Football betting site Betway

Plan

Please let nobody for one moment believe Jenkins has resigned over anything. It was always going to happen, part of the long term plan. I did tell you it would happen.

It always was to appear as if there was a breakdown between him and the owners. How else could he carry out the final act ?

I did tell you two years ago the plan was always to re own the club after administration, the plan has never changed. He can not be part of the club when it enters administration then proclaim to be the saviour, this way he thinks he can.

All the opinion is "we will not accept it" well, the supporters have accepted anything and everything for 5 seasons, they will accept another term with Jenkins at the helm without a whimper.

The Trust will be no more so Jenkins and Morgan plus two others will ride into town and claim what they feel is theirs. 
«13

Comments

  • So where do you think the Supporters Trust would stand should they win a legal battle after the owners had refused mediation.
    Also, who are the other 2 that will ride back into town with Jenkins and Morgan
    Natterjack
  • Laurel and Hardy maybe Colin 
    Natterjack
  • Colin

    They will not win any battle, they do not even have the time to win any court battle, grief, they are well ver a year too late for that. 

    There are two others Colin who will front it up. I will give you the names as soon as I am sure. 
  • Hi Andrew,if the Club went into Administration,how would the Owners ie the Americans, recover their investment.

  • Andrew2 said:
    Colin

    They will not win any battle, they do not even have the time to win any court battle, grief, they are well ver a year too late for that. 

    There are two others Colin who will front it up. I will give you the names as soon as I am sure. 
     Are you a member of the Trust Andrew?

  • Moorlands
    They will have taken their "investment" with bells on well before. 

    Jeff

    Yes, but it is a toothless non entity that has become pointless sorry, it just as well close down, it can achieve nothing, will stop nothing and is giving fans false hope they may some how turn the clock back...that can not and will not happen.
  • Thanks Andrew---can you explain to a non finance person how they will be able to recover  their £60 mil plus and what is your  idea of timescale.
  • The Trusts big mistake was in 2014 when we allowed Jenkins to run it like it was all his own.
    A mistake but with good intention as up until then it looked as if we were going places after coming 8th. No one knew that he was secretly dealing with these people until it was too late, even at the last minute no one believed what would happen, especially gagging everyone for disclosure.
    In 2015 I started writing on here when working in Egypt but even more passionately when I discovered Bob the knob was coming and stressed then before he took one game that it was the most ridiculous appointment since Cullis, which even made us a laughing stock on Sky Saturday football show.
    Since then I have constantly voiced opinion that money has been filtered away on non football employees, with some wanting to believe it was inflated football wages causing the problem as the owners wanted us to believe.
    I have suggested that these ****** never ever paid Jenkins up front and the shares were bought in instalments through Swansea trading and the other 28 investors, together with an inflated salary, all classed as conspiracy theory.
    I am now of the opinion the loan fees and parachute payments coming in have  finally paid him off.
    The Yanks are now on their own, no one in Swansea will help them, as much as some believe the Trust isn't  doing enough, I firmly believe we now have bargaining power, for once all 20,000 will question every single move they make. Any company relies in the trust of its customers to provide a good product, these haven't provided sod all. I also believe they have retrieved their investment and a profit, how we might never know but Jenkins does.
    If they can get the next full parachute payment a few of the instalments and the TV revenue from the FA cup, my earlier prediction of them gone by the end of the season looks good, just before the accounts have to be submitted in June
  • Would they just walk away ,even if they have secretly salted away the cash.Surely to walk away would destroy their credibility.What pretext could they use ?
  • edited February 4
    Phillip,
    your opening statement isn't quite correct as at that time(2014) everything was rosy, fans wouldn't accept criticism of ANYBODY while complacency, including our fans, had spread like a cancer through the club, whilst the season we finished in our highest ever position in the PL was still being acclaimed as one of our finest by one of our own forum poster-Charlie, prior to the start of this season.

    The only difference with the Bob Bradley appointment by the Yanks compared to Michael Thompson placing Cullis in charge is we were in the PL.  Both appointments made by people who knew / know jackshit about the game.

    I am struggling to get my head around where you say about inflated players' wages, especially when I read that Narsingh is supposedly getting £50k/week, so what does that equate to what all the other players in the squad are getting. Add to the mix what a 30 man U23 squad are getting in wages, plus the increase in staffing levels throughout the football club and in my mind the overall wage bill can quite conceivably be as quoted in the annual balance sheet.

    I can't honestly see the Yanks going anywhere until after the 2nd parachute payment has been received by May 2020, but I hope your are right in your prediction that the Yanks will be gone by June. By then I hope that our Trust have either engaged in mediation or voted to take the owners through the legal channels because the thought of Jenkins and Morgan coming to the rescue of the club(their words to the media) is not worth thinking about.
  • I have to be honest, i was thinking this myself, ie Huw rides into town to reclaim his crown. Doesnt seem so far fetched now.

    Fair play Andrew, youve taken some criticism over the years, but its all playing out as you predicted. (Unfortunately)
  • edited February 4
    moorlands said:
    Would they just walk away ,even if they have secretly salted away the cash.Surely to walk away would destroy their credibility.What pretext could they use ?
    Shifting cash just cannot be done, usually, those who believe in conspiracies make it fit the agenda, what's being  suggested by some is embezzlement which carries a prison sentence in this country and the US.
    There are strict guidelines that have to be adhered too within company law and the Football licensing authorities.
    I understand that whilst major mistakes have been made in over trading in players, there's nothing sinister going on. Mistakes that with hindsight, should never have happened but back of a fag packet guesstimates are not what's needed at this time.
    The Americans will not walk away, they are never here to feel the heat, but (and this is a very hypothetical question because none of us have £70m) would you walk away if the natives got restless? I wouldn't, I'd just stay away and try and sell, even at a loss.
    Now this worries me because if they do sell, we don't know who's next, careful what we wish for.
    basementjack
  • edited February 4
    Phillip or anyone else 
    Please anyone that thinks the Yanks are using club money to pay for the shares they have bought explain your theory/logic.
    Whether it be from a secondary Swansea company set up or loan fees etc

    Why would anyone in their right mind allow someone to pay them for their shares with money that is already theirs.
    Financially this really makes no sense.

    That logic just does not add up
  • Phillip or anyone else 
    Please anyone that thinks the Yanks are using club money to pay for the shares they have bought explain your theory/logic.
    Whether it be from a secondary Swansea company set up or loan fees etc

    Why would anyone in their right mind allow someone to pay them for their shares with money that is already theirs.
    Financially this really makes no sense.

    That logic just does not add up
    You've only gone and done it MJID, be prepared for a nonsensical ramble
  • Sorry Andrew and Phillip but your theories,whilst you are quite entitled to put them out there, are too speculative for me to take on board.Strikes me that you tend to fit whatever happens into your particular view of things.I can't see any of those in power being dull enough to attempt that sort of fraud.Too much scrutiny present and quite rightly so,
    Can you refer to any other recent PL Club where this has been tried let alone been successful?
  • Phillip,
    your opening statement isn't quite correct as at that time(2014) everything was rosy, fans wouldn't accept criticism of ANYBODY while complacency, including our fans, had spread like a cancer through the club, whilst the season we finished in our highest ever position in the PL was still being acclaimed as one of our finest by one of our own forum poster-Charlie, prior to the start of this season.

    The only difference with the Bob Bradley appointment by the Yanks compared to Michael Thompson placing Cullis in charge is we were in the PL.  Both appointments made by people who knew / know jackshit about the game.

    I am struggling to get my head around where you say about inflated players' wages, especially when I read that Narsingh is supposedly getting £50k/week, so what does that equate to what all the other players in the squad are getting. Add to the mix what a 30 man U23 squad are getting in wages, plus the increase in staffing levels throughout the football club and in my mind the overall wage bill can quite conceivably be as quoted in the annual balance sheet.

    I can't honestly see the Yanks going anywhere until after the 2nd parachute payment has been received by May 2020, but I hope your are right in your prediction that the Yanks will be gone by June. By then I hope that our Trust have either engaged in mediation or voted to take the owners through the legal channels because the thought of Jenkins and Morgan coming to the rescue of the club(their words to the media) is not worth thinking about.
    I did say the big mistake was letting Jenkins take control in 2014, indeed it was finishing 8th during that time but ended with him getting rid of John Jo, Chico, Mitchu and Hernandez because Monk wanted rid, this followed a disastrous run where he got rid of Monk, the players who later were used as an excuse because the dressing room was in turmoil, all those players subsequently left, Jenkins decisions, then it all changed for the worse.
    As for Narsing getting 50K a week, that's wrong, he was on 43K now minus 60%. so under 20K a week, VDH 11K a week
    If all the first team squad totalled 53M ( Before relegation) which I doubt but give them that fact, its the other 46M that baffles me for an extra 300 staff that would mean an average of 153K a year, I know that includes Jenkins 666K Pearlman 700K but it also includes those working one day a fortnight, so those wages are the basis of what we need disclosed, bearing in mind the likes of the safety manager/ high end admin are on about 40K a year, as for the 30 in the academy, I doubt few are on 153K a years that 3 grand a week, lets be honest it stinks and I firmly believe this is where the biggest problem is.
    The next accounts need to be in by June, nothing to hide they will remain but if they do stay without discloser on these vast amounts evaporating then boycotting everything must be the next option, it wont affect the team as they will be gone.    
  • Colin put me onto this.

    Dai Roberts of budget carpets is looking for 1400 people to front up 50k to save the club.

    an early responder was JvZ!!


    DubDragon
  • jollyboy said:
    Phillip or anyone else 
    Please anyone that thinks the Yanks are using club money to pay for the shares they have bought explain your theory/logic.
    Whether it be from a secondary Swansea company set up or loan fees etc

    Why would anyone in their right mind allow someone to pay them for their shares with money that is already theirs.
    Financially this really makes no sense.

    That logic just does not add up
    You've only gone and done it MJID, be prepared for a nonsensical ramble

    They fiddled it, embezzlement possibly, illegal possibly, criminal possibly, don't you think they would be up in arms over many allegations and become transparent if there wasn't anything dodgy going on, they are hiding everything from those who have an interest for the football club.
    For those who believe everything is above board need to have a good hard look back at the last 4 years
    SeaJack
  • Phillip y ou do realise that employment costs like NI ,Holiday Pay,Sickness Pay,Pensions,Liabilty Inurance etc can add a major percentage to the cost of employing every individual on the books.Spent a great deal of my working life calculating such things
  • Question for anyone out there with definitive knowledge on the subject.

    It is being suggested that money is being 'moved' into the subsidiary companies of Swansea City 
    to somehow pay for the shares purchased by the yanks. My reading of the accounts submitted by the subsidiary companies is that only SCFC 2002 Ltd have submitted a full set of accounts as required by the Companies Act. The other companies have submitted an exemption under the Act, due to the turnover being sufficiently small to warrant that exemption. 

    If monies of sufficient quantity were being moved in order to pay off a £67m share purchase, then wouldn't those subsidiary companies be required to submit a full set of accounts ? 

    I am struggling to believe that any such wrongdoing is taking place, when we have a chartered accountant as our supporters director and a legal team who would be well versed in this field of work.
  • Andrew2 said:
    Moorlands
    They will have taken their "investment" with bells on well before. 

    Jeff

    Yes, but it is a toothless non entity that has become pointless sorry, it just as well close down, it can achieve nothing, will stop nothing and is giving fans false hope they may some how turn the clock back...that can not and will not happen.
    OK, fair enough Andrew, I wanted to be sure you were a member and that you've had the same information that I've had in order to come to view on the success of legal action. Your viewpoint is fair enough although I take the opposite view in that we would probably win it. I kind of see your view about being toothless due to the make up of the club board, their reluctance to play ball with the Trust and our lack of clout in getting appropriate information, but the Trust is not pointless, especially if they can win a court case that gives supporters a sound nest egg for future difficulties.

    In terms of HJ's "plan", I do think there's mileage in this and it was rumoured last Summer, but I think this possibility of "buy back" has only become an option or be viable since we got relegated and he wouldn't have "planned" for that to happen. I wouldn't want it to happen though.
  • Anyone who thinks some sort of company law or FA laws will prevent the owners of a company removing money from it in fees is living with the fairies. Forget its a football club, its a business. In any business the owners can do just about anything they want.

    They own the company, they can do whatever they wish with it and nobody can stop them. If you think they cant, you just watch. 


  • MJL
    Why on earth is he looking for £70m ?

    About £5m will do it in a year or so, if you are thinking of lumping in £50k, forget it.
    deekay
  • Colin put me onto this.

    Dai Roberts of budget carpets is looking for 1400 people to front up 50k to save the club.

    an early responder was JvZ!!


    Expand the photo  on the original tweet and i think you'll find that it's a young JVZ.
  • There is another possible plan.Move the high earners and those who are not enthusiastic to stay,employ a good coach with a great record of developing young players,cultivate the young players,add some experience and move the team forward with the hope of regaining the glory days.

    Having done so either stay for the ride, or sell a much a more viable club to regain your investment.

    Of course if this is the Plan why contemplate allowing one of the first of your homegrown players be let go to a rival club?
  • Andrew2 said:
    Please let nobody for one moment believe Jenkins has resigned over anything. It was always going to happen, part of the long term plan. I did tell you it would happen.

    It always was to appear as if there was a breakdown between him and the owners. How else could he carry out the final act ?

    I did tell you two years ago the plan was always to re own the club after administration, the plan has never changed. He can not be part of the club when it enters administration then proclaim to be the saviour, this way he thinks he can.

    All the opinion is "we will not accept it" well, the supporters have accepted anything and everything for 5 seasons, they will accept another term with Jenkins at the helm without a whimper.

    The Trust will be no more so Jenkins and Morgan plus two others will ride into town and claim what they feel is theirs. 

    Just to recap, your theory is:

    Jenkins persuaded Kaplan, Levein and 25 other American investors to take part in a scam that puts The Sting to shame. His cunning plan was to take an established Premier League team with an annual income of £130m, sell 70% of the shares for £70m (so far so good), deliberately get it relegated, watch the shares (including his own remaining investment) disintegrate in value, recompense the Americans by shifting £70m to them by embezzling it from the club under the scrutiny of the auditors, journalists like David Conn etc, deliberately sell our best players so we tumble further through the divisions, fail to balance the books, take us into administration - all so he can buy an L2 club for £5m and hope he can repeat his previous feat of taking us back up the leagues and turn his £5m into £130m again?

    Wouldn't it have been simpler to have kept us in the Premier League, banked his share of the £70m and watched his remaining share grow in value?

    If that's his plan, who the hell sanctioned the appointment of a competent manager in Potter? Surely they'd have hired Charlie Morgan or that Azerbaijani decorator that Cardiff employed as their head of recruitment?

    enaitch
  • Cadleigh
    You have not kept up.
    First of all, they did not pay £70m for any shares, it was much less. Second, they are not prepared to gamble one penny, so demise from the PL was inevitable, and, as the plan sold was win or lose you win, relegation was no big deal, in fact it meant for sure there was never going to be any risk.

    Tell me, if you think they crave the PL so much, we well well positioned just 10 days ago for a play of place, what did they do ? They tried to endure we go nowhere near the PL and all the costs that brings.

    Cadleigh, try and see the last 4/5 years all joined up, there is only one conclusion.

    So, your mocking I am afraid is very wide of the mark, but then you mocked when I told you what Jenkins was up to.
    SeaJackArch_Stanton
  • Jeff

    Relegation was inevitable, as soon as the new owners saw they could clear cash very quickly by relegation and fire sale, no risk...the point is always as I have said for two years, the plan was sold as no risk, that is what it is.

    They were sold the deal as just that, investment with security, problem was, the security of relegation was more appealing than risk of PL football and costs.

    As for any legal case, I have seen nothing that shows beyond doubt even if The Trust win any action, which will take many years, that even IF successful would see any money go to The Trust. In my opinion , they are wasting their time even trying.

    Who exactly do you think will tip up if any case was successful ?

    Even a successful action, which is very doubtful, do they really think they will see a penny ?
  • It's Occam's Razor, Andrew. When presented with competing hypotheses, always go for the one that requires the fewest assumptions. In this case cock up trumps over conspiracy
Sign In or Register to comment.