| another 2 million invested on 09:43 - Mar 28 with 956 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 09:26 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The point I was making was that the club was over a reasonable period profitable with strong assets. Now it struggles to brea even with little playing assets. Anyone can Google a example of a single season where this was not the case. Swansea generally invested potential profits while in the PL building Fairwood. Creating asset values not profits. Anyone can Google on years figures to prove something or other and make another cheap shot comment. |
Every time somebody proves you wrong or points out you have posted something that is not factual you accuse them of insukts, slurs and cheap shots. Rather ironic given how many cheap shots you have aimed at thousands of people.
Yor last sentence is in itself, a cheap shot, irony eh.
One last thing, if something is proven, if it is a fact, then you need to accept it. You might also want to post more facts yourself and not post imaginary conversations or statements intended to back up your assumptions or speculations. That is called fiction. |  | |  |
| another 2 million invested on 11:09 - Mar 28 with 910 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 09:43 - Mar 28 by SullutaCreturned |
Every time somebody proves you wrong or points out you have posted something that is not factual you accuse them of insukts, slurs and cheap shots. Rather ironic given how many cheap shots you have aimed at thousands of people.
Yor last sentence is in itself, a cheap shot, irony eh.
One last thing, if something is proven, if it is a fact, then you need to accept it. You might also want to post more facts yourself and not post imaginary conversations or statements intended to back up your assumptions or speculations. That is called fiction. |
I have not insulted 1000s of people. I accused them of doing a bad job. This is not an insult. I did say they had been a bit dim. They failed to cash in their lottery ticket and pick up millions. They then proposed to pay around £11m in fees to third parties. Not so clever if you ask me and bad for the club. No one said anything or agreed with me. Then what do you know POTY 2023. This is a forum and it is better to be entertaining and use parody. It adds something in my opinion. [Post edited 28 Mar 15:56]
|  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 11:46 - Mar 28 with 891 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 11:09 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I have not insulted 1000s of people. I accused them of doing a bad job. This is not an insult. I did say they had been a bit dim. They failed to cash in their lottery ticket and pick up millions. They then proposed to pay around £11m in fees to third parties. Not so clever if you ask me and bad for the club. No one said anything or agreed with me. Then what do you know POTY 2023. This is a forum and it is better to be entertaining and use parody. It adds something in my opinion. [Post edited 28 Mar 15:56]
|
You do realise that RichardO polled more than double the votes you did from board members. Your other votes were made up by non members. Make of that what you will.
https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/swanseacity/members//polls/3015/%F0%9F%8F |  | | |
| another 2 million invested on 12:24 - Mar 28 with 848 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 11:09 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I have not insulted 1000s of people. I accused them of doing a bad job. This is not an insult. I did say they had been a bit dim. They failed to cash in their lottery ticket and pick up millions. They then proposed to pay around £11m in fees to third parties. Not so clever if you ask me and bad for the club. No one said anything or agreed with me. Then what do you know POTY 2023. This is a forum and it is better to be entertaining and use parody. It adds something in my opinion. [Post edited 28 Mar 15:56]
|
Can you prove the claim of £11M the trust paid to third parties. This one is up there with your classics. [Post edited 28 Mar 12:25]
| | | |
| another 2 million invested on 12:33 - Mar 28 with 828 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 11:09 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
I have not insulted 1000s of people. I accused them of doing a bad job. This is not an insult. I did say they had been a bit dim. They failed to cash in their lottery ticket and pick up millions. They then proposed to pay around £11m in fees to third parties. Not so clever if you ask me and bad for the club. No one said anything or agreed with me. Then what do you know POTY 2023. This is a forum and it is better to be entertaining and use parody. It adds something in my opinion. [Post edited 28 Mar 15:56]
|
Youcalled thousands of people a bit dim ut reviousy you had called them thick, I'm sure if I culd be bothered to look there would be more. I say that because weren't you warned off repeating something, some insult?
Another rant about the trust, bore off mun for pete's sake. You're obsessed but the rest of us have moved on. is that why you brought up Wrexham, to give you yet another excuse to go on about the trust? Very sad. get a hobby that doesn't involve a keyboard.
POTY, again, get a life. It means very little and the last 2 years the winner has been a joke title. We all voted for Builth to shut up a board moron. Ths year you won, make of that what you will. I wasn't aware non members could vote, I wonder if they could vote more than once.
There's nothing wrong with being entertaining but there is something wrong in posting lies and there is NOTHING entertaining in constantly harping on about the trust. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 13:52 - Mar 28 with 783 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 12:24 - Mar 28 by Whiterockin |
Can you prove the claim of £11M the trust paid to third parties. This one is up there with your classics. [Post edited 28 Mar 12:25]
|
The £11m was reportedly the fee the Trust would have had to pay in fees if they had gone to court and won £20m. Over 50% of the award. The members had already voted to go ahead without knowing all the details it seems. The source was the Trust statement when they settled. Yes it is a classic. Most members were keen to go ahead. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 13:55 - Mar 28 with 780 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 12:33 - Mar 28 by SullutaCreturned |
Youcalled thousands of people a bit dim ut reviousy you had called them thick, I'm sure if I culd be bothered to look there would be more. I say that because weren't you warned off repeating something, some insult?
Another rant about the trust, bore off mun for pete's sake. You're obsessed but the rest of us have moved on. is that why you brought up Wrexham, to give you yet another excuse to go on about the trust? Very sad. get a hobby that doesn't involve a keyboard.
POTY, again, get a life. It means very little and the last 2 years the winner has been a joke title. We all voted for Builth to shut up a board moron. Ths year you won, make of that what you will. I wasn't aware non members could vote, I wonder if they could vote more than once.
There's nothing wrong with being entertaining but there is something wrong in posting lies and there is NOTHING entertaining in constantly harping on about the trust. |
The only people I called " thickos" were those engaging in ethnic slurs and disrespecting footballers who have died in aeroplane accidents. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 14:33 - Mar 28 with 755 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 13:52 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The £11m was reportedly the fee the Trust would have had to pay in fees if they had gone to court and won £20m. Over 50% of the award. The members had already voted to go ahead without knowing all the details it seems. The source was the Trust statement when they settled. Yes it is a classic. Most members were keen to go ahead. |
So the trust never proposed to pay £11M in fees. It was allegedly a fee they may have incurred if it had gone to court, which they didn't.
So another lie on your part.
EDIT
I can see why you have previously been banned for continually telling lies about the trust.
[Post edited 28 Mar 14:35]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| another 2 million invested on 15:45 - Mar 28 with 719 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 14:33 - Mar 28 by Whiterockin |
So the trust never proposed to pay £11M in fees. It was allegedly a fee they may have incurred if it had gone to court, which they didn't.
So another lie on your part.
EDIT
I can see why you have previously been banned for continually telling lies about the trust.
[Post edited 28 Mar 14:35]
|
What is a proposal? Definition.
"A plan or suggestion, especially a formal or written one, put forward for consideration by others" .
Did the Trust propose to go to court? Yes they did and had plans to do so.. It was voted for by the members who were warned it would not come cheap.
So have much would the fess be? . The Trust reported they would be at least half the claim demand of £21m, (at least £10.5m in the event of a complete win). Probably even in excess of the rounded up £11m I quoted.
Cut and pasted from the Trust document of February 2022.
[The £21M number needs to be put in proper context – this was the approximate value of the Trust’s shares in 2016 when the club was sold – it is not the net funds the Trust could have realised by taking legal action. All legal cases carry cost and risk – without waiving privilege in all of the advice received, the QC opinion the Trust obtained for our case stated “Strong prospects of establishing liability with a 60% chance of success”. In the best-case scenario of the Trust winning the case and the judge requiring the current majority owners and 2016 sellers to buy the Trust’s shares at 2016 valuation, after deduction of fees and premiums for the funder and insurer and various legal representatives, the Trust may have realised at most half of the £21M amount and, of course, the Trust would then have no shares in the club and little to no engagement with the club’s ownership or management]
[Post edited 28 Mar 15:51]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 15:53 - Mar 28 with 709 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 15:45 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
What is a proposal? Definition.
"A plan or suggestion, especially a formal or written one, put forward for consideration by others" .
Did the Trust propose to go to court? Yes they did and had plans to do so.. It was voted for by the members who were warned it would not come cheap.
So have much would the fess be? . The Trust reported they would be at least half the claim demand of £21m, (at least £10.5m in the event of a complete win). Probably even in excess of the rounded up £11m I quoted.
Cut and pasted from the Trust document of February 2022.
[The £21M number needs to be put in proper context – this was the approximate value of the Trust’s shares in 2016 when the club was sold – it is not the net funds the Trust could have realised by taking legal action. All legal cases carry cost and risk – without waiving privilege in all of the advice received, the QC opinion the Trust obtained for our case stated “Strong prospects of establishing liability with a 60% chance of success”. In the best-case scenario of the Trust winning the case and the judge requiring the current majority owners and 2016 sellers to buy the Trust’s shares at 2016 valuation, after deduction of fees and premiums for the funder and insurer and various legal representatives, the Trust may have realised at most half of the £21M amount and, of course, the Trust would then have no shares in the club and little to no engagement with the club’s ownership or management]
[Post edited 28 Mar 15:51]
|
When a pathological liar is caught, they won’t admit they were lying and will likely become defensive.
Pathological liars may try to deflect the blame, find excuses for their lying, minimize the importance of the lie, or admit only to a small part of their dishonesty. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 16:02 - Mar 28 with 679 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 15:53 - Mar 28 by Whiterockin |
When a pathological liar is caught, they won’t admit they were lying and will likely become defensive.
Pathological liars may try to deflect the blame, find excuses for their lying, minimize the importance of the lie, or admit only to a small part of their dishonesty. |
The Trust proposed to go to court and the members voted to go to court. The third party fees for services for this proposal was reported to be around £11m. I have provided the evidence from the Trust themselves. They had been working on it for years.
You can deflect all you like. [Post edited 28 Mar 16:04]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 16:09 - Mar 28 with 666 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 16:02 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The Trust proposed to go to court and the members voted to go to court. The third party fees for services for this proposal was reported to be around £11m. I have provided the evidence from the Trust themselves. They had been working on it for years.
You can deflect all you like. [Post edited 28 Mar 16:04]
|
I will leave others decide if the trust actually proposed to pay £11M in fees or if it could have been the price to pay if they had gone to court, they didn't.
I stand by the fact the trust never had any intention of paying those fees, so never proposed to pay it.
I refer to my post above and suggest that you get professional help. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 16:30 - Mar 28 with 633 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 16:09 - Mar 28 by Whiterockin |
I will leave others decide if the trust actually proposed to pay £11M in fees or if it could have been the price to pay if they had gone to court, they didn't.
I stand by the fact the trust never had any intention of paying those fees, so never proposed to pay it.
I refer to my post above and suggest that you get professional help. |
They had a mandate to go to court from the members who knew it was not cheap. Several posters have expressed their anger that it did not go ahead and left the Trust for good in disgust. You are in denial using dogey semantics. If there was no offer from the club, what then? [Post edited 28 Mar 16:35]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 18:21 - Mar 28 with 601 views | max936 |
| another 2 million invested on 15:53 - Mar 28 by Whiterockin |
When a pathological liar is caught, they won’t admit they were lying and will likely become defensive.
Pathological liars may try to deflect the blame, find excuses for their lying, minimize the importance of the lie, or admit only to a small part of their dishonesty. |
Fair play, you've way more patience than me Whitey, I've long since given up.  |  |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 19:55 - Mar 28 with 555 views | BillyChong |
| another 2 million invested on 09:25 - Mar 28 by SullutaCreturned |
As I said to you previously, nothing I have said to you is an insult, or at least it doesnt break site rules and it is far better (in my opinion) than continually denigrating people by the thousand, which is what you do.
What did any of my post have to do with SCST? This is why you're a space cadet, no matter what is posted you don't see the reality and you twist it to attack the usual object of your ire.
Where have I ever said the trust members cannot be wrong? That's a lie. Where have I ever said the majority is aways right, another lie. Stop making things up.
What the majority vote for is what they should get whether it is right or wrong, that's how the democratic process works, the majority get what they want even if it's a complete farce.
You make another assumption about Wrexham which I believe to be false. I'm fairly sure Reynolds has said the WST is an important part of the future at Wrexham though I stand to be proven wrong. |
Reynolds has on numerous occasions praised their trust for keeping the club alive.
They did their due diligence and rejected offers for the clubs from the sharks before taking a vote on the Hollywood sale. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 21:57 - Mar 28 with 512 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 15:45 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
What is a proposal? Definition.
"A plan or suggestion, especially a formal or written one, put forward for consideration by others" .
Did the Trust propose to go to court? Yes they did and had plans to do so.. It was voted for by the members who were warned it would not come cheap.
So have much would the fess be? . The Trust reported they would be at least half the claim demand of £21m, (at least £10.5m in the event of a complete win). Probably even in excess of the rounded up £11m I quoted.
Cut and pasted from the Trust document of February 2022.
[The £21M number needs to be put in proper context – this was the approximate value of the Trust’s shares in 2016 when the club was sold – it is not the net funds the Trust could have realised by taking legal action. All legal cases carry cost and risk – without waiving privilege in all of the advice received, the QC opinion the Trust obtained for our case stated “Strong prospects of establishing liability with a 60% chance of success”. In the best-case scenario of the Trust winning the case and the judge requiring the current majority owners and 2016 sellers to buy the Trust’s shares at 2016 valuation, after deduction of fees and premiums for the funder and insurer and various legal representatives, the Trust may have realised at most half of the £21M amount and, of course, the Trust would then have no shares in the club and little to no engagement with the club’s ownership or management]
[Post edited 28 Mar 15:51]
|
I once used a definition to prove you wrong, you told me definitions weren't needed. Except it seems when you yourself are backed into a corner. Hypocrisy much?
Have you got the the link, or any actual proof that what you say about fees is true? After all, it is easier to post the link to the document and we can all see the unadulterated version. [Post edited 28 Mar 22:05]
| | | |
| another 2 million invested on 21:59 - Mar 28 with 510 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 13:55 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The only people I called " thickos" were those engaging in ethnic slurs and disrespecting footballers who have died in aeroplane accidents. |
Oh no, I'm fairly sure you have called trust members thicko's. Otherwise why were you warned about your behaviour? | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 22:11 - Mar 28 with 504 views | vetchonian |
| another 2 million invested on 19:55 - Mar 28 by BillyChong |
Reynolds has on numerous occasions praised their trust for keeping the club alive.
They did their due diligence and rejected offers for the clubs from the sharks before taking a vote on the Hollywood sale. |
as did the Swans trust their due diligence decided the original proposed buyers were unsuitable and as the majority shareholder they had clout.
So the next time a buyer was found the sell outs collided and out maneuvered the majority shareholder by going forces and selling their voting rights too | |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 22:16 - Mar 28 with 504 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 21:57 - Mar 28 by SullutaCreturned |
I once used a definition to prove you wrong, you told me definitions weren't needed. Except it seems when you yourself are backed into a corner. Hypocrisy much?
Have you got the the link, or any actual proof that what you say about fees is true? After all, it is easier to post the link to the document and we can all see the unadulterated version. [Post edited 28 Mar 22:05]
|
Here is the statement. I referenced it for u you with the date and an extract.
https://www.swanstrust.co.uk/supporters-updates/swans-trust-chair-update-februar
Carry on deflecting if you want to. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 22:16 - Mar 28 with 502 views | SullutaCreturned |
I haven't deflected anything, I have asked questions.
PS, I read it and it doesn't quite say what you think. They wanted funding and insurance and without hgh enough numbers being realised there they decided the case was too risky.
Insurance, indemnities, they wanted protection against the high fees.
In cases like these the loser can be instructed to pay the costs, this wasn't mentioned. I'd need a lawyers opinion on that to be sure but nothing was mentioned in that statement. [Post edited 28 Mar 22:25]
| | | |
| another 2 million invested on 22:32 - Mar 28 with 493 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 22:16 - Mar 28 by SullutaCreturned |
I haven't deflected anything, I have asked questions.
PS, I read it and it doesn't quite say what you think. They wanted funding and insurance and without hgh enough numbers being realised there they decided the case was too risky.
Insurance, indemnities, they wanted protection against the high fees.
In cases like these the loser can be instructed to pay the costs, this wasn't mentioned. I'd need a lawyers opinion on that to be sure but nothing was mentioned in that statement. [Post edited 28 Mar 22:25]
|
The Trust had mandate to go to Court from the members on a proposal they had worked on for years. The members had been informed the fees would be hgh. Members performed poorly.
Your post is gibberish. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 07:08 - Mar 29 with 440 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 22:16 - Mar 28 by SullutaCreturned |
I haven't deflected anything, I have asked questions.
PS, I read it and it doesn't quite say what you think. They wanted funding and insurance and without hgh enough numbers being realised there they decided the case was too risky.
Insurance, indemnities, they wanted protection against the high fees.
In cases like these the loser can be instructed to pay the costs, this wasn't mentioned. I'd need a lawyers opinion on that to be sure but nothing was mentioned in that statement. [Post edited 28 Mar 22:25]
|
As we all agree except for one. Nowhere did it say they proposed to pay £11M. Just one poster with an agenda trying to knock the trust. Clearly it is failing and his hole is getting deeper, frustration must be a terrible feeling. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 13:01 - Mar 29 with 357 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 22:32 - Mar 28 by ReslovenSwan1 |
The Trust had mandate to go to Court from the members on a proposal they had worked on for years. The members had been informed the fees would be hgh. Members performed poorly.
Your post is gibberish. |
Sorry but, no.
The trust had a mandate but after due diligence they decided it was too risky because they couldn't get enough funding or insurance to cover costs.
The members voted on the information they had at the time.
You have perormed poorly, again. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 14:12 - Mar 29 with 305 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 18:21 - Mar 28 by max936 |
Fair play, you've way more patience than me Whitey, I've long since given up. |
TBH Max the guy continues to post slurs, innuendos and lies regarding the trust. I am no fan of the trust, but they worked tirelessly to save the club helping to maintain our league status and put us in a far better position than if they had not been there. They do not deserve to be treated like this. The poster in question has already been banned for these actions and only because Keith currently is more tolerant he is still about. This forum is read worldwide and personally I do not want people to have access to the rubbish he posts without the truth also being available for them to read, hence the responses. Yes my patience is wearing thin, but at least he is in the minority of one regarding his recent posts. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 17:08 - Mar 29 with 241 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 14:12 - Mar 29 by Whiterockin |
TBH Max the guy continues to post slurs, innuendos and lies regarding the trust. I am no fan of the trust, but they worked tirelessly to save the club helping to maintain our league status and put us in a far better position than if they had not been there. They do not deserve to be treated like this. The poster in question has already been banned for these actions and only because Keith currently is more tolerant he is still about. This forum is read worldwide and personally I do not want people to have access to the rubbish he posts without the truth also being available for them to read, hence the responses. Yes my patience is wearing thin, but at least he is in the minority of one regarding his recent posts. |
I just happen to believe they are not good for the club. In 2002 they had a purpose and a goal. Once Roberto Martinez rolled up they became irrelevant.
I have asked people what they have achieved outside the heroics of 2002 and get no reply. Their million pounds needs to be invested in something. Doing nothing served them well when Huw Jenkins was in charge. Now they cannot sit on the laurels. They are shrinking fast. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
