• ***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

Swansea City owners talking to new investors

Londonlisa2001 said:
The premise on which your question was based was false so it’s a pointless question.

I’d remind you that at several members of the current trust board were also part of the board that had already reviewed in huge depth the details of funding in place and assessed them to be sufficient.

The current trust board were advised in the strongest possible terms that the membership should be consulted about any change away from the agreed path. They were also given actual lists of areas that needed to be dealt with as part of any settlement and refused to even present them to the owners.

And actually, even leaving that aside, the way the Trust board behaved after making the decision to accept the ‘deal’ was reprehensible. A refusal to answer questions, or to pretend questions were answered when they clearly hadn’t be understood, a misrepresentation of the deal as it did stand, confusion about what had and hadn’t been agreed, hiding behind NDAs when people pointed out the severe flaws etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

Interesting time to leave for work btw.

As said already it is not a false premise. Your response is simply deflection. No funder signed an agreement to fund Trust legal action.

Also I had confirmed last night too that the Trust solicitors were definite in advising against consultation with members before settling the dispute (different so what you say above) to avoid the settlement breaking down when it became known the Trust didnt have funding.
 
Longlostjack said:
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.

The Trust went in circles for six years talking about legal action or settling or legal action.

How do you think the Trust could take legal action without an investor willing to fund it?
 
mayhilljack3 said:
The Trust went in circles for six years talking about legal action or settling or legal action.

How do you think the Trust could take legal action without an investor willing to fund it?

They made sub groups and everything mun, even kept telling us they knew comms were shite and they were going to sort it...
 
monmouth said:
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.

Great Post.
 
mayhilljack3 said:
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).

Odd

As it confirms exactly what this thread started with
 
mayhilljack3 said:
The Trust went in circles for six years talking about legal action or settling or legal action.

How do you think the Trust could take legal action without an investor willing to fund it?

This point was answered by Ux in a previous post. I think his words were „blatant untruth“. Given that you refused to consult with Trust members before throwing in the towel and have squandered any meaningful influence that the Trust had, I know who I prefer to believe.
 
Neath_Jack said:
They made sub groups and everything mun, even kept telling us they knew comms were shite and they were going to sort it...

Manana manana manana tap dancing for 6 long years. Then oops 6 years are up now time to exit sharpish! 😂
 
Longlostjack said:
This point was answered by Ux in a previous post. I think his words were „blatant untruth“. Given that you refused to consult with Trust members before throwing in the towel and have squandered any meaningful influence that the Trust had, I know who I prefer to believe.

Good luck to you mate if you choose to follow the twaddle of the “Lord of the spreadsheet macro”
 
mayhilljack3 said:
Good luck to you mate if you choose to follow the twaddle of the “Lord of the spreadsheet macro”

are you comfortable that you are coming across as a total cunt? And a shithousery one at that
 
LoyalSwan said:
are you comfortable that you are coming across as a total c**t? And a shithousery one at that

I’d say Godden is the sh*thouse for bottling it when he knew legal action was never going to happen. Hospital pass to Dalton.

The only reason I waste my time on here once in a while is because there are good people doing their best to make something positive of the Trust these days and I don’t like it that Godden’s ego and personal insecurities lead him to slag off the Trust at every opportunity, in particular the new chairman Dalton who had the balls to step in when Godden walked off.

Of course the original sin was the Trust pre-2016 being asleep at the wheel when the local boys were thinking of selling, but that is old history.

Suggest you all reading this have a think about things and suggest you don’t take what you see on Planet Swans as fact.
 
mayhilljack3 said:
I’d say Godden is the sh*thouse for bottling it when he knew legal action was never going to happen. Hospital pass to Dalton.

The only reason I waste my time on here once in a while is because there are good people doing their best to make something positive of the Trust these days and I don’t like it that Godden’s ego and personal insecurities lead him to slag off the Trust at every opportunity, in particular the new chairman Dalton who had the balls to step in when Godden walked off.

Of course the original sin was the Trust pre-2016 being asleep at the wheel when the local boys were thinking of selling, but that is old history.

Suggest you all reading this have a think about things and suggest you don’t take what you see on Planet Swans as fact.
Fuck the trust and fuck you
 
mayhilljack3 said:
I’d say Godden is the sh*thouse for bottling it when he knew legal action was never going to happen. Hospital pass to Dalton.

The only reason I waste my time on here once in a while is because there are good people doing their best to make something positive of the Trust these days and I don’t like it that Godden’s ego and personal insecurities lead him to slag off the Trust at every opportunity, in particular the new chairman Dalton who had the balls to step in when Godden walked off.

Of course the original sin was the Trust pre-2016 being asleep at the wheel when the local boys were thinking of selling, but that is old history.

Suggest you all reading this have a think about things and suggest you don’t take what you see on Planet Swans as fact.

I've had a think, and have come to the conclusion that you are a snivelling little cùnt.

Now go fack off to work and give us all a break ...
 
mayhilljack3 said:
Also I had confirmed last night too that the Trust solicitors were definite in advising against consultation with members before settling the dispute (different so what you say above) to avoid the settlement breaking down when it became known the Trust didnt have funding.

Someone’s telling you massive porkies mush. Either that or you’re telling yourself massive porkies and it’s easier to believe your own lies.
 
To be fair we could never assume we get a balanced view on here when the forum is full of ex-members with reputations to defend. Andy doesnt help himself either - he's obnoxious and condescending and seemingly proud of it

Theres probably been mistakes on all sides, new and old. Maybe the concept of an unpaid committee up against devious, duplicitous sellers looking to make their fortune was always doomed to fail

They should just wrap it up. Whether their intentions are noble or self-serving, it can't be worth the amount of shit they endure
 
By the way, im not critisicing anyone who has sat on the committe. All have shown more effort than myself so who am I to complain
 

Swansea City v Leeds United

Online statistics

Members online
23
Guests online
366
Total visitors
389

Forum statistics

Threads
19,105
Messages
265,993
Members
4,701
Back
Top