Financial challenges aplenty

[PSumbler]

The latest in our series looking at the impact of the global pandemic

The life of a Swansea City fan is never easy. For all of us we have had to see many ups and downs in our time supporting the club and for many of us in a very short space of time we have seen matches to stay in the football league right through to winning trophies and competing in Europe. But it’s a different battle now and one that will be interesting to see how we come through.

Read more here...

 

[Pegojack]

I think the club's financial situation makes the Trust's proposed legal action even more urgent. A favourable outcome and an additional £20 million in the coffers would be very welcome in the event that the club goes belly up and is available once again for supporter ownership.

 

[Badlands]

I think the club's financial situation makes the Trust's proposed legal action even more urgent. A favourable outcome and an additional £20 million in the coffers would be very welcome in the event that the club goes belly up and is available once again for supporter ownership.

The club was owned by supporters. but it was never supporter owned.
What have the Trust even done to benefit the club? Very little.
How much did the previous share holders put into the club financially? Nothing.
Were the previous shareholders profligate with club funds? For whatever reason, yes.
Given the way the trust blocked moves to sell originally and their performance since would you trust The Trust to run a football club at our level?

 

[Dr. Winston]

And that is why the job of someone balancing the books is not to be underestimated

Yet it frequently is.

 

[Dr. Winston]

Given the way the trust blocked moves to sell originally and their performance since would you trust The Trust to run a football club at our level?

Disingenuous. The Trust never said the club shouldn't be sold. They just wanted to be very, very careful about who they sold it to. Unlike Jenkins, Dineen and co who didn't give a flying fuck as long as they cashed in.

The Trust isn't strong enough to run the club but they shouldn't really need to. You hire people like Birch to so that for you. Jenkins biggest (perhaps deliberate) mistake was not accepting when the job got too big for him.

 

[CurtessECarr]

Can't see many clubs outside the Premiership actually buying players at the moment. Cannot see Players out of contract picking up wages the've been used to when signing for other clubs because no club is collecting much in the way of revenue at the moment. Interesting but worrying times.

 

[Belfy]

I think the club's financial situation makes the Trust's proposed legal action even more urgent. A favourable outcome and an additional £20 million in the coffers would be very welcome in the event that the club goes belly up and is available once again for supporter ownership.

The club was owned by supporters. but it was never supporter owned.
What have the Trust even done to benefit the club? Very little.
How much did the previous share holders put into the club financially? Nothing.
Were the previous shareholders profligate with club funds? For whatever reason, yes.
Given the way the trust blocked moves to sell originally and their performance since would you trust The Trust to run a football club at our level?

The answer is clearly yes because they blocked the original sale to people Who after due diligence were not fit, and then having been excluded from the second deal for obvious reasons they may well have blocked that as well.
Your last sentence isn’t accurate though because they haven’t and don’t wish to run a football club at this level.

 

[J_B]

The club was owned by supporters. but it was never supporter owned.
What have the Trust even done to benefit the club? Very little.
How much did the previous share holders put into the club financially? Nothing.
Were the previous shareholders profligate with club funds? For whatever reason, yes.
Given the way the trust blocked moves to sell originally and their performance since would you trust The Trust to run a football club at our level?

The answer is clearly yes because they blocked the original sale to people Who after due diligence were not fit, and then having been excluded from the second deal for obvious reasons they may well have blocked that as well.
Your last sentence isn’t accurate though because they haven’t and don’t wish to run a football club at this level.

Absolutely right. It's a strange stick to beat the Trust with that they wanted to do due diligence to ensure that the club was in good hands.

 

[Badlands]

The club was owned by supporters. but it was never supporter owned.
What have the Trust even done to benefit the club? Very little.
How much did the previous share holders put into the club financially? Nothing.
Were the previous shareholders profligate with club funds? For whatever reason, yes.
Given the way the trust blocked moves to sell originally and their performance since would you trust The Trust to run a football club at our level?

The answer is clearly yes because they blocked the original sale to people Who after due diligence were not fit, and then having been excluded from the second deal for obvious reasons they may well have blocked that as well.
Your last sentence isn’t accurate though because they haven’t and don’t wish to run a football club at this level.

Comment about supporter ownership was in response to Pegojack ' favourable outcome and an additional £20 million in the coffers would be very welcome in the event that the club goes belly up and is available once again for supporter ownership.'
Being opposed to a sale of any kind when it was obvious the, then board, had nothing left to give ...
'The Trust owns more than 21% of the shares in the football club and wish to make it known at the moment that they do not believe that there is a need for the club to change ownership or proceed with the deal.' meant getting deeper in debt and less likely to hand over to responsible management.
Who did the Trust block a sale to? I thought John Jay Moores and Charles Noell were turned down because they were only interested in a 30% stake.
The Chinese rumours were a nonsense but many fans still think we should have sold to Peter Zhang and his SinoFortone front. (£2bn developments in the UK only succeeded in buying a pub!
What is it some fans think could happen from a takeover?

 

[Darran]

The answer is clearly yes because they blocked the original sale to people Who after due diligence were not fit, and then having been excluded from the second deal for obvious reasons they may well have blocked that as well.
Your last sentence isn’t accurate though because they haven’t and don’t wish to run a football club at this level.

Comment about supporter ownership was in response to Pegojack ' favourable outcome and an additional £20 million in the coffers would be very welcome in the event that the club goes belly up and is available once again for supporter ownership.'
Being opposed to a sale of any kind when it was obvious the, then board, had nothing left to give ...
'The Trust owns more than 21% of the shares in the football club and wish to make it known at the moment that they do not believe that there is a need for the club to change ownership or proceed with the deal.' meant getting deeper in debt and less likely to hand over to responsible management.
Who did the Trust block a sale to? I thought John Jay Moores and Charles Noell were turned down because they were only interested in a 30% stake.
The Chinese rumours were a nonsense but many fans still think we should have sold to Peter Zhang and his SinoFortone front. (£2bn developments in the UK only succeeded in buying a pub!
What is it some fans think could happen from a takeover?

What have the new board given us that the old board couldn’t give us then? Go on I’ll wait.

It’s also interesting that Dineen and Swedehead have both told people in private that the Americans told lies or have broken promises. Why don’t they say it in public.
I hope they get all they deserve.

 

[waynekerr55]

I think the club's financial situation makes the Trust's proposed legal action even more urgent. A favourable outcome and an additional £20 million in the coffers would be very welcome in the event that the club goes belly up and is available once again for supporter ownership.

The club was owned by supporters. but it was never supporter owned.
What have the Trust even done to benefit the club? Very little.
How much did the previous share holders put into the club financially? Nothing.
Were the previous shareholders profligate with club funds? For whatever reason, yes.
Given the way the trust blocked moves to sell originally and their performance since would you trust The Trust to run a football club at our level?

Yeah that'll be it.

Have a word with yourself. Stop being a patsy on their behalf, you're like a Poundland Peston.

 

[waynekerr55]

Comment about supporter ownership was in response to Pegojack ' favourable outcome and an additional £20 million in the coffers would be very welcome in the event that the club goes belly up and is available once again for supporter ownership.'
Being opposed to a sale of any kind when it was obvious the, then board, had nothing left to give ...
'The Trust owns more than 21% of the shares in the football club and wish to make it known at the moment that they do not believe that there is a need for the club to change ownership or proceed with the deal.' meant getting deeper in debt and less likely to hand over to responsible management.
Who did the Trust block a sale to? I thought John Jay Moores and Charles Noell were turned down because they were only interested in a 30% stake.
The Chinese rumours were a nonsense but many fans still think we should have sold to Peter Zhang and his SinoFortone front. (£2bn developments in the UK only succeeded in buying a pub!
What is it some fans think could happen from a takeover?

What have the new board given us that the old board couldn’t give us then? Go on I’ll wait.

It’s also interesting that Dineen and Swedehead have both told people in private that the Americans told lies or have broken promises. Why don’t they say it in public.
I hope they get all they deserve.

wibble wibble, Sumbler knew, or something

 

[Badlands]

Comment about supporter ownership was in response to Pegojack ' favourable outcome and an additional £20 million in the coffers would be very welcome in the event that the club goes belly up and is available once again for supporter ownership.'
Being opposed to a sale of any kind when it was obvious the, then board, had nothing left to give ...
'The Trust owns more than 21% of the shares in the football club and wish to make it known at the moment that they do not believe that there is a need for the club to change ownership or proceed with the deal.' meant getting deeper in debt and less likely to hand over to responsible management.
Who did the Trust block a sale to? I thought John Jay Moores and Charles Noell were turned down because they were only interested in a 30% stake.
The Chinese rumours were a nonsense but many fans still think we should have sold to Peter Zhang and his SinoFortone front. (£2bn developments in the UK only succeeded in buying a pub!
What is it some fans think could happen from a takeover?

What have the new board given us that the old board couldn’t give us then? Go on I’ll wait.

It’s also interesting that Dineen and Swedehead have both told people in private that the Americans told lies or have broken promises. Why don’t they say it in public.
I hope they get all they deserve.

Financial stability, better chance of sustainability, professionalism.

 

[Risc]

What have the new board given us that the old board couldn’t give us then? Go on I’ll wait.

It’s also interesting that Dineen and Swedehead have both told people in private that the Americans told lies or have broken promises. Why don’t they say it in public.
I hope they get all they deserve.

Financial stability, better chance of sustainability, professionalism.

Financial stability? No expert but if it wasn’t for the academy graduates we have flogged and a few decent profits on transfer deals we would be at Bolton’s level already. As much as I can’t stand Jenkins he must take credit for that.

I don’t think I have one positive thing to say about the current owners

 

[Darran]

What have the new board given us that the old board couldn’t give us then? Go on I’ll wait.

It’s also interesting that Dineen and Swedehead have both told people in private that the Americans told lies or have broken promises. Why don’t they say it in public.
I hope they get all they deserve.

Financial stability, better chance of sustainability, professionalism.

Go on then explain to every how.