Swansea Trust (Inspirational) Is Ours Influential enough (1 Viewer)

[Evo1883]

THE NEED FOR A STRONG TRUST (TAKEN FROM SWANSTRUST)

It can happen to anyone at anytime with little warning

When Leeds drew with Valencia in that European semi final 1st leg few would have envisaged that less than seven years later they would ply their trade in the 3rd tier of English football and start the season with a MINUS FIFTEEN POINT penalty.

And also remember that when you watched that match on TV you had never heard of Tony Petty. More evidence of how quickly things can turn.

This is proof if anyone needed it that the fortunes of a football club can change at any moment and a real reason to renew your membership of Swans Trust.

This is vital to ensure that fans can have a say in the following
• DAY TO DAY RUNNING OF THE CLUB
• POTENTIAL FUTURE SALES OF THE CLUB OR INVESTMENT INTO THE CLUB
• RAISING OF ISSUES OF CONCERN TO THE SUPPORTERS

Nobody likes to see a football club in trouble and nobody wants to see Swansea City go down the route we have been down before on too many occasions to be proud of.
But we came through it because of you - OUR FANS

SWANS TRUST
YOUR CLUB, YOUR FUTURE

 

---

[Nick]

Serious question, what sort of action did Swansea's fans take?

 

[fernandopartridge]

Ask the Swans Trust how much they pay in rent for the Liberty Stadium.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Ask the Swans Trust how much they pay in rent for the Liberty Stadium.

The rent issue is irrelevant. We all know that by now

 

[fernandopartridge]

The rent issue is irrelevant. We all know that by now

It's the starting point for this whole phase of the story isn't it. It will always be relevant although in fairness to ACL and SISU, the fact the club pays rent is nothing to do with either of them.

That said, I know there is a lot more to it than that but I am sure the Swansea Trust find life easier than a Sky Blues Trust would if it somehow gained ownership of a club with the rental agreement CCFC had.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

It's the starting point for this whole phase of the story isn't it. It will always be relevant although in fairness to ACL and SISU, the fact the club pays rent is nothing to do with either of them.

That said, I know there is a lot more to it than that but I am sure the Swansea Trust find life easier than a Sky Blues Trust would if it somehow gained ownership of a club with the rental agreement CCFC had.

The rental issue was the excuse the club needed to pick the fight, dear chap. Never mentioned - in SISU's tenure - until they made it the huge issue they did. When it was looking like it was solved, it was all about revenue. Although Fisher also admitted he'd never taken up ACL's offer to meet with the Compass JV to understand what could be done with these revenues.

I used to think SISU's advisors missed the rental issue during due diligence. Now, I don't. They saw it; they knew about it. But they ignored it, as it could be turned back on ACL and used as the key to open up what they really wanted all along

 

[fernandopartridge]

The rental issue was the excuse the club needed to pick the fight, dear chap. Never mentioned - in SISU's tenure - until they made it the huge issue they did. When it was looking like it was solved, it was all about revenue. Although Fisher also admitted he'd never taken up ACL's offer to meet with the Compass JV to understand what could be done with these revenues.

I used to think SISU's advisors missed the rental issue during due diligence. Now, I don't. They saw it; they knew about it. But they ignored it, as it could be turned back on ACL and used as the key to open up what they really wanted all along

I think the time immediately after the takeover would have been the best time for them to attempt what they have - ACL was less established then and probably more vulnerable to such an act - SISU also were flavour of the month for a time.

It would have been interesting to hear what the reaction would have been if SISU had attempted to distress ACL immediately after 'saving' CCFC from administration.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

I think the time immediately after the takeover would have been the best time for them to attempt what they have - ACL was less established then and probably more vulnerable to such an act - SISU also were flavour of the month for a time.

It would have been interesting to hear what the reaction would have been if SISU had attempted to distress ACL immediately after 'saving' CCFC from administration.

That, I would agree with. What's interesting about the timing of the rent dispute is that it coincided with two issues.

- Relegation - was that the factor?
- The point at which ACL's accounts showed it to be - at least theoretically - self-sufficient without football-related incomes

Whether ACL genuinely are self-sufficient without CCFC we'll never know and could argue all day. However, in getting their books signed off during the rent dispute, their auditor believed that were. However, they were certainly moving from a situation whereby they were non-viable without the club, to a phase when they may have been able without the club.

SISU acted at the latest time they could behave been susceptible to distressing. So, which influenced them the most? Maybe both.

However, their costly application for judicial review against CCC's £14m loan leads me to the conclusion they were certainly very interested in ACL's financial health. Or ill-health, depending upon whether you're inside the tent pissing out, or outside the tent pissing in, of course....