FAO Lisa

[waynekerr55]

Have you seen the latest response on the Trust FB page?

Why the hell did they sign a confidentiality clause?

 

[Niigata Jack]

Have you seen the latest response on the Trust FB page?

Why the hell did they sign a confidentiality clause?

Coze they were soft soaped and naively got taken in by American blarney and threatened with lodgers ointment sarnies and rich tea biccies instead of Vol-e-vents and chocolate hob nobs on match days.

 

[Darran]

Screenshot?

 

[Jackfath]

For those of us who aren't privy to the Trust Facebook page, could some kind poster please let others know what's been said?

 

[J_B]

Who gives a s**t about the Trust?

They're dead to me now.

 

[Darran]

Lisa Clement Hi Lisa. Thanks for consolidating these - please see responses below:

1. This is subject to confidentiality clauses over the Shareholders Agreement, so unfortunately we cannot disclose any further information at this stage.

2. We confirm again that dividends and voting rights are ultimately based on % ownership, not number of shares.

3. The Trust has gained appropriate and beneficial Change of Control rights through the settlement agreement in relation to the football club. Gaining rights over the specific ownership structure within the Swansea Football LLC consortium is unrealistic as you probably know from dealings with Delaware based LLC entities.

4. There is currently £13.1m in CLN - as has previously been documented £5m belongs to Jake Silverstein, matched by £5m from Swansea Football LLC. The remaining £3.1m has been loaned by other parties - this does not include the 2016 sellers.

5. As mentioned in a previous responses, we expect this to happen by the start of the new season but have not been given a specific date for the conversion. Ultimately it is up to those who hold the notes to determine if and when they convert, but we are continuing to discuss this with Jake Silverstein and the Board and the Senior Management Team of the club.

Adam Lewis Adam. Thanks for the responses. Re point 2. This is in direct contradiction of the articles which states quite clearly that the C class share is not eligible for a dividend and that dividends are based on number of shares.
What mechanism has been used to contradict the articles and why would brand new articles not address this issue?
Re change of control. Rupert quite clearly stated during the online forum that the matter of change of control at a Swansea Football LLC level had been addressed. This was explicitly asked. Your answer seems to imply that this is not the case. In which case the club can be sold at the topco level with the Trust having no tag rights. Which is quite the hole. Why has this not been considered?
Re point 4 -who has made a loan to the club?

 

[Jackfath]

Thank you for this Darran, no wonder you're in the top 1 posters on this fine site. Makes interesting reading.

 

[Skippyjack]

F*cking ell.. they're turning into a rather corporate entity the Trust.. it's unbelievable how much contempt they show the people who actually pay membership fees.. astounding

It's like jump on board with the Americans or f*ck off vibe about it

 

[Darran]

Thank you for this Darran, no wonder you're in the top 1 posters on this fine site. Makes interesting reading.

My pleasure.

 

[Uxy]

Ultimately there are two possibilities here, firstly they simply don't understand what they've signed and don't really understand the questions, or they do and they're bluffing it out. It may be a bit of both.

Either way, we're now in the situation where we don't know the following:
a) Who will pay the Trust £500k if the Swans gets promoted. The only plausible insinuation is that it will be the club.

b) Who holds £3.1m worth of convertible notes, that could choose to become a shareholder in our club if they wish.

c) Whether the Trust is actually able to attach itself to any future sale of the club, if the sale is done in such a way as to leave the SCFC 2002 shareholding untouched (e.g. through a sale of the Delaware vehicle that they have used to control a majority stake in our club).

d) Whether the Trust will always own 5% of the club, or just has 5% of the voting rights..

Edit - Oh and e) Anything else, as the SHA and Settlement agreement are more heavily protected than our keepers have been all season.

Whatever anyone's thoughts on the deal, and I've no real issue with the board pushing it, the lack of clarity is simply unacceptable, as is obviously the lack of a consultation.

 

[monmouth]

Incompetent
Duplicitous
Embarrassing
Shameful.

 

[3swan]

Without trying to make our that the Trust has been perfect over the years.

IMHO

It was set up with the genuine intent of protecting the club for future fans

I believe it is now a plaything for the owners to use as it's PR arm.

 

[Uxy]

Without trying to make our that the Trust has been perfect over the years.

IMHO

It was set up with the genuine intent of protecting the club for future fans

I believe it is now a plaything for the owners to use as it's PR arm.

There will be some associated with the club, and the Trust, who will believe that is what the Trust should be, that if the club asks them to do something they should. Nonsense, pure and simple.

 

[PSumbler]

Without trying to make our that the Trust has been perfect over the years.

IMHO

It was set up with the genuine intent of protecting the club for future fans

I believe it is now a plaything for the owners to use as it's PR arm.

There will be some associated with the club, and the Trust, who will believe that is what the Trust should be, that if the club asks them to do something they should. Nonsense, pure and simple.

I sat in a meeting once with representatives and senior management (non football from the club) where the Trust were told that we should say what the club wanted because that is what the club wanted us to do.

It never did and never should work like that but...

From the April minutes

There are concerns that Swansea City are currently in the upper tiers for persistent standing, contrary to regulations. Enforcement is difficult and it’s been suggested the Trust have further discussions with the club to address the situation.

Doing the PR job for the club that reads as

The Trust was never designed to be - and never should be - a supporters club but unfortunately that is what many of the current board think it is and the challenge to the club will be minimal, if at all, existent

 

[Niigata Jack]

Without trying to make our that the Trust has been perfect over the years.

IMHO

It was set up with the genuine intent of protecting the club for future fans

I believe it is now a plaything for the owners to use as it's PR arm.

It basically reads to me, that they have basically just given 16% if not the full 21% of the Supporters shares away. in any other walks of life they'd have been sacked for gross negligence, it's unbelievable and unforgiveable.

I don't know what to make of this current lot, other than to say that they are incompetent beyond belief, if things go belly up for the club at any point, there'll be little if anything to keep the club alive by looks of it, because there seems little evidence of any guarantees.