Please log in to use all the site's facilities
|Season Ticket Prices|
at 12:59 22 Oct 2018
No I don’t know how much they are going to be but they are doing away with the 60 age concession and moving it to 65, those that are 60 now will continue at the lower rate, those at 59 will be pissed right off.
|One of my favourite posters|
at 21:05 14 Oct 2018
I think I upset him a few weeks ago,I didn’t really mean to,I’m glad he came back he’s awesome.
|Guns and Liverpool?|
at 12:00 10 Oct 2018
What the fuçk is that all about then?
I was just looking at a tribute on twitter from the Liverpool Echo that a friend retweeted to celebrate John Lennons birthday yesterday.
I had a quick look at the paper and one of the first stories I saw was about a 27 year old man out on day release from prison who was shot dead on Sunday.
The reason he was in prison was because he was caught in possession of a loaded pistol.
He was caught in possession of a loaded pistol after being shot by someone else in his own bedroom five years ago.
|FAO Lohengrin |
at 14:47 3 Oct 2018
I’ve had a load of pics and articles for my Facebook group today.
Did you know Sir Oswald Mosley once spoke in Briton Ferry?
You must be gutted you missed thar one.
|If you want a laugh |
at 23:50 16 Sep 2018
This is a poster on another Swans Forum that never goes to the Liberty.
|Answers questions about the Trust's Legal Claims and Request for Mediation|
at 12:50 15 Sep 2018
Q: What has happened so far?
A: Following the majority owner, at the end of last year, breaking off negotiations to buy part of the Trust’s shareholding in the company which owns the Club (which we’ll call ‘2002 Limited’ for short), the Trust Board instructed lawyers to review the factual background, from the formation of the Trust to 2016 and beyond, and to consider the Trust’s legal position with regard to the 2016 sale and its aftermath.
This resulted in a detailed chronology being prepared and a Claim Letter being sent on behalf of the Trust to the majority owner, Huw Jenkins and others on 18 May 2018, setting out the Trust’s legal claims. This was in order to comply with a standard Direction from the High Court as to what claimants must do before they commence court proceedings. That includes trying to resolve claims with intended defendants at an early stage by negotiation, mediation or other methods that avoid court proceedings.
The Trust’s lawyers therefore proposed mediation, but that was rejected by the majority owner. In spite of that proposal being repeated with further explanation, no further response to it has been received.
According to the Court Direction, intended defendants who receive a Claim Letter must respond to it within a reasonable time and no later than 3 months in a very complex case. The majority owner, through its lawyers, stated that it would provide a reply letter within that 3 month period, but did not do so and shows no sign of doing so. It is clear, therefore, that the majority owner is in breach of the Court Direction.
The other intended defendants, including Huw Jenkins, have also failed to comply with the Court Direction in not providing a response letter within the required period.
Recently, the majority owner has suggested a confidential meeting with the Trust and that possibility is being discussed between the respective lawyers. No indication has been received of what the majority owner wishes to discuss. It is not clear whether it is intended that Huw Jenkins and others should also take part.
A confidential meeting took place many weeks ago between members of the Trust Board, Huw Jenkins and Martin Morgan. Since then, the lawyer acting for them and some other former shareholders has approached the Trust’s lawyers, more than once, to propose a further meeting, but when our lawyers responded with suggested dates, no reply was received.
Q: Against whom are the Trust’s claims made?
A: The Claim Letter was sent to:
the majority owner (Swansea Football, LLC)
other listed shareholders, namely:
OTH 2015 Limited
Bulk Vending Systems Limited
2002 Limited (as required by law).
Q: What is the Trust claiming?
A: There are several legal claims, including:
That since the sale of a controlling interest to the majority owner, the affairs of 2002 Limited have been conducted in a manner that is unfairly prejudicial to the interests of the Trust as a shareholder. For example, the Trust was excluded from the share sale and from a new Shareholders’ Agreement between the majority owner and the other remaining shareholders as to how the company is to be managed. If it reached Court and the Court agreed with the Trust, it could (amongst other options) order the majority to purchase all or part of the Trust’s shares for a reasonable price (which the Trust would argue is that which Huw Jenkins and others received).
That the 2002 Shareholders Agreement, which had been operated for many years and accepted as valid and binding, was breached by virtue of the Trust not being given first refusal to purchase any of the shares sold in 2016, by new Articles of Association being adopted without the Trust’s consent and by non-observance of an implied duty of ‘good faith’ between shareholders (e.g. the other shareholders excluded the Trust from knowledge of and participation in negotiations with Jason Levien and Steve Kalpan for the sale of shares to the present majority owner).
That Huw Jenkins and others made misstatements which caused the Trust loss, for which the Trust is entitled to damages, namely that the Trust did not wish to sell any shares and that there was no existing Shareholders Agreement of binding effect.
Although those in receipt of the Claim Letter have not provided the required response letters, it is understood that they deny the claims.
Q: What is mediation? What is the effect of the majority owner refusing it?
A: Mediation is a type of voluntary negotiation in which an independent mediator tries to assist parties to reach an agreement to resolve their disputes. The mediator does not make a decision as to who is right or wrong and cannot force the parties to enter into an agreement. Mediation has a high success rate.
As mediation is voluntary, the majority owner cannot be forced to mediate. However, the Court may punish an unreasonable refusal to mediate, if the stage of court proceedings is reached, by imposing costs sanctions. The Trust considers that the refusal of the majority to mediate is unreasonable and that the failure of Huw Jenkins and others to respond to the proposal is also unreasonable.
Q: What happens next?
A: Due to the refusal of the majority owner to produce a copy of the 2016 Share Sale and Purchase Agreement, as well as some other relevant documents, the Trust has instructed its lawyers to make an application to the High Court for an order for ‘pre-action disclosure’. That is likely to be issued within the next 10 days.
The Trust Board remains willing to mediate or negotiate in good faith, but there has been much delay by the intended defendants and the Trust’s claims cannot remain unresolved for much longer. The Trust’s Board and lawyers are making plans for litigation, should it become necessary, and there will be a full consultation of the members before any decision is taken.
|Trust Chairman’s Update|
at 19:13 5 Sep 2018
‘It has been almost three weeks since the last update I provided to our members about events at Swans Trust, at what is a critical time for both the Trust and the Club.
I have some key updates for you around the mediation process that we announced in May and the questions we have asked the football club around the decisions taken over the last few months.
Let me start with an update about the mediation process. In May, we informed our members that we had attempted to engage with the majority owners of Swansea City and other parties (including Huw Jenkins and Martin Morgan) through a formal mediation process, beginning with a claim letter that set out the Trust’s legal case in detail and proposed a mediation. Mediation is a voluntary and confidential process in which relevant parties seek to resolve disputes with the assistance of a trained independent and impartial mediator.
Our aim was, and remains, to seek an agreement to settle past differences, subject to members’ approval, with a view to moving ahead together with the task of rebuilding the club and returning it to top level football.
The Trust entered this process in good faith, attempting to resolve all issues without the need for formal court proceedings. Unfortunately, the legal representatives of the majority owners initially refused our offer to mediate, questioning whether it was genuine, and bizarrely accused the Trust of trying to harm the Club.
An initial ’Without Prejudice’ meeting was held with Huw Jenkins and Martin Morgan in early June, however there has been no follow up meeting with them or their lawyers, although the Trust was open to the possibility.
The courts have a ‘Practice Direction’, which sets out the guidelines which parties in dispute should follow before they start court proceedings. This includes trying to reach agreement by means such as mediation. The Practice Direction outlines a maximum timeline within which the relevant parties should provide a full written response to the Trust’s claim. The Trust and its legal representatives have provided every opportunity for this to be met, even allowing the maximum possible timeline which is usually reserved for more complex cases than this. Unfortunately, this deadline passed on 20thAugust without a response being received, either from the majority owners or the others.
Since the deadline passed, things have progressed a little. Our legal team were contacted by the legal representatives of the majority owners and, as a result, we are currently in discussions to arrange a meeting between the Trust, the majority owners and other parties within the next few weeks.
As a Trust, we must continue to protect our legal position. As part of the mediation process, the Trust requested access to various pieces of documentation relating to the 2016 sale.These documents have not yet been received. On the advice of our legal team, the Trust board has instructed our lawyers to initiate legal action to obtain access to these documents, unless they are provided within a further 7 days. This is a limited legal action specifically to obtain access to these documents. It is not the same as undertaking legal action relating to the sale itself and its impact on the Trust’s shareholding. We hope those issues can still be resolved as part of the discussions that are scheduled to take place in the next few weeks. However, these documents are important so that the Trust can best advise its members on the next course of action to take, which could mean undertaking legal action relating to the 2016 sale and its impact on the Trust’s position.
I can assure you that we will investigate every option available to us to ensure that we get the right result for the Trust, whichwill only be concluded following a full consultation and ballot of our members. We will, of course, continue to keep you updated as things progress.
As representatives of the fans, it is key that we understand the reasons for decisions made by the Club and gain assurances on the financial management of the Club. In my last update, I said that the Trust had sent a comprehensive list of questions to the majority owners of the Club, to obtain some clarity on the club’s financial position after this summer, understand the reasons for why decisions were made as well as seeking to ensure that the decisions taken are in the best interests of the Club. Many of these questions related to our transfer dealings this summer, but we also sought clarity on our financial obligations in the future, such as the salaries of senior employees. We know that relegation to the Championship means that we will receive considerably less revenue than previously, and we need to cut our cloth accordingly, but without visibility on the current situation we cannot say if the decisions taken were in the Club’s best interests.
The majority owners have responded to our requests and offered to meet with Stuart MacDonald, our Supporter Director, to answer our questions and provide those assurances. That was a positive step. However, the club havealso insisted that before any meeting takes place that an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) was signed by Stuart. This NDA would have prevented Stuart releasing key information into the public domain but, crucially, also stopped him from providing any information to the Trust board. This is unacceptable as it would mean that the Trust board could not gain the reassurances that we needed, plus puts our Supporter Director in an impossible position.
We have advised the majority owners that our Supporter Director will not be signing this document and we are deeply disappointed and angry that it was suggested he should sign in the first place given both Stuart’s position as a Director of the Club (which already brings with it fiduciary duties regarding confidential information being made public) but also our position as a 21% shareholder and representative of the fans. We will continue to push for these answers but not being able to provide them at this time is very disappointing.
Furthermore, the request to sign an NDA arrived just 48 hours after some key commercial information relating to the club was released via a private message exchange on Twitter by a current employee (and former shareholder) with a young supporter, which later entered the public domain. Whilst we welcome all levels of fan engagement by members of the Club’s hierarchy, it is completely inappropriate that the Supporter Director is asked to withhold information from the Trust board whilst others release this information to anyone who asks. Not for the first time, we have expressed our strong opinion that Leigh Dineen’s continued employment at the football club is inappropriate, not least due to his unprofessionalism in this matter.
On a separate note we were pleased to play a part in the competitive pricing for the Carabao Cup tie against Crystal Palace and we commend the club for listening to our viewpoints on this matter. While the result did not go our way, there were some promising debuts for some of our younger players which was pleasing to see.
I would also like to applaud the excellent efforts of Graham Potter, the coaching staff and the playing squad in performing so well at the start of this season. There has also been an obvious change in footballing philosophy on the pitch and this has made watching the Swans a much more enjoyable experience than in recent times.
This is a critical time for this organisation, and the Club as a whole. The Trust is only as strong as its membership and, in the coming weeks, we will be seeking to increase our membership base to provide as strong a voice for the fans as possible. We would welcome your help in getting the message out to fans about the importance of joining and the need for a strong Supporters Trust, especially at this time.
I would like to thank everyone who has joined us this evening and for all members who have already joined for this year. We will now open for any questions’
[Post edited 5 Sep 19:17]
|FAO The Res|
at 13:58 5 Sep 2018
Are you going to the ‘Trust Members Only’ fans forum tonight to ask questions and get some answers? lol
|Thomas The Tank Engine|
at 15:23 3 Sep 2018
Oh please just fuçk off you stupid stupid cretinous çunts.
|Forum Votes: ||6366|
|Comment Votes: ||0|
|Prediction League: ||0|