Well, looks like we finally reached...

[BarryTownSwan]

700K was the reported fee for the Brighton lad

If £700k is correct then I'm on the owners side here. Is a midfielder a priority position with Pato, Dhanda and Fulton staying? Read a report that we were looking a loan until July with an option to buy in the summer - if true then why would Brighton and the player accept our deal when he left on a permanent transfer to Hull NOW ! Guaranteed contract NOW for the player and a guaranteed transfer fee NOW for Brighton. Compared to our offer we had no chance getting this over the line.

 

[BarryTownSwan]

The thing is, I don't think we've got a bad pool of players now. The issue is if Martin has been led up the garden path or promised things not delivered. Potter and Cooper both had faces like smacked arses at this time of year too. And, as said, someone is leaking. The thing that's still bugging me is Wolf. What the hell is that all about when we refuse a primary target almost over the line. It's hard believe they really know what they are doing with any clear thinking.

It's not likely to end well again is it?

Martin himself said 'we need players OUT before we get players IN' and made specific reference to Fulton and Dhanda having deals on the table (as if easing their decisions to accept so he's got the funds to sign his chosen replacements). As it turns out neither Dhanda or Fulton left so there wree no outgoings to fund any incomings. Pato staying (and owners rejecting low offers shows IMO that the owners have some financial savvy!) means the Brighton player is no longer essential. I'm with the owners here. Martin may be upset about investment but the owners did exactly what they told him they'd do. I think Martin may well walk eventually, not now, but before he gets sacked for continued poor performances.

 

[BarryTownSwan]

The thing is, I don't think we've got a bad pool of players now. The issue is if Martin has been led up the garden path or promised things not delivered. Potter and Cooper both had faces like smacked arses at this time of year too. And, as said, someone is leaking. The thing that's still bugging me is Wolf. What the hell is that all about when we refuse a primary target almost over the line. It's hard believe they really know what they are doing with any clear thinking.

It's not likely to end well again is it?

Yes something dodgy about Wolf. Look at virtually all our signings - all linked to either Martin or Allen previously. Wolf is very different. Smells a bit like Arriola to me. Is there an American ownership link?

Wales Online report Martin has close ties to Wolf's agent and was delighted with the acquisition. Of course signings are linked to Allen & Martin - why else employ a manager and scout/faciliator to oversee transfers, that's exactly why they are there FFS!

 

[Londonlisa2001]

The thing is, I don't think we've got a bad pool of players now. The issue is if Martin has been led up the garden path or promised things not delivered. Potter and Cooper both had faces like smacked arses at this time of year too. And, as said, someone is leaking. The thing that's still bugging me is Wolf. What the hell is that all about when we refuse a primary target almost over the line. It's hard believe they really know what they are doing with any clear thinking.

It's not likely to end well again is it?

Martin himself said 'we need players OUT before we get players IN' and made specific reference to Fulton and Dhanda having deals on the table (as if easing their decisions to accept so he's got the funds to sign his chosen replacements). As it turns out neither Dhanda or Fulton left so there wree no outgoings to fund any incomings. Pato staying (and owners rejecting low offers shows IMO that the owners have some financial savvy!) means the Brighton player is no longer essential. I'm with the owners here. Martin may be upset about investment but the owners did exactly what they told him they'd do. I think Martin may well walk eventually, not now, but before he gets sacked for continued poor performances.

Oh, I’m sorry, but this is simply nonsense. Financial savvy? Lol.

We have three midfielders in our first team squad that do not want to be here and two of them the manager doesn’t want to play.

Take Dhanda, we are now going to pay him his full wage for him to not play for half a season before leaving for free. We could have had at least some of that wage paid for him to be elsewhere. That’s not financial savvy. That’s absolutely idiotic decision making. It smacks of ‘we know how to do business and he’s worth x’ as though it’s a piece of furniture.
Same with Fulton. We are now paying him full salary to play a bit part at best, and relying on him (when he doesn’t want to be here one would imagine given the absolute lack of faith shown in him from RM) when we could have had money back.

And Patterson. That will be interesting. Hopefully he comes back into the fold but it doesn’t seem hugely promising. He’s not going to be much interested now.

We also have one of the two top paid players in the club not in the first team and freeing up his wages could have meant some creativity being injected in to a team that is literally as painting by numbers as it gets.

Some of this is on the manager, there’s no need to select a system that hardly any lower league players can play without extensive coaching. And one that has no width, no pace and no creativity.

But some is on the owners, and whatever Silverstein is (ostensibly someone who has a loan of £5m in the club, no shares, no ownership, yet was over here we were told to ‘sort out the window’ snigger).

We don’t have bad players at all, but we have players not matched for the system we are playing. If we didn’t get the players to play it, then the only thing left to change is the system. So let’s hope we start seeing that. Tonight.

As an aside - when people ask what the sellers could possibly have done to help the club instead of them, well take a bit less themselves and insist the rest was put in to the club or fans owners maybe? Just a thought…

 

[moscowjack]

...the next level - some very depressing reads around this morning

If only there had been due diligence done before the club was sold.

Old ground I know but this all comes back to the desire of many people to sell the club to the first people who stumped up the cash

And the sale was always for the good of the individuals and NOT the football club.

And the Brighton player was just the icing on the cake for the way that was handled - but absolutely no surprise

I'm probably going to regret this (the trolls will love it) but....here goes.

I don't blame the former owners for selling. We had the 3rd poorest ownership in the top 2 divisions. I know, because I sadly once spent a whole Sunday morning putting it only a spreadsheet. Sad, I know...but we were mid-table in the PL and there was only one way we would go, eventually. With all clubs like us in the PL, we are one massive managerial mistake away from relegation. That's what happened eventually but the previous owners sold to an American group who made many promises to them, and to us. They promised to have the finances to keep us there and it made me think we were safer. We can't blame the former owners (most of whom weren't millionaires) from their lottery win, especially as there wasn't exactly a queue of potential buyers, and our 'luck' on the pitch was starting to run out.

Fast forward and the Yanks have failed to deliver. I sort of like them keeping the club financially safe, but I hated the fact that they failed to back a return to the PL in the first season after relegation. I hate the fact that they refuse to speculate to accumulate and I hate the fact that we're just a distant 'toy' for them. Unfortunately, selling (at a big loss) would close that chapter of their portfolio and all of their investors will see a very big minus return. Not selling hides that performance, to a large extent. I tried to introduce a potential buyer to them 12-18 months ago but they said "thanks, but no thanks". They don't want to invest and they don't want to sell.

Without major names to sell, it's going to get tighter and tighter. I think Russell Martin's potentially one of the best managers we've had for a long time (considering the situation) and would hate to see him walk away, because of a lack of the type of investment that the Yanks promised us when they arrived. They've cheated us all, unfortunately, but at least they haven't saddled us with tens of millions of debt or skimmed millions in fees. Crumbs of comfort, I know.......

 

[monmouth]

Martin himself said 'we need players OUT before we get players IN' and made specific reference to Fulton and Dhanda having deals on the table (as if easing their decisions to accept so he's got the funds to sign his chosen replacements). As it turns out neither Dhanda or Fulton left so there wree no outgoings to fund any incomings. Pato staying (and owners rejecting low offers shows IMO that the owners have some financial savvy!) means the Brighton player is no longer essential. I'm with the owners here. Martin may be upset about investment but the owners did exactly what they told him they'd do. I think Martin may well walk eventually, not now, but before he gets sacked for continued poor performances.

Oh, I’m sorry, but this is simply nonsense. Financial savvy? Lol.

We have three midfielders in our first team squad that do not want to be here and two of them the manager doesn’t want to play.

Take Dhanda, we are now going to pay him his full wage for him to not play for half a season before leaving for free. We could have had at least some of that wage paid for him to be elsewhere. That’s not financial savvy. That’s absolutely idiotic decision making. It smacks of ‘we know how to do business and he’s worth x’ as though it’s a piece of furniture.
Same with Fulton. We are now paying him full salary to play a bit part at best, and relying on him (when he doesn’t want to be here one would imagine given the absolute lack of faith shown in him from RM) when we could have had money back.

And Patterson. That will be interesting. Hopefully he comes back into the fold but it doesn’t seem hugely promising. He’s not going to be much interested now.

We also have one of the two top paid players in the club not in the first team and freeing up his wages could have meant some creativity being injected in to a team that is literally as painting by numbers as it gets.

Some of this is on the manager, there’s no need to select a system that hardly any lower league players can play without extensive coaching. And one that has no width, no pace and no creativity.

But some is on the owners, and whatever Silverstein is (ostensibly someone who has a loan of £5m in the club, no shares, no ownership, yet was over here we were told to ‘sort out the window’ snigger).

We don’t have bad players at all, but we have players not matched for the system we are playing. If we didn’t get the players to play it, then the only thing left to change is the system. So let’s hope we start seeing that. Tonight.

As an aside - when people ask what the sellers could possibly have done to help the club instead of them, well take a bit less themselves and insist the rest was put in to the club or fans owners maybe? Just a thought…

Perfect.

Oh, and “painting by numbers” so true, owners and manager.

 

[3swan]

...the next level - some very depressing reads around this morning

If only there had been due diligence done before the club was sold.

Old ground I know but this all comes back to the desire of many people to sell the club to the first people who stumped up the cash

And the sale was always for the good of the individuals and NOT the football club.

And the Brighton player was just the icing on the cake for the way that was handled - but absolutely no surprise

I'm probably going to regret this (the trolls will love it) but....here goes.

I don't blame the former owners for selling. We had the 3rd poorest ownership in the top 2 divisions. I know, because I sadly once spent a whole Sunday morning putting it only a spreadsheet. Sad, I know...but we were mid-table in the PL and there was only one way we would go, eventually. With all clubs like us in the PL, we are one massive managerial mistake away from relegation. That's what happened eventually but the previous owners sold to an American group who made many promises to them, and to us. They promised to have the finances to keep us there and it made me think we were safer. We can't blame the former owners (most of whom weren't millionaires) from their lottery win, especially as there wasn't exactly a queue of potential buyers, and our 'luck' on the pitch was starting to run out.

Fast forward and the Yanks have failed to deliver. I sort of like them keeping the club financially safe, but I hated the fact that they failed to back a return to the PL in the first season after relegation. I hate the fact that they refuse to speculate to accumulate and I hate the fact that we're just a distant 'toy' for them. Unfortunately, selling (at a big loss) would close that chapter of their portfolio and all of their investors will see a very big minus return. Not selling hides that performance, to a large extent. I tried to introduce a potential buyer to them 12-18 months ago but they said "thanks, but no thanks". They don't want to invest and they don't want to sell.

Without major names to sell, it's going to get tighter and tighter. I think Russell Martin's potentially one of the best managers we've had for a long time (considering the situation) and would hate to see him walk away, because of a lack of the type of investment that the Yanks promised us when they arrived. They've cheated us all, unfortunately, but at least they haven't saddled us with tens of millions of debt or skimmed millions in fees. Crumbs of comfort, I know.......

It's widely accepted that the sellers would sell their shares one day. The one issue you didn't mention in your post was the way it was conducted. You use the phrase cheated us sll, isn't that the case with the sale and still ongoing?

 

[moscowjack]

It's widely accepted that the sellers would sell their shares one day. The one issue you didn't mention in your post was the way it was conducted. You use the phrase cheated us sll, isn't that the case with the sale and still ongoing?

I agree, it was done very badly, but don't forget that the Trust said they would never sell. It still doesn't excuse the smoke and mirrors that went on though.

What annoys me more is the false promises from the Yanks and their stubbornness not to invest since they took over. We could have bounced back up after the relegation but they refused to speculate as teams like Fulham, Bournemouth, West Brom and Norwich usually do.

 

[3swan]

In any business excluding a 21% shareholder from negotiations is a bit more than handling it badly though. It's irrelevant whether the Trust would sell as they should have been kept in the loop. With the then recent history of Silver Shield, Mike Lewis, Petty, openness from the sellers and The Trust(the fans) should have been a given. The handing over of voting rights was the icing on the cake. Now we are left with owners where their intentions become more questionable by recent actions.

 

[crazedbison]

Martin himself said 'we need players OUT before we get players IN' and made specific reference to Fulton and Dhanda having deals on the table (as if easing their decisions to accept so he's got the funds to sign his chosen replacements). As it turns out neither Dhanda or Fulton left so there wree no outgoings to fund any incomings. Pato staying (and owners rejecting low offers shows IMO that the owners have some financial savvy!) means the Brighton player is no longer essential. I'm with the owners here. Martin may be upset about investment but the owners did exactly what they told him they'd do. I think Martin may well walk eventually, not now, but before he gets sacked for continued poor performances.

Oh, I’m sorry, but this is simply nonsense. Financial savvy? Lol.

We have three midfielders in our first team squad that do not want to be here and two of them the manager doesn’t want to play.

Take Dhanda, we are now going to pay him his full wage for him to not play for half a season before leaving for free. We could have had at least some of that wage paid for him to be elsewhere. That’s not financial savvy. That’s absolutely idiotic decision making. It smacks of ‘we know how to do business and he’s worth x’ as though it’s a piece of furniture.
Same with Fulton. We are now paying him full salary to play a bit part at best, and relying on him (when he doesn’t want to be here one would imagine given the absolute lack of faith shown in him from RM) when we could have had money back.

And Patterson. That will be interesting. Hopefully he comes back into the fold but it doesn’t seem hugely promising. He’s not going to be much interested now.

We also have one of the two top paid players in the club not in the first team and freeing up his wages could have meant some creativity being injected in to a team that is literally as painting by numbers as it gets.

Some of this is on the manager, there’s no need to select a system that hardly any lower league players can play without extensive coaching. And one that has no width, no pace and no creativity.

But some is on the owners, and whatever Silverstein is (ostensibly someone who has a loan of £5m in the club, no shares, no ownership, yet was over here we were told to ‘sort out the window’ snigger).

We don’t have bad players at all, but we have players not matched for the system we are playing. If we didn’t get the players to play it, then the only thing left to change is the system. So let’s hope we start seeing that. Tonight.

As an aside - when people ask what the sellers could possibly have done to help the club instead of them, well take a bit less themselves and insist the rest was put in to the club or fans owners maybe? Just a thought…

Very well said Lisa. I agree wholeheartedly with everything you’ve stated.

The one piece that really sticks with me is the Silverstein bit. Perhaps I’m a bit dense,but I don’t quite understand what the majority owners were trying to accomplish here.

I imagine the £5m convertible “loan” from the cable tv heir (who as I understand it has never had a real job other than “investing” his father’s money) was just a back door in to “buy” shares despite the legal issue with the trust still pending. This tells me the majority owners really really see the trust as a nuisance that they hope to see out of the way. But, I think they underestimate how much of a bad look their handling of this has been.

I’m essentially at the point where I’d truly embrace relegation if it meant that some of us (okay, probably more than just some) could lump some cash together and be rid of these 69%.

What’s 69% of a League One team worth these days anyways?

 

[PSumbler]

It's widely accepted that the sellers would sell their shares one day. The one issue you didn't mention in your post was the way it was conducted. You use the phrase cheated us sll, isn't that the case with the sale and still ongoing?

I agree, it was done very badly, but don't forget that the Trust said they would never sell. It still doesn't excuse the smoke and mirrors that went on though.

What annoys me more is the false promises from the Yanks and their stubbornness not to invest since they took over. We could have bounced back up after the relegation but they refused to speculate as teams like Fulham, Bournemouth, West Brom and Norwich usually do.

Just as a point of order and not detracting from your points but the Trust never said that

Indeed less than 18 hours after finally being told about the potential interest every shareholder received a communication from the Trust to say they could well be interested in selling

The narrative of us saying we'd never sell is a well trodden but incorrect line

As I said not to detract from your other points

 

[waynekerr55]

I agree, it was done very badly, but don't forget that the Trust said they would never sell. It still doesn't excuse the smoke and mirrors that went on though.

What annoys me more is the false promises from the Yanks and their stubbornness not to invest since they took over. We could have bounced back up after the relegation but they refused to speculate as teams like Fulham, Bournemouth, West Brom and Norwich usually do.

Just as a point of order and not detracting from your points but the Trust never said that

Indeed less than 18 hours after finally being told about the potential interest every shareholder received a communication from the Trust to say they could well be interested in selling

The narrative of us saying we'd never sell is a well trodden but incorrect line

As I said not to detract from your other points

Well this makes the AGM even more critical IMO. If the Trust has what's due to it there's scope for Blackpool (look at how they've bounced back). If it's dropped then no money for the Trust and probably still down the shîtter

 

[Longlostjack]

Just as a point of order and not detracting from your points but the Trust never said that

Indeed less than 18 hours after finally being told about the potential interest every shareholder received a communication from the Trust to say they could well be interested in selling

The narrative of us saying we'd never sell is a well trodden but incorrect line

As I said not to detract from your other points

Well this makes the AGM even more critical IMO. If the Trust has what's due to it there's scope for Blackpool (look at how they've bounced back). If it's dropped then no money for the Trust and probably still down the shîtter

Yes. Had the sellers only been up front with the Trust at that time instead of doing the dirty behind their back. Before any trolls jump on that statement - it’s based on the fact that legal insurance cover was secured. There must be a good case to answer.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

...the next level - some very depressing reads around this morning

If only there had been due diligence done before the club was sold.

Old ground I know but this all comes back to the desire of many people to sell the club to the first people who stumped up the cash

And the sale was always for the good of the individuals and NOT the football club.

And the Brighton player was just the icing on the cake for the way that was handled - but absolutely no surprise

I'm probably going to regret this (the trolls will love it) but....here goes.

I don't blame the former owners for selling. We had the 3rd poorest ownership in the top 2 divisions. I know, because I sadly once spent a whole Sunday morning putting it only a spreadsheet. Sad, I know...but we were mid-table in the PL and there was only one way we would go, eventually. With all clubs like us in the PL, we are one massive managerial mistake away from relegation. That's what happened eventually but the previous owners sold to an American group who made many promises to them, and to us. They promised to have the finances to keep us there and it made me think we were safer. We can't blame the former owners (most of whom weren't millionaires) from their lottery win, especially as there wasn't exactly a queue of potential buyers, and our 'luck' on the pitch was starting to run out.

Fast forward and the Yanks have failed to deliver. I sort of like them keeping the club financially safe, but I hated the fact that they failed to back a return to the PL in the first season after relegation. I hate the fact that they refuse to speculate to accumulate and I hate the fact that we're just a distant 'toy' for them. Unfortunately, selling (at a big loss) would close that chapter of their portfolio and all of their investors will see a very big minus return. Not selling hides that performance, to a large extent. I tried to introduce a potential buyer to them 12-18 months ago but they said "thanks, but no thanks". They don't want to invest and they don't want to sell.

Without major names to sell, it's going to get tighter and tighter. I think Russell Martin's potentially one of the best managers we've had for a long time (considering the situation) and would hate to see him walk away, because of a lack of the type of investment that the Yanks promised us when they arrived. They've cheated us all, unfortunately, but at least they haven't saddled us with tens of millions of debt or skimmed millions in fees. Crumbs of comfort, I know.......

From my perspective I don’t blame them for wanting to cash in. I do blame them for doing so at the expense of the club itself and their partners. Partners that had been instrumental in the creation of their opportunity to cash in in the first place. The fact that those partners represented the people of Swansea and, ironically, we’re a huge part of the ‘story’ that they dined off for many years makes it even more unforgivable.

If the Americans made promises it would have been easy to write those promises into the contract for sale. If that stopped the sale then they were never serious in which case pretending that the sellers cared about what happened after the cheques cleared is just fluff.
Much of your latter stuff I agree with.

 

[Darran]

...the next level - some very depressing reads around this morning

If only there had been due diligence done before the club was sold.

Old ground I know but this all comes back to the desire of many people to sell the club to the first people who stumped up the cash

And the sale was always for the good of the individuals and NOT the football club.

And the Brighton player was just the icing on the cake for the way that was handled - but absolutely no surprise

I'm probably going to regret this (the trolls will love it) but....here goes.

I don't blame the former owners for selling. We had the 3rd poorest ownership in the top 2 divisions. I know, because I sadly once spent a whole Sunday morning putting it only a spreadsheet. Sad, I know...but we were mid-table in the PL and there was only one way we would go, eventually. With all clubs like us in the PL, we are one massive managerial mistake away from relegation. That's what happened eventually but the previous owners sold to an American group who made many promises to them, and to us. They promised to have the finances to keep us there and it made me think we were safer. We can't blame the former owners (most of whom weren't millionaires) from their lottery win, especially as there wasn't exactly a queue of potential buyers, and our 'luck' on the pitch was starting to run out.

Fast forward and the Yanks have failed to deliver. I sort of like them keeping the club financially safe, but I hated the fact that they failed to back a return to the PL in the first season after relegation. I hate the fact that they refuse to speculate to accumulate and I hate the fact that we're just a distant 'toy' for them. Unfortunately, selling (at a big loss) would close that chapter of their portfolio and all of their investors will see a very big minus return. Not selling hides that performance, to a large extent. I tried to introduce a potential buyer to them 12-18 months ago but they said "thanks, but no thanks". They don't want to invest and they don't want to sell.

Without major names to sell, it's going to get tighter and tighter. I think Russell Martin's potentially one of the best managers we've had for a long time (considering the situation) and would hate to see him walk away, because of a lack of the type of investment that the Yanks promised us when they arrived. They've cheated us all, unfortunately, but at least they haven't saddled us with tens of millions of debt or skimmed millions in fees. Crumbs of comfort, I know.......

You don’t have to be a troll to say of course you don’t blame them seeing as your big chums with some of them.