• ***IMPORTANT*** SOME PASSWORDS NOT WORKING

    There has been some issues with user passwords. Some users may need to reset their passwords to login to the forum. Please use the password reset option when logging in. If you do experience issues and find our account is locked then please email admin@jackarmy.net Thanks

Our Owners

swansvalleyjack

Reserve Team Player
Joined
Jul 1, 2020
Messages
87
Reaction score
11
I'm presuming their number one priority is decent financial profit for them and their client investors. Number two priority is success on the field for their reputation and for the fans/club. And better success means better returns.

However, year on year, the on field "success" is diminishing, and recruitment quality is less and less. This season being a prime example.

I'm just wondering when might be the tipping point for unacceptable financial returns to them and their clients.

Now, do others more financially savvy than me, know what they've taken out of the club and what sort of annual returns they are currently getting.

It does cost a lot of money to run a successful Championship club ( though I'm not sure we need to add to those costs with a Chief of Staff/ Head of Strategy)

So when do they start thinking - is it worth our while any more to continue with the Club ?

(btw, likely lower season ticket sales next year will negatively contribute I would have thought, to the tipping point scales)
 
If their top priority was profit/returns then they wouldn't have spent so much money on players (or involved themselves in football to begin with). They've had to put in tens of millions to cover the club's losses in the last few seasons (after the parachute payments ran dry) so I can't imagine a continuing worsening of ticket sales is going to change anything dramatically.

How they convinced the new directors to buy in I don't know as the original lot might as well have set their cash on fire rather than buying shares.
 
jasper_T said:
If their top priority was profit/returns then they wouldn't have spent so much money on players (or involved themselves in football to begin with). They've had to put in tens of millions to cover the club's losses in the last few seasons (after the parachute payments ran dry) so I can't imagine a continuing worsening of ticket sales is going to change anything dramatically.

How they convinced the new directors to buy in I don't know as the original lot might as well have set their cash on fire rather than buying shares.

Pretty sure they're top priority is making money. Unless they enjoy this real life long distance game of championship manager enough to pay 120odd million quid or they're a charitable organisation that provides jobs to mid level American golf loving executives. They aren't Swansea fans. Never have been, have been, never will be.

But they know that getting back to the prem is the only realistic way of recouping their outlay which is why transfer fees have been paid. However up until now they are yet to demonstrate the acumen or balls to be able to get us back there.
 
Nocountryforoldjack said:
It's really baffling as to what the goal or end game really is as owners of us ?

Their end game is clear. Sell and recoup an acceptable proportion of investment. Ideally that's all of it, and PL. It's not that they don't want to do that, it's that they are totally incompetent and have been since day one. They are also (rightly in my view) not prepared to risk more than a certain amount to achieve it. Where they have spent, it's just been on mostly inadequate players. Whenever they could take a poor football related decision, they have.

Putting a nobody idiot like Coleman in to front it was merely the latest fuckwittery on that front. Still nowhere near as low as wanting to give Dan James away, while dynamiting the ground under Potter. That IS something to thank Jenkins for.
 
Chief said:
Pretty sure they're top priority is making money. Unless they enjoy this real life long distance game of championship manager enough to pay 120odd million quid or they're a charitable organisation that provides jobs to mid level American golf loving executives. They aren't Swansea fans. Never have been, have been, never will be.

But they know that getting back to the prem is the only realistic way of recouping their outlay which is why transfer fees have been paid. However up until now they are yet to demonstrate the acumen or balls to be able to get us back there.

They had the chance to recoup most of their outlay in the PL after we sold Gylfi and Llorente, and instead let the club spaff it all away on dross. It's nice to imagine our owners having the wrong motives, definitely gets the blood boiling imagining some devious Yanks growing rich on our suffering when it could easily be so much better, but it seems more likely to me that they're trying to run the club well, investing a lot of their own cash in the process, and failing because they're just not very good at it. DC United aren't doing any better than we are under Levien.
 
It’s really straightforward.

They bought a club that on the face of it was maintaining its position in the premier league with no owner investment (some short term cash bridging loans but no actual investment was made at any point). The club was financially self sufficient.

The plan was to remain in situ in the belief that:

1. Broadcasting rights would continue to rise exponentially thus increasing their initial valuation similarly exponentially with zero outlay required;
2. There were commercial opportunities available that hadn’t been exploited including stadium naming, sponsorships, commercial partnerships etc etc if they brought in someone with the requisite experience;
3. There were significant opportunities available in generating US interest in the club (the Jack to a King nonsense, the love of the underdog story - see Wrexham) and they tried to advance this by the appointment of Bob Bradley.

Several things went wrong.

Firstly, the club was not actually financially self sufficient - it was chasing its tail by the time they got involved - ludicrous contracts to players like Ayew and Gomis which completely changed the financial structure, bad recruitment decisions with players like Clucas - awful decisions on management (Monk replacing Laudrup) etc etc etc.

The club was a lot closer to relegation than perhaps they ever realised. No5 certain that at the time they genuinely believed that a club like us are permanently so close to going down.

Commercially I’m not sure they realised quite how much the stadium ownership structure hampered the club’s ability to exploit things such as naming rights, likewise I don’t think they realised quite how beneficial the stadium ownership structure was in derisking future downsides. Equally, I suspect they didn’t really work out that there is very little interest commercially in clubs which are outside the ‘big club’ set up, outside major population centres, not historically glamorous and who had thrown away the reflected commercial attractiveness of someone like Laudrup. Also the people appointed to cover commercial opportunities were weak.

The cocked up the whole ‘US’ interest bit by appointing a manager who was so woefully out of his depth that it was farcical. And forgot that US interest almost always means the club has to be in the premier league (unless owned by a huge film star) as it simply won’t get the tv coverage needed to sustain the interest outside that.

Plus the chairman they thought had a magic touch made increasingly bad decisions. And an ownership that fancied itself as commercially competent but which was exposed for lack of football nous time and time again, resulting in damaging outcomes.

When relegated, they were left with stupid contracts, a dramatic fall in broadcast revenue with no commercial revenue to make any difference and so were facing huge losses immediately.
They realised that they needed to get back up, but initially at least completely underestimated how difficult that is. And when faced with managers that would have stood a chance, instead blamed them for not walking back up with almost no effort and time and time again failed to back them as they lost confidence and assumed that it must the managers’ faults that didn’t result in promotion.

They are now in a position that they will have written off the vast majority of their initial investment, they have reduced their holdings (by bringing others into the LLC and putting some money from the LkC into the club reducing the average cost of their holding and reducing minority ownership), they have looked unsuccessfully to sell the club for quite some time, but are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They know the only possibilities are the club going back up and them making a lot of money, or the club eventually falling away, probably into administration and start again. I suspect they’re torn. They are just about doing enough to delay the second possibility without really having the desire to invest enough for the first. This will continue for as long as they think ‘just a couple more wins and we could have fluked a play off place which is then a toss up for going back up).


Despite comments by others there has been no opportunity for them to recoup their investment otherwise they would have done it. While the Trust legal case was ongoing that prevented it and since the ridiculous settlement the club has been an absolute basket case so only a few have been willing to make an investment, and even then, it’s been a few quid (in their terms) thrown in in much the way that a normal person would put a hundred quid on red at a casino. It’s not been a big enough investment to move the dial.

The only chance we have is that we hit really lucky with a new manager who manages to find a way of getting success out of an increasingly thread bare cupboard (and they will in that situation chuck some cash at some loans or players that they think could turn a profit). Or that someone somewhere who is rich as all hell wants to buy a club to take up and for what ever reason fancies us.
 
I was hoping Londonlisa in particular would respond....and as usual to brilliantly summarize things !!

I like the reference to them being between a "rock and a hard place" ....that's what my gut instinct was telling me also, but without Lisa's professional insight.
 
I have never understood their game from day one.

When we were in the PL and raking in £100m a season, all they did was constantly sell our best players (often for less than market value) and then cut corners on replacements, as well as appointing a string of managers ranging from average to abysmal. They then seemed genuinely surprised when we eventually went down. Were they thick? Were they badly advised? Or did they play roulette, hoping to get away with it? Who knows.

Then, when we went down, instead of using the parachute payments to keep a semblance of a good side, they flogged the family silver. If it wasn't nailed down, it was gone. Potter was left promoting youngsters to play alongside what was left.

Now the fire sale that first summer I might have understood, if it wasn't for the fact that when Cooper came in, despite the parachute payments falling, they then went wild in the aisles, bringing back Ayew as the top paid player in the division at £80k pw, and lavishing big bucks on wages and loan fees for several top PL academy players. Why didn't they do this in the first season? It was just absolutely bizarre.

After the Cooper experiment failed, they then decided to try and run the club on vapours for the most part, similar to the Potter season. Despite a couple of splurges on Fisher and Darling, again it was sell sell sell and let the coach play square pegs in round holes to cover the gaps in the squad.

The way they've run the club since day one is just baffling - they seem to have manic phases where they go wild, then they go through periods where they don't even buy the basic essentials.

It all points to a bunch of people who blow hot and cold with their interest levels, and who just do not know what they are doing. Bad, bad combination.
 
Andrew - North Hill said:
I have never understood their game from day one.

When we were in the PL and raking in £100m a season, all they did was constantly sell our best players (often for less than market value)

We did some amazing sales from 2016 until relegation. £15m for Ash after his legs had gone. £20m+ for Andre Ayew. World record fee for a player Llorente's age at the time. Gylfi for mad money. Even Cork which I remembered as being low was still £10m so not awful (unless you compare it to the clowns we replaced him with).
 
jasper_T said:
They had the chance to recoup most of their outlay in the PL after we sold Gylfi and Llorente, and instead let the club spaff it all away on dross. It's nice to imagine our owners having the wrong motives, definitely gets the blood boiling imagining some devious Yanks growing rich on our suffering when it could easily be so much better, but it seems more likely to me that they're trying to run the club well, investing a lot of their own cash in the process, and failing because they're just not very good at it. DC United aren't doing any better than we are under Levien.

How could they have recouped most of their outlay after selling Siggy and Llorente then? Taken it all out in dividends? Not sure that would have been that feasible especially seeing as they didn't own as much of the club as they do now. The trust would have got 21% of the proceeds etc. There's a lot of talk also that the 45mill in reality actually was nowhere near then everything factored in.

The rest I agree with, but making a profit is undoubtedly their main aim. They just don't seem to be capable of doing that.
 
Londonlisa2001 said:
It’s really straightforward.

They bought a club that on the face of it was maintaining its position in the premier league with no owner investment (some short term cash bridging loans but no actual investment was made at any point). The club was financially self sufficient.

The plan was to remain in situ in the belief that:

1. Broadcasting rights would continue to rise exponentially thus increasing their initial valuation similarly exponentially with zero outlay required;
2. There were commercial opportunities available that hadn’t been exploited including stadium naming, sponsorships, commercial partnerships etc etc if they brought in someone with the requisite experience;
3. There were significant opportunities available in generating US interest in the club (the Jack to a King nonsense, the love of the underdog story - see Wrexham) and they tried to advance this by the appointment of Bob Bradley.

Several things went wrong.

Firstly, the club was not actually financially self sufficient - it was chasing its tail by the time they got involved - ludicrous contracts to players like Ayew and Gomis which completely changed the financial structure, bad recruitment decisions with players like Clucas - awful decisions on management (Monk replacing Laudrup) etc etc etc.

The club was a lot closer to relegation than perhaps they ever realised. No5 certain that at the time they genuinely believed that a club like us are permanently so close to going down.

Commercially I’m not sure they realised quite how much the stadium ownership structure hampered the club’s ability to exploit things such as naming rights, likewise I don’t think they realised quite how beneficial the stadium ownership structure was in derisking future downsides. Equally, I suspect they didn’t really work out that there is very little interest commercially in clubs which are outside the ‘big club’ set up, outside major population centres, not historically glamorous and who had thrown away the reflected commercial attractiveness of someone like Laudrup. Also the people appointed to cover commercial opportunities were weak.

The cocked up the whole ‘US’ interest bit by appointing a manager who was so woefully out of his depth that it was farcical. And forgot that US interest almost always means the club has to be in the premier league (unless owned by a huge film star) as it simply won’t get the tv coverage needed to sustain the interest outside that.

Plus the chairman they thought had a magic touch made increasingly bad decisions. And an ownership that fancied itself as commercially competent but which was exposed for lack of football nous time and time again, resulting in damaging outcomes.

When relegated, they were left with stupid contracts, a dramatic fall in broadcast revenue with no commercial revenue to make any difference and so were facing huge losses immediately.
They realised that they needed to get back up, but initially at least completely underestimated how difficult that is. And when faced with managers that would have stood a chance, instead blamed them for not walking back up with almost no effort and time and time again failed to back them as they lost confidence and assumed that it must the managers’ faults that didn’t result in promotion.

They are now in a position that they will have written off the vast majority of their initial investment, they have reduced their holdings (by bringing others into the LLC and putting some money from the LkC into the club reducing the average cost of their holding and reducing minority ownership), they have looked unsuccessfully to sell the club for quite some time, but are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They know the only possibilities are the club going back up and them making a lot of money, or the club eventually falling away, probably into administration and start again. I suspect they’re torn. They are just about doing enough to delay the second possibility without really having the desire to invest enough for the first. This will continue for as long as they think ‘just a couple more wins and we could have fluked a play off place which is then a toss up for going back up).


Despite comments by others there has been no opportunity for them to recoup their investment otherwise they would have done it. While the Trust legal case was ongoing that prevented it and since the ridiculous settlement the club has been an absolute basket case so only a few have been willing to make an investment, and even then, it’s been a few quid (in their terms) thrown in in much the way that a normal person would put a hundred quid on red at a casino. It’s not been a big enough investment to move the dial.

The only chance we have is that we hit really lucky with a new manager who manages to find a way of getting success out of an increasingly thread bare cupboard (and they will in that situation chuck some cash at some loans or players that they think could turn a profit). Or that someone somewhere who is rich as all hell wants to buy a club to take up and for what ever reason fancies us.

This is a neat summary and is bang on, but tldr for people with short attention spans: they were sold a pup and are clueless about what to do about it.
 
Londonlisa2001 said:
It’s really straightforward.

They bought a club that on the face of it was maintaining its position in the premier league with no owner investment (some short term cash bridging loans but no actual investment was made at any point). The club was financially self sufficient.

The plan was to remain in situ in the belief that:

1. Broadcasting rights would continue to rise exponentially thus increasing their initial valuation similarly exponentially with zero outlay required;
2. There were commercial opportunities available that hadn’t been exploited including stadium naming, sponsorships, commercial partnerships etc etc if they brought in someone with the requisite experience;
3. There were significant opportunities available in generating US interest in the club (the Jack to a King nonsense, the love of the underdog story - see Wrexham) and they tried to advance this by the appointment of Bob Bradley.

Several things went wrong.

Firstly, the club was not actually financially self sufficient - it was chasing its tail by the time they got involved - ludicrous contracts to players like Ayew and Gomis which completely changed the financial structure, bad recruitment decisions with players like Clucas - awful decisions on management (Monk replacing Laudrup) etc etc etc.

The club was a lot closer to relegation than perhaps they ever realised. No5 certain that at the time they genuinely believed that a club like us are permanently so close to going down.

Commercially I’m not sure they realised quite how much the stadium ownership structure hampered the club’s ability to exploit things such as naming rights, likewise I don’t think they realised quite how beneficial the stadium ownership structure was in derisking future downsides. Equally, I suspect they didn’t really work out that there is very little interest commercially in clubs which are outside the ‘big club’ set up, outside major population centres, not historically glamorous and who had thrown away the reflected commercial attractiveness of someone like Laudrup. Also the people appointed to cover commercial opportunities were weak.

The cocked up the whole ‘US’ interest bit by appointing a manager who was so woefully out of his depth that it was farcical. And forgot that US interest almost always means the club has to be in the premier league (unless owned by a huge film star) as it simply won’t get the tv coverage needed to sustain the interest outside that.

Plus the chairman they thought had a magic touch made increasingly bad decisions. And an ownership that fancied itself as commercially competent but which was exposed for lack of football nous time and time again, resulting in damaging outcomes.

When relegated, they were left with stupid contracts, a dramatic fall in broadcast revenue with no commercial revenue to make any difference and so were facing huge losses immediately.
They realised that they needed to get back up, but initially at least completely underestimated how difficult that is. And when faced with managers that would have stood a chance, instead blamed them for not walking back up with almost no effort and time and time again failed to back them as they lost confidence and assumed that it must the managers’ faults that didn’t result in promotion.

They are now in a position that they will have written off the vast majority of their initial investment, they have reduced their holdings (by bringing others into the LLC and putting some money from the LkC into the club reducing the average cost of their holding and reducing minority ownership), they have looked unsuccessfully to sell the club for quite some time, but are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They know the only possibilities are the club going back up and them making a lot of money, or the club eventually falling away, probably into administration and start again. I suspect they’re torn. They are just about doing enough to delay the second possibility without really having the desire to invest enough for the first. This will continue for as long as they think ‘just a couple more wins and we could have fluked a play off place which is then a toss up for going back up).


Despite comments by others there has been no opportunity for them to recoup their investment otherwise they would have done it. While the Trust legal case was ongoing that prevented it and since the ridiculous settlement the club has been an absolute basket case so only a few have been willing to make an investment, and even then, it’s been a few quid (in their terms) thrown in in much the way that a normal person would put a hundred quid on red at a casino. It’s not been a big enough investment to move the dial.

The only chance we have is that we hit really lucky with a new manager who manages to find a way of getting success out of an increasingly thread bare cupboard (and they will in that situation chuck some cash at some loans or players that they think could turn a profit). Or that someone somewhere who is rich as all hell wants to buy a club to take up and for what ever reason fancies us.

In terms of a way forward, it doesn’t have to be someone as rich as hell (but they certainly need access to more capital than this lot). I look at Ipswich as a possible model. Not where they are now, but where they were just over two years ago under their previous owner: someone absent from the club with no real connection, who didn’t fully trust a CEO to run the business, who made a series of bad manager appointments, didn’t always back the manager and let their facilities fall into disrepair. Sound familiar?

In the end it needed relegation to L1 and a couple of years of failed promotion attempts to get the message to sink home that the owner needed to sell up and cut his losses. We’re not there yet, but that’s where we’re heading and that’s what’s needed.

Finding new owners brings its own risk of course, but I can’t see another way forward.
 
LeonWasTheDog's said:
In terms of a way forward, it doesn’t have to be someone as rich as hell (but they certainly need access to more capital than this lot). I look at Ipswich as a possible model. Not where they are now, but where they were just over two years ago under their previous owner: someone absent from the club with no real connection, who didn’t fully trust a CEO to run the business, who made a series of bad manager appointments, didn’t always back the manager and let their facilities fall into disrepair. Sound familiar?

In the end it needed relegation to L1 and a couple of years of failed promotion attempts to get the message to sink home that the owner needed to sell up and cut his losses. We’re not there yet, but that’s where we’re heading and that’s what’s needed.

Finding new owners brings its own risk of course, but I can’t see another way forward.

Yeah you make a really good point and to be honest with you I could take getting relegated if it meant getting rid of the owners and rebuilding.
 
Nocountryforoldjack said:
Yeah you make a really good point and to be honest with you I could take getting relegated if it meant getting rid of the owners and rebuilding.

I completely agree.

I don't want us to go down, but if we did, being two divisions below the land of milk and honey might just trigger them to finally piss off. Not sure they'd have the energy or interest in hanging around much longer.
 

Swansea City v Stoke City

Online statistics

Members online
11
Guests online
515
Total visitors
526

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
18,235
Messages
259,066
Members
4,696
Back
Top