| another 2 million invested on 18:09 - Mar 29 with 786 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 07:08 - Mar 29 by Whiterockin |
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. |
Many posters express disgust they did not go to Court and carry out the wishes of the membership. Be clear the members knew it would cost millions. Had not Silverstein given them an off ramp I am not sure there would have had any other option. This is for the lawyers.
I was madness. I pay tribute to the current board for the stick they have taken in NOT carrying out the wishes of the members. I believe the Convertible loan loan changed everything. It meant the court case would directly and negatively cause significant damage to the club.
It is too subtle and nuance for most members. This is why the Trust have £1m instead of £15m. It is no use to them. Just a figure on a bank statement. |  |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
|  |
| another 2 million invested on 18:28 - Mar 29 with 767 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 18:09 - Mar 29 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Many posters express disgust they did not go to Court and carry out the wishes of the membership. Be clear the members knew it would cost millions. Had not Silverstein given them an off ramp I am not sure there would have had any other option. This is for the lawyers.
I was madness. I pay tribute to the current board for the stick they have taken in NOT carrying out the wishes of the members. I believe the Convertible loan loan changed everything. It meant the court case would directly and negatively cause significant damage to the club.
It is too subtle and nuance for most members. This is why the Trust have £1m instead of £15m. It is no use to them. Just a figure on a bank statement. |
Well even if they only got 50% they'd still have about 10 million. Your opinion always seemed to be raging against "English" lawyers. Always seemed a tad xenophobic to myself.
Again, whether it turned out to be right or wrong, the board broke faith with the memberships wishes, it renders the trust pointless because who will trust them?
And yet again you suggest the members are thick, to thick to understand. it doesn't matter how you dress it up, it's what you mean.
However, you think yourself clever enough and if that was true you wouldn't have posted so many mistruths. |  | | |
| another 2 million invested on 18:50 - Mar 29 with 757 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 18:28 - Mar 29 by SullutaCreturned |
Well even if they only got 50% they'd still have about 10 million. Your opinion always seemed to be raging against "English" lawyers. Always seemed a tad xenophobic to myself.
Again, whether it turned out to be right or wrong, the board broke faith with the memberships wishes, it renders the trust pointless because who will trust them?
And yet again you suggest the members are thick, to thick to understand. it doesn't matter how you dress it up, it's what you mean.
However, you think yourself clever enough and if that was true you wouldn't have posted so many mistruths. |
Your thinking is bonkers and your thinking is similar to that of other members. In your view money taken from the owners and given 50:50 to the Trust and their funders would have been a good deal.
It would have been a disaster as the Trust not not know how to manage money and the funders were not local people. It is better to leave the money with the US owners who have put that money into the club and introduced new investors.
SCST do not have the necessary capabilities to use their money and shares wisely. The will end up like Wrexham WST who seem to have given up rather than share the wealth with Reynolds and Co. They have handed over their shares and leases for pennies. They cannot compete. Reynolds is brutal. [Post edited 29 Mar 18:58]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 19:52 - Mar 29 with 727 views | QJumpingJack |
| another 2 million invested on 18:09 - Mar 29 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Many posters express disgust they did not go to Court and carry out the wishes of the membership. Be clear the members knew it would cost millions. Had not Silverstein given them an off ramp I am not sure there would have had any other option. This is for the lawyers.
I was madness. I pay tribute to the current board for the stick they have taken in NOT carrying out the wishes of the members. I believe the Convertible loan loan changed everything. It meant the court case would directly and negatively cause significant damage to the club.
It is too subtle and nuance for most members. This is why the Trust have £1m instead of £15m. It is no use to them. Just a figure on a bank statement. |
whats happened to Silverstein? | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 20:20 - Mar 29 with 711 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 19:52 - Mar 29 by QJumpingJack |
whats happened to Silverstein? |
He invested independently and then transferred his holding into the LLC 'bucket'. He must have been fairly happy with them and their plans.
These days the spokesman for the club and the LLC is Mr Coleman. The LLC does not want mixed messaging. All LLC stuff goes through Coleman I would think.
The LLC and Swansea fortunes are entwined. I see no reason not to offer them my support. Dilution of other is of no interest to me. DIluted owners are those who have left their wallet at home. [Post edited 29 Mar 21:38]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 07:20 - Mar 30 with 651 views | QJumpingJack |
| another 2 million invested on 20:20 - Mar 29 by ReslovenSwan1 |
He invested independently and then transferred his holding into the LLC 'bucket'. He must have been fairly happy with them and their plans.
These days the spokesman for the club and the LLC is Mr Coleman. The LLC does not want mixed messaging. All LLC stuff goes through Coleman I would think.
The LLC and Swansea fortunes are entwined. I see no reason not to offer them my support. Dilution of other is of no interest to me. DIluted owners are those who have left their wallet at home. [Post edited 29 Mar 21:38]
|
who feeds you this information?
the club must be concerned you know so much about the ownership. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 09:38 - Mar 30 with 640 views | theloneranger |
| another 2 million invested on 07:20 - Mar 30 by QJumpingJack |
who feeds you this information?
the club must be concerned you know so much about the ownership. |
There's only ONE person ....
HIMSELF!! 😇 |  |
| Everyday above ground ... Is a good day! 😎 |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 10:19 - Mar 30 with 619 views | 3swan |
| 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]
|
Exactly
2 points from the link
"The members’ vote in 2019 gave the Trust Board the mandate to pursue legal action and also to settle the claim if appropriate. The Trust has said on numerous occasions that it is willing to listen to offers that could lead to a settlement and so avoid the need for legal action – which was always seen as a last resort."
" In June 2021, the non-binding heads of terms for funding and insurance appeared broadly adequate. As the details of the funding agreement were being discussed, it became apparent that the funder required the Trust to commit potentially all of its own resources to pursue the case to conclusion once the funder’s budget had been exhausted, however long or costly the legal action would be and including the costs of a potential appeal."
Just like an MOT things were at a point in time and can and did change as more information came to light with detailed discussions for funding.
The thought that the buyers would have paid £21m for the Trust shares is nonsensical as they had no need to due to having voting rights from the other sellers | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| another 2 million invested on 10:26 - Mar 30 with 606 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 10:19 - Mar 30 by 3swan |
Exactly
2 points from the link
"The members’ vote in 2019 gave the Trust Board the mandate to pursue legal action and also to settle the claim if appropriate. The Trust has said on numerous occasions that it is willing to listen to offers that could lead to a settlement and so avoid the need for legal action – which was always seen as a last resort."
" In June 2021, the non-binding heads of terms for funding and insurance appeared broadly adequate. As the details of the funding agreement were being discussed, it became apparent that the funder required the Trust to commit potentially all of its own resources to pursue the case to conclusion once the funder’s budget had been exhausted, however long or costly the legal action would be and including the costs of a potential appeal."
Just like an MOT things were at a point in time and can and did change as more information came to light with detailed discussions for funding.
The thought that the buyers would have paid £21m for the Trust shares is nonsensical as they had no need to due to having voting rights from the other sellers |
Its wonderful that people are posting facts on this thread instead of made up BS. |  | | |
| another 2 million invested on 10:57 - Mar 30 with 582 views | max936 |
| another 2 million invested on 10:19 - Mar 30 by 3swan |
Exactly
2 points from the link
"The members’ vote in 2019 gave the Trust Board the mandate to pursue legal action and also to settle the claim if appropriate. The Trust has said on numerous occasions that it is willing to listen to offers that could lead to a settlement and so avoid the need for legal action – which was always seen as a last resort."
" In June 2021, the non-binding heads of terms for funding and insurance appeared broadly adequate. As the details of the funding agreement were being discussed, it became apparent that the funder required the Trust to commit potentially all of its own resources to pursue the case to conclusion once the funder’s budget had been exhausted, however long or costly the legal action would be and including the costs of a potential appeal."
Just like an MOT things were at a point in time and can and did change as more information came to light with detailed discussions for funding.
The thought that the buyers would have paid £21m for the Trust shares is nonsensical as they had no need to due to having voting rights from the other sellers |
Don't talk sense by speaking the "ABSOLUTE TRUTH" Swanny it won't be absorbed or appreciated by the usual suspect. [Post edited 30 Mar 10:58]
|  |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 13:20 - Mar 30 with 541 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 18:50 - Mar 29 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Your thinking is bonkers and your thinking is similar to that of other members. In your view money taken from the owners and given 50:50 to the Trust and their funders would have been a good deal.
It would have been a disaster as the Trust not not know how to manage money and the funders were not local people. It is better to leave the money with the US owners who have put that money into the club and introduced new investors.
SCST do not have the necessary capabilities to use their money and shares wisely. The will end up like Wrexham WST who seem to have given up rather than share the wealth with Reynolds and Co. They have handed over their shares and leases for pennies. They cannot compete. Reynolds is brutal. [Post edited 29 Mar 18:58]
|
See you just posted another mistruth. Where did I say it was a good deal? As I have repeatedly said, whether it be right or wrong that is what the membership voted for.
A bit of a failure to comrehend on your part, again.
Now would it have been a disaster? The trust would have a lot more money sitting in an interest bearing bank account, for a rainy day. What future trust bards did with it, who knows.
And yet AGAIN you post a lie, an outright LIE about the Wrexham trust. They turned down buyers because they didn't seem right but they did their due diligence on Reynolds and McIlhenney and they have, by any meaure, made a very good decision.
How can you call Reynolds "brutal" when he has invested a lot of money, made Wrexham much more succesful AND looked after individuals when health problems have come around. reynolds is very popular up there, in stark contrast to our owners. In fact calling him brutal could easiky be seen as a slur on his good name, maybe you shoud remove it?
That is why you are a space cadet, you can't seem to grasp reality, you are divorced from it. You spread mistruths and then repeat them. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 13:41 - Mar 30 with 525 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 07:20 - Mar 30 by QJumpingJack |
who feeds you this information?
the club must be concerned you know so much about the ownership. |
It seems I absorb more information than most. I read club statements and absorb the the information. All on public record and the media. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 14:02 - Mar 30 with 506 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 13:20 - Mar 30 by SullutaCreturned |
See you just posted another mistruth. Where did I say it was a good deal? As I have repeatedly said, whether it be right or wrong that is what the membership voted for.
A bit of a failure to comrehend on your part, again.
Now would it have been a disaster? The trust would have a lot more money sitting in an interest bearing bank account, for a rainy day. What future trust bards did with it, who knows.
And yet AGAIN you post a lie, an outright LIE about the Wrexham trust. They turned down buyers because they didn't seem right but they did their due diligence on Reynolds and McIlhenney and they have, by any meaure, made a very good decision.
How can you call Reynolds "brutal" when he has invested a lot of money, made Wrexham much more succesful AND looked after individuals when health problems have come around. reynolds is very popular up there, in stark contrast to our owners. In fact calling him brutal could easiky be seen as a slur on his good name, maybe you shoud remove it?
That is why you are a space cadet, you can't seem to grasp reality, you are divorced from it. You spread mistruths and then repeat them. |
You stated that even if they did have to pay £11m in fees " they would still get £10m". This appeared to me to support the plan. You also had a long record of supporting activists like The Chief once of this parrish.
Giving the Trust £10 m is a terrible idea. They are experts in losing value since 2015. Inflation is about 4% these day down from 9% . With 0.3% interest they are getting they lose 3.7% per year or a whopping £407,000 devaluation or roughly £8000 a week.
£1 m is huge money even now. You cannot be a " big" operation and do nothing with your cash. They think small and not worthy of shares in Swansea city in my opinion. Reynolds is a proper business man a d being called "brutal" is a compliment. Levien and co were content to work with the Trust as a partner. Reynolds wanted 100% control and the WST out of the way including the lease. He learned perhaps from the Swansea experience.
There is only one question for the Trust to answer. " How do you mitigate against inflation to avoid devaluation. " if the answer is nothing then theg are wasting their time. Wrexham WST perhaps realised this and wound itself up it seems. They lived had to mouth. [Post edited 30 Mar 14:15]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 14:19 - Mar 30 with 490 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 14:02 - Mar 30 by ReslovenSwan1 |
You stated that even if they did have to pay £11m in fees " they would still get £10m". This appeared to me to support the plan. You also had a long record of supporting activists like The Chief once of this parrish.
Giving the Trust £10 m is a terrible idea. They are experts in losing value since 2015. Inflation is about 4% these day down from 9% . With 0.3% interest they are getting they lose 3.7% per year or a whopping £407,000 devaluation or roughly £8000 a week.
£1 m is huge money even now. You cannot be a " big" operation and do nothing with your cash. They think small and not worthy of shares in Swansea city in my opinion. Reynolds is a proper business man a d being called "brutal" is a compliment. Levien and co were content to work with the Trust as a partner. Reynolds wanted 100% control and the WST out of the way including the lease. He learned perhaps from the Swansea experience.
There is only one question for the Trust to answer. " How do you mitigate against inflation to avoid devaluation. " if the answer is nothing then theg are wasting their time. Wrexham WST perhaps realised this and wound itself up it seems. They lived had to mouth. [Post edited 30 Mar 14:15]
|
Oh here we are again, yet another mistruth. Maybe I should just call it what it is, a lie.
Reynolds did not want the trust out of the way, here you go, read their mission statement,
https://www.wrexhamafc.co.uk/club/mission-statement/
And now maybe stop telling lies about what Reynolds and McIhenney want.
And on the SCST, no point in saying anything there because you are obsessed but nobody is listening anymore. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 14:21 - Mar 30 with 484 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 10:19 - Mar 30 by 3swan |
Exactly
2 points from the link
"The members’ vote in 2019 gave the Trust Board the mandate to pursue legal action and also to settle the claim if appropriate. The Trust has said on numerous occasions that it is willing to listen to offers that could lead to a settlement and so avoid the need for legal action – which was always seen as a last resort."
" In June 2021, the non-binding heads of terms for funding and insurance appeared broadly adequate. As the details of the funding agreement were being discussed, it became apparent that the funder required the Trust to commit potentially all of its own resources to pursue the case to conclusion once the funder’s budget had been exhausted, however long or costly the legal action would be and including the costs of a potential appeal."
Just like an MOT things were at a point in time and can and did change as more information came to light with detailed discussions for funding.
The thought that the buyers would have paid £21m for the Trust shares is nonsensical as they had no need to due to having voting rights from the other sellers |
They would have bought the Trusts shares if they were available and made an enquiry in 2016. The enquiry I recall reading did not meet with a very positive response.
The US guys no longer seem bothered about the 75% as they had it 2016 but now do not . | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 14:30 - Mar 30 with 480 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 14:19 - Mar 30 by SullutaCreturned |
Oh here we are again, yet another mistruth. Maybe I should just call it what it is, a lie.
Reynolds did not want the trust out of the way, here you go, read their mission statement,
https://www.wrexhamafc.co.uk/club/mission-statement/
And now maybe stop telling lies about what Reynolds and McIhenney want.
And on the SCST, no point in saying anything there because you are obsessed but nobody is listening anymore. |
I just wonder if Swansea Football LLC had put their money in the bank instead of investing in Swansea City how much more money would they have made. £60M initially invested. Plus apparently drip feeding funds, Silverstein’s investment, Coleman’s investment, plus £15.5M put in since the summer just to balance the books. And after all that investment they own just over 70% of a club worth £50M to £60M tops. It doesn't make the trusts finances look at all bad. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 14:43 - Mar 30 with 454 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 14:19 - Mar 30 by SullutaCreturned |
Oh here we are again, yet another mistruth. Maybe I should just call it what it is, a lie.
Reynolds did not want the trust out of the way, here you go, read their mission statement,
https://www.wrexhamafc.co.uk/club/mission-statement/
And now maybe stop telling lies about what Reynolds and McIhenney want.
And on the SCST, no point in saying anything there because you are obsessed but nobody is listening anymore. |
Lovely words for sure. WST ownership holding 0% . No protected 5% like at Swansea city arranged by that nice Mr Silverstein. | |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 16:05 - Mar 30 with 415 views | ReslovenSwan1 |
| another 2 million invested on 14:30 - Mar 30 by Whiterockin |
I just wonder if Swansea Football LLC had put their money in the bank instead of investing in Swansea City how much more money would they have made. £60M initially invested. Plus apparently drip feeding funds, Silverstein’s investment, Coleman’s investment, plus £15.5M put in since the summer just to balance the books. And after all that investment they own just over 70% of a club worth £50M to £60M tops. It doesn't make the trusts finances look at all bad. |
Football investing was always supper high risk. Any financial advisor recommending football investments to FCA investors would lose their licence.
The SCST by 2015 were sitting on a 10,000% mark up and failed to sell a single share. Unforgivable in my eyes. What were the members thinking? There was no talk of a "nest egg" in 2015. That came later.
Levien and Kaplan are doing very nicely thank you with DC Utd worth $700m. Their British investment is a tougher nut crack. They are doing what they can. They have deep plockets. The Trust have a do nothing policy. They are still shrinking. Silversteins and Morris have not lost much value. [Post edited 30 Mar 16:08]
| |
| Wise sage since Toshack era |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 17:49 - Mar 30 with 389 views | QJumpingJack |
| another 2 million invested on 16:05 - Mar 30 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Football investing was always supper high risk. Any financial advisor recommending football investments to FCA investors would lose their licence.
The SCST by 2015 were sitting on a 10,000% mark up and failed to sell a single share. Unforgivable in my eyes. What were the members thinking? There was no talk of a "nest egg" in 2015. That came later.
Levien and Kaplan are doing very nicely thank you with DC Utd worth $700m. Their British investment is a tougher nut crack. They are doing what they can. They have deep plockets. The Trust have a do nothing policy. They are still shrinking. Silversteins and Morris have not lost much value. [Post edited 30 Mar 16:08]
|
who is giving you all this information - most of it is not in the public domain. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 17:51 - Mar 30 with 384 views | KeithHaynes |
| another 2 million invested on 16:05 - Mar 30 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Football investing was always supper high risk. Any financial advisor recommending football investments to FCA investors would lose their licence.
The SCST by 2015 were sitting on a 10,000% mark up and failed to sell a single share. Unforgivable in my eyes. What were the members thinking? There was no talk of a "nest egg" in 2015. That came later.
Levien and Kaplan are doing very nicely thank you with DC Utd worth $700m. Their British investment is a tougher nut crack. They are doing what they can. They have deep plockets. The Trust have a do nothing policy. They are still shrinking. Silversteins and Morris have not lost much value. [Post edited 30 Mar 16:08]
|
Some people would say the trust is holding what they have in the event of a complete collapse of the club. |  |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 18:14 - Mar 30 with 368 views | JumpingJackFlash |
| another 2 million invested on 17:49 - Mar 30 by QJumpingJack |
who is giving you all this information - most of it is not in the public domain. |
Voices in the ether. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 18:49 - Mar 30 with 329 views | magicdaps10 |
| another 2 million invested on 13:41 - Mar 30 by ReslovenSwan1 |
It seems I absorb more information than most. I read club statements and absorb the the information. All on public record and the media. |
You absorb what the club put out and what the club put into the media?
🙈😂 |  |
| |
| another 2 million invested on 18:58 - Mar 30 with 310 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 18:49 - Mar 30 by magicdaps10 |
You absorb what the club put out and what the club put into the media?
🙈😂 |
Shhhhh and never questions anything, the perfect supporter for the Americans. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 19:35 - Mar 30 with 276 views | SullutaCreturned |
| another 2 million invested on 14:43 - Mar 30 by ReslovenSwan1 |
Lovely words for sure. WST ownership holding 0% . No protected 5% like at Swansea city arranged by that nice Mr Silverstein. |
Not just lovely words, Wrexhams owners have committed to having WST representation at board level.
Wrexhams owners have also invested a lot of money in that club and committed to improving the stadium. They have also been very open with fans and have regularly been to local venues to meet with fans, even going into pubs and getting their round in. They have become part of that community.
Our owners don't even want to set foot in the UK let alone Wales or god forbid, Swansea.
Wrexham is a club on the up, a club in safe hands. The jury is very much out on where Swansea are heading.
Do me a favour, please. Stop posting lies as if they are fact. One day you'll get yourself in trouble or you'll cause this website trouble. | | | |
| another 2 million invested on 20:38 - Mar 30 with 242 views | Whiterockin |
| another 2 million invested on 19:35 - Mar 30 by SullutaCreturned |
Not just lovely words, Wrexhams owners have committed to having WST representation at board level.
Wrexhams owners have also invested a lot of money in that club and committed to improving the stadium. They have also been very open with fans and have regularly been to local venues to meet with fans, even going into pubs and getting their round in. They have become part of that community.
Our owners don't even want to set foot in the UK let alone Wales or god forbid, Swansea.
Wrexham is a club on the up, a club in safe hands. The jury is very much out on where Swansea are heading.
Do me a favour, please. Stop posting lies as if they are fact. One day you'll get yourself in trouble or you'll cause this website trouble. |
The last paragraph is why he was banned. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
