Football betting site Betway

3 months on

Nothing from the trust ref the legal battle .  Godden has said it's close on planet swans but seriously it was supposed to be end of March .  I think most , including me , couldn't care less anymore .  They own 20% of the club but can't offer anything financially and in fact stop any injection of cash as can't match the other 80% if an injection was made and won't allow a dilution of their shareholding so no more shares can be issued . 

How about just over seeing what is going on and support rather than try and satisfy a few that want some sort of retribution against those that sold . If we were still in the Premier league they wouldn't care less .  If it was their own money on the line you would hear nothing .

The irony of it all is the only money the trust have to go to court with is the money they got from the management and decisions made by those they want to sue . After all did they really have any say in the day to day running of the club previously ?

It is time to move on and pull the club together , not pull it apart .
cimlajack

Comments

  • Do you know something about the timeframe that we don’t whitey?
  • 2/10.

    Must try harder.

    Back to trolling school for you.
  • Mods can you ban Ponty again once again he babbles on about the trust ... why bring it up today ...??
    barry
  • A voice from the past rises once more,strange day to choose to reappear.Sooo negative.
  • moorlands said:
    A voice from the past rises once more,strange day to choose to reappear.Sooo negative.
    I think the timing is related to Andy Godden's post yesterday on Planet Swans - he said that an announcement from the Trust on legal action was imminent is a week or so. So those campaigning against legal action will be warming up early and gearing up for some heavy duty, industrial strength, social media action.
  • Just wondering ........

    Whitemountains
    White hills
    White hill

    = Alltwen 

    Probably just a silly coincidence.
    garythenotrashcougarenaitch
  • PJ continues to make a fool of himself
  • On a different note. What are your thoughts on the new managerial appointment?
  • Just wondering ........

    Whitemountains
    White hills
    White hill

    = Alltwen 

    Probably just a silly coincidence.
    I doubt whether it is Lord Alltwen! More likely to be the cabal of Dineen or Dai Morgan
  • Leaving aside the intentions or the identity of individual posters for the moment, can we engage with the substance of this thread?

    My understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) is that:
    - the Trust’s issue is not with the current majority shareholders, but with the former majority shareholders and specifically how they froze the Trust out of the share sale, denying them the chance to either block the sale or participate in it and potentially get their shareholding to the magic 25%
    - the legal proceedings have dragged on for a very long time because the Trust have been trying to do things by the book to maximise their chances of a favourable result if/when it goes to court, while the former majority shareholders (let’s call them the ‘sellers’) and the current owners have been missing deadlines, sending proxies to court and generally being unco-operative
    - it is possible that a court might declare the original sale null and void and order the sellers to buy their shares back at the original sale price, but far more likely they will order the current majority shareholders (including some of the original sellers) to buy a percentage of the Trust’s shares at the price they were worth at the time of the sale - ie around £1m per 1% of shares. Since the shares are currently worth a fraction of that, this will be a great deal for the Trust and a very bad one for the buyers unless/until we get back to the Premier League and the shares soar in value again. All of this will reduce the Trust’s shareholding but give it a significant cash sum so if any of the current owners do cut and run before the shares go back up in value, the Trust will be in a strong position to buy back into the club
    - given the way the current board have blocked the Trust from having unrestricted access to the books, engaged with fans’ forums in the US but not in Swansea, and generally behaved as though the Trust are a threat rather than a partner, and given the way the sellers have apparently undermined the pre-legal process, I can’t see that the Trust has had any other options than the ones they’ve taken
    - BUT, to return to the original post, it must be possible, if not likely, that all of this uncertainty has delayed any positive decision-making by the current majority share-holders around bringing new money into the club via a rights issue. If you have a chance - no matter how small - that a judge is going to order you to hand back your shares, or buy a bunch more at a bad rate, there is no way you are going to put more money at risk in the meantime, is there?

    So although I back the Trust 100% in their strategy, and regard them as the only guarantee of our club’s future, I can see that we are going to struggle to kick on while this saga continues. 

    However, the lesson I’d take from that is that the current owners and the sellers should start playing fair. The sooner they do the sooner we can wrap this up.
    JackaremePaulTWyn
  • @Cadleigh

    Correct - and I agree with your conclusion. An out of court settlement benefits everyone. But I don't blame the Trust for crossing the t's in the meantime.
    Jackareme
  • 2/10.

    Must try harder.

    Back to trolling school for you.
    So what are you doing if not trolling as all you want to do is shoot me down ?
  • Cadleigh said:
    Leaving aside the intentions or the identity of individual posters for the moment, can we engage with the substance of this thread?

    My understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) is that:
    - the Trust’s issue is not with the current majority shareholders, but with the former majority shareholders and specifically how they froze the Trust out of the share sale, denying them the chance to either block the sale or participate in it and potentially get their shareholding to the magic 25%
    - the legal proceedings have dragged on for a very long time because the Trust have been trying to do things by the book to maximise their chances of a favourable result if/when it goes to court, while the former majority shareholders (let’s call them the ‘sellers’) and the current owners have been missing deadlines, sending proxies to court and generally being unco-operative
    - it is possible that a court might declare the original sale null and void and order the sellers to buy their shares back at the original sale price, but far more likely they will order the current majority shareholders (including some of the original sellers) to buy a percentage of the Trust’s shares at the price they were worth at the time of the sale - ie around £1m per 1% of shares. Since the shares are currently worth a fraction of that, this will be a great deal for the Trust and a very bad one for the buyers unless/until we get back to the Premier League and the shares soar in value again. All of this will reduce the Trust’s shareholding but give it a significant cash sum so if any of the current owners do cut and run before the shares go back up in value, the Trust will be in a strong position to buy back into the club
    - given the way the current board have blocked the Trust from having unrestricted access to the books, engaged with fans’ forums in the US but not in Swansea, and generally behaved as though the Trust are a threat rather than a partner, and given the way the sellers have apparently undermined the pre-legal process, I can’t see that the Trust has had any other options than the ones they’ve taken
    - BUT, to return to the original post, it must be possible, if not likely, that all of this uncertainty has delayed any positive decision-making by the current majority share-holders around bringing new money into the club via a rights issue. If you have a chance - no matter how small - that a judge is going to order you to hand back your shares, or buy a bunch more at a bad rate, there is no way you are going to put more money at risk in the meantime, is there?

    So although I back the Trust 100% in their strategy, and regard them as the only guarantee of our club’s future, I can see that we are going to struggle to kick on while this saga continues. 

    However, the lesson I’d take from that is that the current owners and the sellers should start playing fair. The sooner they do the sooner we can wrap this up.
    A good post but i really do not know what you mean by sending proxies ? I'm guessing you mean to the mediation process ?

    This is where i'm confused .

    I'm thinking the buyers were going to send directors of their group to negotiate on their behalf with a clear remit and to represent the buyers .
    I'm thinking the sellers were going to send one or two of them to negotiate on their behalf with a clear remit and to represent the sellers .
    I'm thinking the Trust were going to send a board member or 2 ( no different to the others then ) to negotiate on their behalf with a clear remit and to represent the Trust .

    There is only one BIG problem . The Trust at mediation could not negotiate anything because they had no remit from their members . They don't know what they want as they hadn't consulted their membership . They were therefore going to mediation with no idea as to what they wanted . That is not what mediation is about . Mediation before proceedings is to try and come to a solution that satisfies all parties .  The trust would have had to leave mediation , do a full 3 weeks consultation process with it's members and then go back and try and mediate again . 

    It's just not as black and white as some on here think . Why people just resort saying i'm so and so because i offer a different opinion is beyond me . Open your eyes and try a pragmatic view for once . 
  • surely mediation is all about TWO parties getting round the table and discussing the problem in hand. 
  • Whitemountains, I must say I’ve been watching my favourite films all week.sherlock Holmes with the late great basil rathbone and I’ve been doing some deductive reasoning and I must say the game is a foot.i must enquire with pipe in mouth
    1) did you use to play centre mid for bp llandarcy?
    2)did you dorn a ridiculous curly perm.
    3)were you in toosey’s book causing trouble out in Monaco?
    4)were you one of the old board who shafted the club?
    5)have you applied for the head of recruitment job cos I’m sure you think you are the man for the job?
  • Cadleigh said:
    Leaving aside the intentions or the identity of individual posters for the moment, can we engage with the substance of this thread?

    My understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) is that:
    - the Trust’s issue is not with the current majority shareholders, but with the former majority shareholders and specifically how they froze the Trust out of the share sale, denying them the chance to either block the sale or participate in it and potentially get their shareholding to the magic 25%
    - the legal proceedings have dragged on for a very long time because the Trust have been trying to do things by the book to maximise their chances of a favourable result if/when it goes to court, while the former majority shareholders (let’s call them the ‘sellers’) and the current owners have been missing deadlines, sending proxies to court and generally being unco-operative
    - it is possible that a court might declare the original sale null and void and order the sellers to buy their shares back at the original sale price, but far more likely they will order the current majority shareholders (including some of the original sellers) to buy a percentage of the Trust’s shares at the price they were worth at the time of the sale - ie around £1m per 1% of shares. Since the shares are currently worth a fraction of that, this will be a great deal for the Trust and a very bad one for the buyers unless/until we get back to the Premier League and the shares soar in value again. All of this will reduce the Trust’s shareholding but give it a significant cash sum so if any of the current owners do cut and run before the shares go back up in value, the Trust will be in a strong position to buy back into the club
    - given the way the current board have blocked the Trust from having unrestricted access to the books, engaged with fans’ forums in the US but not in Swansea, and generally behaved as though the Trust are a threat rather than a partner, and given the way the sellers have apparently undermined the pre-legal process, I can’t see that the Trust has had any other options than the ones they’ve taken
    - BUT, to return to the original post, it must be possible, if not likely, that all of this uncertainty has delayed any positive decision-making by the current majority share-holders around bringing new money into the club via a rights issue. If you have a chance - no matter how small - that a judge is going to order you to hand back your shares, or buy a bunch more at a bad rate, there is no way you are going to put more money at risk in the meantime, is there?

    So although I back the Trust 100% in their strategy, and regard them as the only guarantee of our club’s future, I can see that we are going to struggle to kick on while this saga continues. 

    However, the lesson I’d take from that is that the current owners and the sellers should start playing fair. The sooner they do the sooner we can wrap this up.
    A good post but i really do not know what you mean by sending proxies ? I'm guessing you mean to the mediation process ?

    This is where i'm confused .

    I'm thinking the buyers were going to send directors of their group to negotiate on their behalf with a clear remit and to represent the buyers .
    I'm thinking the sellers were going to send one or two of them to negotiate on their behalf with a clear remit and to represent the sellers .
    I'm thinking the Trust were going to send a board member or 2 ( no different to the others then ) to negotiate on their behalf with a clear remit and to represent the Trust .

    There is only one BIG problem . The Trust at mediation could not negotiate anything because they had no remit from their members . They don't know what they want as they hadn't consulted their membership . They were therefore going to mediation with no idea as to what they wanted . That is not what mediation is about . Mediation before proceedings is to try and come to a solution that satisfies all parties .  The trust would have had to leave mediation , do a full 3 weeks consultation process with it's members and then go back and try and mediate again . 

    It's just not as black and white as some on here think . Why people just resort saying i'm so and so because i offer a different opinion is beyond me . Open your eyes and try a pragmatic view for once . 
    I just think that if the ‘buyers’, the ‘sellers’ and the ‘Trust’ had acted in a grown up way and sent their top people into the mediation room to sort this out rather than messing about with third parties or whatever we’d be done with this by now and able to move on, together, for the good of SCFC. And although I am not at all an expert on this subject I don’t think the ‘Trust’ were guilty of not playing a straight bat in this process, although I do concede your point that if the other side are playing chess rather than cricket, it probably doesn’t help that your opponent has to ask for a vote before moving their Queen. Doesn’t excuse the end result, though, which is that this has dragged on for a lot longer than it needed to. We all know where this heading, let’s sign the cheque to the Trust and move one.
Sign In or Register to comment.