| Trust update: new investment on 10:30 - Feb 23 with 603 views | felixstowe_jack |
| Trust update: new investment on 17:21 - Feb 22 by swancity |
The Trust are a complete and utter nonentity now. Achieving nothing. Weak, passive and certainly not in any way shape or form are they doing what it was set up all those years ago for. You do seriously wonder what attracts them to the roles? |
The Trust have done more for the club than people like you will ever do. |  |
|  |
| Trust update: new investment on 10:33 - Feb 23 with 598 views | felixstowe_jack |
| Trust update: new investment on 20:05 - Feb 22 by ReslovenSwan1 |
They continue to be diluted.
They are still paying legal bills
Inflation is to still around 5% devaluing their cash
Membership is falling.
It could have been worse if the won their legal case. No point giving them money if they have no plan to invest. Once they get to 5% protected they can get put the deck chairs out and do even less if that is possible.
They never wanted cash. They wanted "protection". This was the philosophy the members bought into. They are a reflection of the members. They were never any good. After Martinez walked through the door they became obsolete. [Post edited 22 Feb 20:07]
|
Not another anti trust rant.
Why don't you support the club instead of posting negative ill informed comments. | |
| |
| Trust update: new investment on 10:35 - Feb 23 with 597 views | Boundy |
| Trust update: new investment on 10:33 - Feb 23 by felixstowe_jack |
Not another anti trust rant.
Why don't you support the club instead of posting negative ill informed comments. |
Because he likes reading ( as opposed to listening to) his own written thoughts , its called a form of narcissism. | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:02 - Feb 23 with 493 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust update: new investment on 10:35 - Feb 23 by Boundy |
Because he likes reading ( as opposed to listening to) his own written thoughts , its called a form of narcissism. |
Attack a crowd of 1000 reducing to 700 and you are going to get called out. I understand this.
Why did the 1000 not sell a single share of their 21% holding at £1,000,000. per share if a "nest egg" was the target? ( a nest egg was never the target in 2011-2016).
It was a no brainer.
How are they investing the £500,000 they received? It is devaluing 4-5% every year. Their £1m is devaluing £50,000 a year or £1000 a week. Give SCST £10 and they will turn it into £8 real terms after 4 years.
If they cannot invest it is "not fit for purpose". Exeter City Trust is fit for purpose the members money goes into the club to keep it afloat.
This is what it was designed for. A struggling L1/ L2 football team. Roberto Martinez rendered it irrelevant. |  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:07 - Feb 23 with 479 views | swancity |
| Trust update: new investment on 10:30 - Feb 23 by felixstowe_jack |
The Trust have done more for the club than people like you will ever do. |
Like what? I’d be interested to know what they have achieved? Seriously. | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| Trust update: new investment on 09:36 - Feb 24 with 401 views | PawelAbbott |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:02 - Feb 23 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Attack a crowd of 1000 reducing to 700 and you are going to get called out. I understand this.
Why did the 1000 not sell a single share of their 21% holding at £1,000,000. per share if a "nest egg" was the target? ( a nest egg was never the target in 2011-2016).
It was a no brainer.
How are they investing the £500,000 they received? It is devaluing 4-5% every year. Their £1m is devaluing £50,000 a year or £1000 a week. Give SCST £10 and they will turn it into £8 real terms after 4 years.
If they cannot invest it is "not fit for purpose". Exeter City Trust is fit for purpose the members money goes into the club to keep it afloat.
This is what it was designed for. A struggling L1/ L2 football team. Roberto Martinez rendered it irrelevant. |
It does raise the question of what is the point in the Trust.
They are now down to 10% ownership with clearly no say in decision making. They don't generate anywhere near enough funds to increase ownership.
They might be better selling up and keeping the money invested to use to help buy the club back should we drop back to League 2. But, the money they'd get now might not be enough even for that.
They don't do anything to inspire people to rejoin. If they were doing something more proactive and coukd get membership back above 30,000 paying members then they would have more income and more of a voice. Be the voice of the supporters and represent the fans in a more convincing way, there might be a point to them.
At the moment they are a non-entity | | | |
| Trust update: new investment on 09:49 - Feb 24 with 378 views | Whiterockin |
| Trust update: new investment on 09:36 - Feb 24 by PawelAbbott |
It does raise the question of what is the point in the Trust.
They are now down to 10% ownership with clearly no say in decision making. They don't generate anywhere near enough funds to increase ownership.
They might be better selling up and keeping the money invested to use to help buy the club back should we drop back to League 2. But, the money they'd get now might not be enough even for that.
They don't do anything to inspire people to rejoin. If they were doing something more proactive and coukd get membership back above 30,000 paying members then they would have more income and more of a voice. Be the voice of the supporters and represent the fans in a more convincing way, there might be a point to them.
At the moment they are a non-entity |
The only benefit as I see it is a seat on the board, even if the shares are diluted down to the guaranteed 5%. This gives supporters some sort of insight into major decisions, because we are getting very little information from the club. |  | | |
| Trust update: new investment on 16:34 - Feb 24 with 305 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust update: new investment on 09:49 - Feb 24 by Whiterockin |
The only benefit as I see it is a seat on the board, even if the shares are diluted down to the guaranteed 5%. This gives supporters some sort of insight into major decisions, because we are getting very little information from the club. |
What do you want to know and why? | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trust update: new investment on 17:10 - Feb 24 with 291 views | Whiterockin |
| Trust update: new investment on 16:34 - Feb 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
What do you want to know and why? |
I want to know how my football club is run, so that we do not repeat history. [Post edited 24 Feb 17:11]
| | | |
| Trust update: new investment on 17:17 - Feb 24 with 261 views | Gwyn737 |
| Trust update: new investment on 17:10 - Feb 24 by Whiterockin |
I want to know how my football club is run, so that we do not repeat history. [Post edited 24 Feb 17:11]
|
I posted this on an earlier thread that went unanswered:
Explain to me how your position works more generally.
The trust owns 10% and that’s all the fans should concern themselves with, right? So..
1. If a club is part owned by the fans it’s only that part of the club the fans should worry about?
2. If a club is not fan owned, they have no right to voice an opinion or challenge the owners?
and a slightly tenuous analogy…
3. If you owned 10% of a racehorse and someone else own the other 90%, should you just concern yourself with your bit and completely ignore what your majority partner is doing, even if they’re treating it badly? | | | |
| Trust update: new investment on 17:34 - Feb 24 with 242 views | Whiterockin |
| Trust update: new investment on 17:17 - Feb 24 by Gwyn737 |
I posted this on an earlier thread that went unanswered:
Explain to me how your position works more generally.
The trust owns 10% and that’s all the fans should concern themselves with, right? So..
1. If a club is part owned by the fans it’s only that part of the club the fans should worry about?
2. If a club is not fan owned, they have no right to voice an opinion or challenge the owners?
and a slightly tenuous analogy…
3. If you owned 10% of a racehorse and someone else own the other 90%, should you just concern yourself with your bit and completely ignore what your majority partner is doing, even if they’re treating it badly? |
You won't get a sensible answer because it doesn't suit his agenda. He is just obsessed with the trust and the other 90% is just a mist. Obviously the whole of the club, who owns it and how it is run is of paramount importance to supporters because it has a direct bearing on the long term survival and what happens on the pitch. In all honesty the 10% the trust own has little bearing on anything apart from a monitoring exercise. | | | |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:05 - Feb 24 with 203 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust update: new investment on 17:17 - Feb 24 by Gwyn737 |
I posted this on an earlier thread that went unanswered:
Explain to me how your position works more generally.
The trust owns 10% and that’s all the fans should concern themselves with, right? So..
1. If a club is part owned by the fans it’s only that part of the club the fans should worry about?
2. If a club is not fan owned, they have no right to voice an opinion or challenge the owners?
and a slightly tenuous analogy…
3. If you owned 10% of a racehorse and someone else own the other 90%, should you just concern yourself with your bit and completely ignore what your majority partner is doing, even if they’re treating it badly? |
I think this is directed at me.
The fans own 10% of the club which is run like a womens institute. It does not care about money. It cares about being involved, being seen to be involved and receiving match day perks, and mixing with the club big shots.
No one cares about the money as long as there is enough to avoid embarrassment with the tax man. Its benefactors are its lawyers, (its biggest ever investment), accountants and bank. It is now making losses so no tax for a while I would think.
It has no intention of buying shares in the club or investing in property for example. It is an traditional Welsh 'do nothing much' social club. It comes with the old rugby club committee culture.
When American were hovering over the club they did not want to make any money. Upto £20,000,000. This was not their interest. Having a 'nest egg' was discussed only with regard to the legal case, not before. The horse had bolted by 2017.
They wanted "protection". They wanted to be "special" and have "special provisions" to maintain a place in the Boardroom. This made no sense to Levien or Kaplan (or me). Silverstein came over to try and understand this "Welsh committee" concept. He gave them what the wanted and some dough they have no idea what to do with.
The fans seem pretty happy with this because they lack drive and ambition that their German counterparts have. Bayern Munchen is fan owned possibly with similar rules and regulations. The members were easy meat as they did not ask tough questions. Some believe the spin that the Trust is a safeguard for football in Swansea. I do not believe this at all. They had 21% of the club. Soon they will have 5% of the club and £1m approx.
The strategy of getting to 25% ownership was bonkers and bad for the club. On getting to 25% the Trust would immediately block any new investment and prefer loans. This is because any new shares would reduce the 25% to 24% or less. To maintain it the Trust would need to match fund 25% of any investment.
Once they get to 5% they can get out the deck chairs cigars and G&Ts and take relaxing to a new level.
The 5% protection wording needs reading. They did not want to sell in 2016 would they want to sell in 2026 for half the amount? Would a buyer want their "special shares?" Is there a tag on or drag on deal.?
Some clarity need there but fans are not too interested. They never were. That is why the Trust has performed so poorly. They are interested in the LLP.
What do they want to know? I will give some thoughts to help you along.
a) How many people are in the LLP?
b) How much does it hold in cash?
c) Is is an hedge fund with client investors paying a fee to the owners of the fund?
d) Could the fund be sold as an entity leading to a change of ownership of the club.
e) Does it hold any shares of DC United or the Australian interests
f) If DC united is sold will Swansea share be sold at the same time at a low price to use losses to offset significant capital gains tax incurred from DC United.?
Is this far off the mark? I welcome views If I am wrong I stand to be corrected. [Post edited 24 Feb 18:17]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:10 - Feb 24 with 198 views | Gwyn737 |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:05 - Feb 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I think this is directed at me.
The fans own 10% of the club which is run like a womens institute. It does not care about money. It cares about being involved, being seen to be involved and receiving match day perks, and mixing with the club big shots.
No one cares about the money as long as there is enough to avoid embarrassment with the tax man. Its benefactors are its lawyers, (its biggest ever investment), accountants and bank. It is now making losses so no tax for a while I would think.
It has no intention of buying shares in the club or investing in property for example. It is an traditional Welsh 'do nothing much' social club. It comes with the old rugby club committee culture.
When American were hovering over the club they did not want to make any money. Upto £20,000,000. This was not their interest. Having a 'nest egg' was discussed only with regard to the legal case, not before. The horse had bolted by 2017.
They wanted "protection". They wanted to be "special" and have "special provisions" to maintain a place in the Boardroom. This made no sense to Levien or Kaplan (or me). Silverstein came over to try and understand this "Welsh committee" concept. He gave them what the wanted and some dough they have no idea what to do with.
The fans seem pretty happy with this because they lack drive and ambition that their German counterparts have. Bayern Munchen is fan owned possibly with similar rules and regulations. The members were easy meat as they did not ask tough questions. Some believe the spin that the Trust is a safeguard for football in Swansea. I do not believe this at all. They had 21% of the club. Soon they will have 5% of the club and £1m approx.
The strategy of getting to 25% ownership was bonkers and bad for the club. On getting to 25% the Trust would immediately block any new investment and prefer loans. This is because any new shares would reduce the 25% to 24% or less. To maintain it the Trust would need to match fund 25% of any investment.
Once they get to 5% they can get out the deck chairs cigars and G&Ts and take relaxing to a new level.
The 5% protection wording needs reading. They did not want to sell in 2016 would they want to sell in 2026 for half the amount? Would a buyer want their "special shares?" Is there a tag on or drag on deal.?
Some clarity need there but fans are not too interested. They never were. That is why the Trust has performed so poorly. They are interested in the LLP.
What do they want to know? I will give some thoughts to help you along.
a) How many people are in the LLP?
b) How much does it hold in cash?
c) Is is an hedge fund with client investors paying a fee to the owners of the fund?
d) Could the fund be sold as an entity leading to a change of ownership of the club.
e) Does it hold any shares of DC United or the Australian interests
f) If DC united is sold will Swansea share be sold at the same time at a low price to use losses to offset significant capital gains tax incurred from DC United.?
Is this far off the mark? I welcome views If I am wrong I stand to be corrected. [Post edited 24 Feb 18:17]
|
That’s doesn’t answer any of my questions. At all.
I’ll slim it down for you.
If you own 10% of a company, should you have no interest (or no rights) in what happens with the other 90%? | | | |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:27 - Feb 24 with 181 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:10 - Feb 24 by Gwyn737 |
That’s doesn’t answer any of my questions. At all.
I’ll slim it down for you.
If you own 10% of a company, should you have no interest (or no rights) in what happens with the other 90%? |
If you are really interested in the 10% and can discuss its objectives and aims then yes. How does it mitigate inflation? Investment plans? . Shirt sponsorship for the women's team?. Monitoring the 4g pitches etc?. (preserving football in Swansea remember?)
If you have no interest in the 10% do not really understand what it is about then - no.
I have asked what did people want to know and got no answers. They can read my post and now know what to ask?. They can of course call me a 'fraud' and then use my a questions.
If you pass "Go" move forward 4 places. If you cannot you my as well forget about it. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:32 - Feb 24 with 177 views | Gwyn737 |
| Trust update: new investment on 18:27 - Feb 24 by ReslovenSwan1 |
If you are really interested in the 10% and can discuss its objectives and aims then yes. How does it mitigate inflation? Investment plans? . Shirt sponsorship for the women's team?. Monitoring the 4g pitches etc?. (preserving football in Swansea remember?)
If you have no interest in the 10% do not really understand what it is about then - no.
I have asked what did people want to know and got no answers. They can read my post and now know what to ask?. They can of course call me a 'fraud' and then use my a questions.
If you pass "Go" move forward 4 places. If you cannot you my as well forget about it. |
So you’ll only discuss the 10%
Thanks you. That fully answers my questions. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
