Swansea City owners talking to new investors

[mayhilljack3]

A site isn't an echo chamber just because everyone lines up to point out you're talking s**t. :lol:

If I came on here and said that Joel Latibeaudiere was the greatest footballer in the world, every reply would disagree with me. Does that mean it's an echo chamber full of sheep, or would it just be the result of me talking bollocks?

Youre right its not a complete echo chamber on here. I see Neathjack is willing to call out Andy Godden from time to time for continuously waffling on about how the Trust is sh*t and he knows best. He must be spending more time on the Trust since he walked off than before when he was then in charge.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

It is not a false premise. Your response is simply deflection.

Nope. Your question was based on a premise that there was no funding which is false.

 

[Uxy]

Assuming you are Andrew Godden, can you answer with a straight YES or NO the following question: Was there a funding agreement signed by a funder when you stepped down as Trust Chair?

A straight YES or NO please without any waffle.

.

I’m surprised you don’t know the answer to this though, which is a bit worrying. I don’t suppose confidentialities apply any more, but I clearly recall the Trust entering an agreement with a specific funder, pending due diligence on both sides, prior to my term ending.

I also remember how those discussions progressed, as I was involved for three months after my term ended (until those of us stood down from the subgroup, due to a lack of engagement).

I also remember what the Trust said about the finalised funding and the gaps they viewed in that. And how that argument was dismantled when questioned.

I also member how the members voted in 2019 and authorised the board to use existing funds to pursue the case. So that’s not really a reason to unilaterally stop it.

Anyway, I have a question or two for you. Why do you hide behind a username? Why don’t you front up to the fans? Do you feel a bit embarrassed by current membership levels, or do you think you can give away enough free memberships to school kids to make up the numbers?

 

[Uxy]

Assuming you are Andrew Godden, can you answer with a straight YES or NO the following question: Was there a funding agreement signed by a funder when you stepped down as Trust Chair?

A straight YES or NO please without any waffle.

.

I’m surprised you don’t know the answer to this though, which is a bit worrying. I don’t suppose confidentialities apply any more, but I clearly recall the Trust entering an agreement with a specific funder, pending due diligence on both sides, prior to my term ending.

I also remember how those discussions progressed, as I was involved for three months after my term ended (until those of us stood down from the subgroup, due to a lack of engagement).

I also remember what the Trust said about the finalised funding and the gaps they viewed in that. And how that argument was dismantled when questioned.

I also member how the members voted in 2019 and authorised the board to use existing funds to pursue the case. So that’s not really a reason to unilaterally stop it.

Anyway, I have a question or two for you. Why do you hide behind a username? Why don’t you front up to the fans? Do you feel a bit embarrassed by current membership levels, or do you think you can give away enough free memberships to school kids to make up the numbers?

 

[Swanjaxs]

.

I’m surprised you don’t know the answer to this though, which is a bit worrying. I don’t suppose confidentialities apply any more, but I clearly recall the Trust entering an agreement with a specific funder, pending due diligence on both sides, prior to my term ending.

I also remember how those discussions progressed, as I was involved for three months after my term ended (until those of us stood down from the subgroup, due to a lack of engagement).

I also remember what the Trust said about the finalised funding and the gaps they viewed in that. And how that argument was dismantled when questioned.

I also member how the members voted in 2019 and authorised the board to use existing funds to pursue the case. So that’s not really a reason to unilaterally stop it.

Anyway, I have a question or two for you. Why do you hide behind a username? Why don’t you front up to the fans? Do you feel a bit embarrassed by current membership levels, or do you think you can give away enough free memberships to school kids to make up the numbers?

You'll have to wait 3 weeks for his reply, he's gone to work already :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[mayhilljack3]

.

I’m surprised you don’t know the answer to this though, which is a bit worrying. I don’t suppose confidentialities apply any more, but I clearly recall the Trust entering an agreement with a specific funder, pending due diligence on both sides, prior to my term ending.

I also remember how those discussions progressed, as I was involved for three months after my term ended (until those of us stood down from the subgroup, due to a lack of engagement).

I also remember what the Trust said about the finalised funding and the gaps they viewed in that. And how that argument was dismantled when questioned.

I also member how the members voted in 2019 and authorised the board to use existing funds to pursue the case. So that’s not really a reason to unilaterally stop it.

Anyway, I have a question or two for you. Why do you hide behind a username? Why don’t you front up to the fans? Do you feel a bit embarrassed by current membership levels, or do you think you can give away enough free memberships to school kids to make up the numbers?

So cutting through all the waffle, the answer is NO. There was not a funding agreement signed by a funder when you stepped down as Trust chair.

It was good to hear the new Trust chair’s speech at the recent AGM after so many years of the Trust banging on about legal action or settlement or maybe legal action and getting nowhere.

 

[NeathJack]

So cutting through all the waffle, the answer is NO. There was not a funding agreement signed by a funder when you stepped down as Trust chair.

It was good to hear the new Trust chair’s speech at the recent AGM after so many years of the Trust banging on about legal action or settlement or maybe legal action and getting nowhere.

Is a transcript of this speech available to non members?

 

[Longlostjack]

Let’s get this absolutely straight. Mayhill whoever you are, you’re doing a typical PR tactic of creating little sidelines that people can argue about while forgetting the original argument. Maybe I‘m giving you too much credit though and you’re as thick as a plank. Fact is the membership voted to allow the Trust to pursue legal action. Trust then decided it wasn’t a good idea without consulting members. (for whatever reason- others can draw their own conclusions-couldn’t possibly comment). The whole thing stinks.

 

[Darran]

Let’s get this absolutely straight. Mayhill whoever you are, you’re doing a typical PR tactic of creating little sidelines that people can argue about while forgetting the original argument. Maybe I‘m giving you too much credit though and you’re as thick as a plank. Fact is the membership voted to allow the Trust to pursue legal action. Trust then decided it wasn’t a good idea without consulting members. (for whatever reason- others can draw their own conclusions-couldn’t possibly comment). The whole thing stinks.

Massively.

 

[jack_lord]

Massively.

and then some.

There has to be some legal argument that the group did not actually follow the recommendations made

 

[J_B]

and then some.

There has to be some legal argument that the group did not actually follow the recommendations made

They betrayed the membership that they were elected to serve.

You can’t get any lower than that.

 

[monmouth]

So cutting through all the waffle, the answer is NO. There was not a funding agreement signed by a funder when you stepped down as Trust chair.

It was good to hear the new Trust chair’s speech at the recent AGM after so many years of the Trust banging on about legal action or settlement or maybe legal action and getting nowhere.

A rather famaous Scottish CEO I worked with always used to call really stupid, suit-full-of-bugger-all, people 'ruperts'. It's sort of stuck with me.

So let me cut through your waffle, you silly little rupert. You sold out the members and the fans for a prawn sandwich and a glass of merlot, because you were too stupid and puffed up with self importance to understand your own total incompetence. Own it. Live with it.

 

[Neath_Jack]

A rather famaous Scottish CEO I worked with always used to call really stupid, suit-full-of-bugger-all, people 'ruperts'. It's sort of stuck with me.

So let me cut through your waffle, you silly little rupert. You sold out the members and the fans for a prawn sandwich and a glass of merlot, because you were too stupid and puffed up with self importance to understand your own total incompetence. Own it. Live with it.

Ruperts are what commissioned officers are referred to by the rank and file in the army. Wonder if your CEO was ex military.

 

[J_B]

There will be countless Barbour clad Ruperts at Twickenham tomorrow singing a slave song from the Deep South.

 

[mayhilljack3]

Is a transcript of this speech available to non members?

Yes, AGM speech is posted on the Trust website. It covers the Trust meeting with potential new investors (debunks the b*llocks that started this thread).