Football betting site Betway

Sustainability

Potter has been talking sustainable development. This means balancing the books. Limited external signings and recruitment to the first team from within. This has come from the 'Management'. The Chairman Ceo and owners working in harmony. (including the Trust presumably). This does not mean Ryan Woods does not come. It means Woods comes from Shrewsbury not Brentford. Smarter work -development not off the shelf players.  Tuesday showed the club's academy DNA where the youngsters impressed Hodgson. What does this mean?  It means HJ is staying on a sustainable salary hopefully. It means the US owners are in it for the long term. The Trust are in for the long term too of course. This is counter intuitive for good old south Wales lefties but there you go.  NO more boom and bust.  The club was spining plates in the PL. Time to clean up the mess and move on. Hopefully the Trust will buy into the new reality and come to an understanding with the owners. They are not going  'any place' in my view. 

Comments

  • Is this the same HJ who’s not so good transfer dealings that have put the club in this position ? He has cost the other board members a huge loss on their share value so I don’t think he is the right man to sign the cheques . The way things are at the moment and the strength and experience on show  the only thing coming from Shrewsbury will be the team bus in league one next season . Of course this is my opinion 
  • If that's their policy, fine.  But they should have been up front about it instead of all the vague BS.  As fans we went into the transfer window with the expectation that there would be some reinforcements.  Not because we knew that for a fact but because we hoped that was the case.  When nothing happened, everyone, except you apparently, is naturally pissed off.

    Had the case been strongly made that this was necessary for the long-term good of the club, we would have griped but most would probably have understood and gone along with it.
    garythenotrashcougar
  • HJ and others  put this club I this position of course. To me  providing they can balance the  books  and keep the academy open its not a bad place to be. The original target was a sustainable championship club with a academy and top notch infrastructure. A Swansea team with 6 or 7 academy player including some local lads trained to play the right way is what I want to see. A small profit every year to be shared with the Trust and U.S. investors to keep them sweet. 
  • Monty
    You think the academy will be open next season do you ? 

    If you have any contacts at all in the club you are well aware it will not be there in the format it is now.

    The accadamy as it is now will close in May next year.
  • Mistakes have been catastrophic over the last few seasons and whilst the finger points at HJ, the majority owners feel he is the right man to be at the helm, I don't agree with that but, unfortunately, I'm not a majority owner, and when all is said and done, I'd rather HJ lead us than Chris Pearlman (no disrespect, Mr P).
    This is ground zero, the owners have decided that enough is enough and books have to be balanced however hard that is to take as a fan.
    I think we have enough in our squad to be about mid table, two or three decent signings could have given us a play-off place.
  • Teddy I would not be surprised.  Being sustainable is not easy. Scfc must ensure the best Welsh kids come to Swansea whatever.  
  • Andrew2 said:
    Monty
    You think the academy will be open next season do you ? 

    If you have any contacts at all in the club you are well aware it will not be there in the format it is now.

    The accadamy as it is now will close in May next year.
    The Academy will be open next year and £6m will continue to be put in to run it, for that, it has to produce quality players regularly. This is Swansea City 2018, welcome
  • What exactly is Pearlmans job as I was under the impression he was there to improve marketing / stadium sponsorship etc. So what does he do as the stadium is still unsponsored at present and the marketing seems unchanged . If you could enlighten me I’m all ears  :/
  • He minds the shop for Uncle Sam 

  • So what’s the pint of having him and Jenkins there ? If he’s just minding the ship or yacht now
  • Odd that the stadium is unsponsored but still carries the name of a company group that one of the major sell out shareholders was a director of. A significant shareholder who sold his 10.5% shares for £9m. Odd indeed.



  • What's odd  about it? .  Directors can be on the board of more than one company and trade between them if they wish.  Success follows success.  Stadium sponsored by local property firm. It's obviously a long term deal. 10 years plus.  

  • enaitch said:
    So what’s the pint of having him and Jenkins there ? If he’s just minding the ship or yacht now
    A pint would be more productive enaitch!
    enaitch
  • What's odd  about it? .  Directors can be on the board of more than one company and trade between them if they wish.  Success follows success.  Stadium sponsored by local property firm. It's obviously a long term deal. 10 years plus.  

    Calm down Ponty, you really need to read comments before posting. The point is that the stadium is unsponsored which is surprising when it is a major income source at a time when the playing staff are being sold off, often below market value.

    The deal with Liberty was taken out in 2005 for 5 years. There’s been nothing new since despite the stadium carrying the Liberty name.

    Last year it was being trumpeted that a multi million pound deal was being sourced but it all went completely flat with no new deal. It’s a lot like that with that promises and the like not being followed through by the American owners.

    And nothing wrong with connected company trading. Those sorts of transactions can be very beneficial for all sorts of reasons but devilishly tricky to unpick when you’re trying to follow the money. 
  • Panda it would not be called the Liberty stadium if it was unsponsored.  SCFC is not a charity. SCFC needs local businesses and would be wise to respect them. 
  • Panda it would not be called the Liberty stadium if it was unsponsored.  SCFC is not a charity. SCFC needs local businesses and would be wise to respect them. 

    Either the club are receiving revenue for naming rights CURRENTLY or they are not. Which is it? If they are not receiving revenue then all sponsor logos should be removed. If there is a deal, this should be revealed including the terms.
    Clarity anybody?
  • Ponty, perhaps you can explain why it’s been called the Liberty Stadium since the sponsorship deal with Liberty Group publicly finished in 2010?
  • It was council owned until last year. I like to think the rate payers were getting a good deal. 
  • The Liberty group no longer exists  ffs so they not sponsoring anything 
  • If the Liberty group are not paying then the name should be stripped from the building - what sort of businessmen are running our ship?
  • Jackareme said:
    If the Liberty group are not paying then the name should be stripped from the building - what sort of businessmen are running our ship?
    Because why seek out a seven figure naming rights sponsorship deal when you can just sell 12 top players for less than their market value? 

    Honk honk  ;)
  • Was there another option GTNTC? talk me through it.  Loans? Gamble on promotion followed by administration?  Tapping the owners for cash.  The Trust have no money. 
  • Neither do the yanks by the looks of it!
  • The trust are not the owners nor decision makers. They’re shareholders like the ones who sold their individual holdings to the Americans who then became owners through a majority shareholding. Quite straightforward. 

    The stadium naming issue is not so straightforward. Shame we don’t have interested independent journalists prepared to ask the right questions. 


  • Ponty
    "Potter is talking sustainable development"
    Yeah and a month ago he and his team were talking about using the loan window as a way of dealing with the disappointment of the actual transfer window.

    do you really think he's saying what he is actually thinking?
  • He said he did not know what to expect and things never are.  He has one Wilfried Bony and Jefferson Montero and Leroy Fer. If he handles them well they will all be in the Championship team of the season along with big Mike. Just got to keep them fit. I expect big things of Dhanda and MCBurnie too,  Potter did not sign any of them.  
  • "The Trust are not owners just share holders"  That sums it up. It's called a fudge.  They  tell people they own the club and then avoid all responsibility. I hope the Trusts chairman  has good news in the forum.  Good news means no London lawyers.  
  • Jacktar said:
    Mistakes have been catastrophic over the last few seasons and whilst the finger points at HJ, the majority owners feel he is the right man to be at the helm, I don't agree with that but, unfortunately, I'm not a majority owner, and when all is said and done, I'd rather HJ lead us than Chris Pearlman (no disrespect, Mr P).
    This is ground zero, the owners have decided that enough is enough and books have to be balanced however hard that is to take as a fan.
    I think we have enough in our squad to be about mid table, two or three decent signings could have given us a play-off place.
    Anyone else heard that two experienced journalists are going to America to interview Stephen Kaplan, they want to get to the bottom of what’s been going on, good luck with that
Sign In or Register to comment.