 votes in the recent poll. 33% more than Chief. Democracy at work. Democracy involves listening to opinions you do not like. |
They were verified by the trust's statements released at the time. The links have been posted for you to read. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:33 - Dec 9 with 541 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:27 - Dec 9 by Chief |
I'm just fully aware of how busy they are and are volunteers, so I don't need them to clarify something that me and everyone else is obvious from statements already released.
Are you to lazy to check? You've also come to a conclusion without checking that is contrary to the trust's correspondence. |
The new board member is retired and sound like a good fellow to me for more transparent and open than his predecessor it seems to me. I doubt he is answering questions all day.
So it is down to me you check your claims. It figures. Stay tuned. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:36 - Dec 9 with 540 views | Chief |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:33 - Dec 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The new board member is retired and sound like a good fellow to me for more transparent and open than his predecessor it seems to me. I doubt he is answering questions all day.
So it is down to me you check your claims. It figures. Stay tuned. |
I have, I searched the trust's statement when the CLN was announced.
Research tally's up with my conclusion. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 18:02 - Dec 9 with 534 views | max936 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:20 - Dec 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I am contesting forum myths and fake narratives promoted by the likes of Chief. He made accusations and declined to verify them when challenged.
I was pleased to get 4 votes in the recent poll. 33% more than Chief. Democracy at work. Democracy involves listening to opinions you do not like. |
Opinions are always welcome, that's what forum's are about, its the same opinion mentioned over and over day after day, even when that opinion is posted from a different angle or on a thread that you see an opportunity to chuck in the same opinion, that gets tedious, you won't see that though because you don't want to see it.
Over and Out | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 18:20 - Dec 9 with 529 views | shingle |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 16:35 - Dec 9 by Catullus |
I blame the Chief for keeping on answering! |
Yep the most boring of blokes no doubt about that.  | | | |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 18:47 - Dec 9 with 503 views | Chief |
Nice of my fan club to turn up on the thread.
I'm definitely doing something right then. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 18:56 - Dec 9 with 499 views | Chief |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 18:30 - Dec 9 by raynor94 |
Killing the board! |
Well I know some of them betrayed the trust in the past but I think that's a bit extreme Raynor!
I understand the anger though. | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 21:29 - Dec 9 with 474 views | Catullus |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 17:20 - Dec 9 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I am contesting forum myths and fake narratives promoted by the likes of Chief. He made accusations and declined to verify them when challenged.
I was pleased to get 4 votes in the recent poll. 33% more than Chief. Democracy at work. Democracy involves listening to opinions you do not like. |
You are pushing your own fake narrative!
4 votes, wow. I got 4 votes and I pulled out and told people not to vote for me, what makes your 4 votes so special?
Pleased to get 4 votes  all hail the mighty Res  | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 21:34 - Dec 9 with 467 views | Chief |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 21:29 - Dec 9 by Catullus |
You are pushing your own fake narrative!
4 votes, wow. I got 4 votes and I pulled out and told people not to vote for me, what makes your 4 votes so special?
Pleased to get 4 votes all hail the mighty Res |
And one of those was from me  | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 23:05 - Dec 9 with 445 views | Chief |
Guess what Resloven....... | |
| |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 00:14 - Dec 10 with 437 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| More information on the Convertible Loan note on 23:05 - Dec 9 by Chief |
Guess what Resloven....... |
I got three more votes than I expected. Perhaps the other two were by accident too. I am up against a very powerful but fake narrative that attacks the club ownership at any opportunity. It is based on a soft Socialist Sunday school ethos that continues to hold south Wales back. Profit is bad and leadership by committee is superior to driven achievers. The WRU was ran into the ground until it reformed taking away power from committees.
In this word the SCST has more sense than the ex Chairman and Mr Morgan. 1000 brain must be more sensible and virtuous than two right? Wrong of course. Two sharp brains are far better than 1000 passenger brains along for the ride. What are the costs of legal action? No idea. What happens if you lose? No idea. What are you going to invest in? No idea. How are you going to get back into the club in future? No idea. You voted for it? Really?
In this world the SCST is skint not from basic poor governance and a useless strategy but by unfair practices. Fake. It is getting 0.15% on its money and wants more to waste. Where is the imagination.? The big issue for members is where the SCST sit on match day. The new board member has assured fans that they take the VIP seats in rotation not both at the same time. In touch with member sentiment, by crickey.
Levien and Kaplan seem like decent people to me. Silverstein is a much better communicator. They will run Swansea to eventually make them a profit. It may take 10-15 years but they will get there in the end. There are more basket case clubs than well run clubs. The PL is becoming a sugar daddy league owned by States and Oligarchs. Southampton will probably thrash Swansea with their reserves but still are struggling to keep their heads above water.
If the Trust want out then they can go. They are not much use to Swansea city. Their structure was designed for small town clubs like Exeter City. Swansea city has outgrown its ageing exoskeleton (The Trust). When changes needed to be made the old crab did not want to discard its old shell.
The old crusty crab does not want investment as it causes dilution. The crab exoskeleton was fine for 20 years but it now needs to be shed an a new one grown otherwise it will choke itself to death by being constricted.
The way I see things as the club grows it grows the Trust must be discarded unless they learn to think differently and explore how they fit in with a free market economy able to invest and protect itself from inflation.
Tedious to some who prefer to discuss their favourite kit from the last 25 years. The Gulf one was mind as it happens. Crabs shell exoskeletons analogies. No wonder I got a mighty 4 votes beaten only by the formidable Dr P with his facts and sharp texts and Jasper every ones favourite for his facts and pleasant demeanour. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
