Got this e-mail from the Trust

CroJack

Data Analyst
Staff member
Members Update
Swans Trust Update - April 2019

Dear xxxxx

Welcome to your April update from the Swans Trust board. Communication with our members is something that is very important for the Trust board and we know this view is shared by our members. Therefore, we will aim to provide monthly email updates to our members on the various activities that have taken place during the last month.

Shareholding Update

It has been a couple of months since the Swans Trust’s AGM where, during his address, our Chairman Phil Sumbler outlined the timetable and actions to be taken within which the Trust will seek to resolve the long-standing legal issues regarding the Trust’s shareholding in the football club.

As communicated to our members a few weeks later, we were disappointed to announce that the proposed mediation, planned for the end of February, was not going to proceed.

This was for two reasons. Firstly, the legal representatives of the selling shareholders informed our legal representatives that he had been instructed not to provide a detailed response to the claim letter, demonstrating that his clients had no intention of complying with the Practice Direction. Mediation cannot sensibly take place without that response/defence and the Trust cannot commit to wasting the funds of our members whilst the selling shareholders concerned refuse to properly engage in the pre-action process.

Secondly, it became clear prior to the mediation dates that neither of the managing partners of the majority shareholders, Steve Kaplan or Jason Levien, were planning to attend the proposed February mediation dates either, despite the Trust having made it clear that the attendance of one of them was vital if the Trust was to commit to spending thousands of pounds on a mediation. Although alternative attendees were suggested, a mediation is much less likely to be productive while the managing partners of the club’s owners are not prepared to fully engage.

At the time of that announcement, the Trust noted the willingness that had been shown by the majority owners to at least engage in the process to try to seek a mediated settlement. It is therefore disappointing to confirm that no progress has been made in that regard. The Trust has communicated our willingness to proceed with further dialogue, however we have not received any response.

In terms of next steps, as previously outlined, the Trust had planned to proceed with the members consultation on all available options during March. Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, such as the changing circumstances, required legal activities taking longer than anticipated and the need to provide our members with information that is as comprehensive and accurate as we can, this has not been possible.
We apologise for any disappointment this causes to our members, however the Trust board is of the view that it is critical that we clarify all options for our members, where at all possible, prior to that consultation. The Trust board is still very much of the view that the members consultation will occur as soon as possible, and we will publish the timeline for this as soon as possible.

Football Club Update

Since our AGM, there have been some significant changes in the running of the football club. February saw the departure of Huw Jenkins from the role.

Huw deserves considerable credit for his part in the Swans’ rise to the Premier League and for that the Trust thanks him. However, we must also point out, once again, his involvement in the way the sale of the football club to its current owners was conducted, as well as the continuing negative impact of that sale. It is also important to remember Mr. Jenkins’s culpability for the disastrous transfer dealings of the past three seasons, which are the main reason the club is in its current position. For these reasons, change was inevitable and necessary.

Moving forward, it is accurate to say that the Trust has been keep informed by the club in terms of plans to find a replacement chairman, with the preferred candidate of the majority owners being Trevor Birch. As previously communicated, the Trust were informed that Mr. Birch was the majority owners’ preferred candidate in advance of his appointment and have met him both prior to, and after, his appointment. He brings wide experience and expertise to the role.
We are aware of the concerns raised by our members regarding the remit and targets he has been set by the majority owners, which ties in to the press reports regarding members of staff being notified of a consultation period regarding potential redundancies at the club. The Trust is acutely aware of the financial challenges which life in the Championship brings, but it is disappointing that jobs are at risk primarily due to the poor management of the football club in the past. However, we have been told that his focus is on stabilising the club rather than preparing the club for a sale. The Trust, through our supporter director, will be strongly representing the views of our members to the new chairman and the club board that any decisions made are taken with the best long-term interests of the football club at heart.

We should once again note that the Trust has previously communicated our concerns regarding some aspects of his remuneration package, which we have been informed contains an equity element. The details and conditions of this are unclear but, if true, would potentially dilute the Trust’s shareholding and further prejudice our position as a minority shareholder in the football club. The Trust raised our objections to the majority owners prior to the appointment but, to date, we have not received a response.
 

Behindthegoal

Key Player
If only the Trust had been preparing The Referendum, we would not have wasted 2 years of our lives. If they think most of the members are going to read their presentation when or if it is published they should think again.
 

ivoralljack

Grizzled Veteran
Staff member
Thanks, @CroJack got the same email and intended to post it here but lots of distractions this past week, so hadn't got round to it. I believe that Graham Potter and his lads are starting to flourish and I firmly believe they could go on to great things. It's why the Trust MUST now show some teeth to do what they can to ensure that they are given every chance to finish what has been started. To break up this team now to feed investors would be criminal in my view. Despite the trials and tribulations of recent times: despite the shackles and constraints which have been placed around Potter's neck, he has brought his excellent young team to the verge of doing something incredible - maybe not this season but certainly next season.

The Trust must fight tooth and nail, in the courts if necessary, to give them their chance.
 

Yankee_Jack

Key Player
Secondly, it became clear prior to the mediation dates that neither of the managing partners of the majority shareholders, Steve Kaplan or Jason Levien, were planning to attend the proposed February mediation dates either, despite the Trust having made it clear that the attendance of one of them was vital if the Trust was to commit to spending thousands of pounds on a mediation.
I fail to see why the current owners are required to be part of the mediation. Unless they have dirty hands or are somehow strong arming the Trust not to pursue action against the selling shareholders, and the Trust can clearly prove that they have, then they are not a subject of the dispute. IMO, they have no business being a part of it.

From everything I have seen / read, the selling shareholders as a collective and specific individuals in that group engaged in conduct that compromised the governance of the Club, violated shareholder agreements in force, and thereby damaged the Trust financially, its ownership position in the Club, and its capability to deliver on its mission. If the new shareholders were part of a conspiracy with the old shareholders then that's a different matter.

The Trust has a duty to itself and its members, and for that matter to other trusts in the country, not to tolerate the interference in its mission nor its finances by any third party. As such it must take action to remedy this situation and make itself whole.
 

Yankee_Jack

Key Player
A glaring omission from their statement, is what the Trust intends to do from this point forward. Mediation has not been possible. Now what? HELLO?
 

CroJack

Data Analyst
Staff member
A glaring omission from their statement, is what the Trust intends to do from this point forward. Mediation has not been possible. Now what? HELLO?
'The Trust board is still very much of the view that the members consultation will occur as soon as possible, and we will publish the timeline for this as soon as possible.'

As soon as possible is not good enough.
 

Yankee_Jack

Key Player
'The Trust board is still very much of the view that the members consultation will occur as soon as possible, and we will publish the timeline for this as soon as possible.'

As soon as possible is not good enough.
Exactly

They couldn't work any slower if they were unionized and working to rule. If they or their legal counsel don't have a set of contingencies on-hand then what have they been planning over the last 12 months.
 

CroJack

Data Analyst
Staff member
Exactly

They couldn't work any slower if they were unionized and working to rule. If they or their legal counsel don't have a set of contingencies on-hand then what have they been planning over the last 12 months.
What do you think it's the reason they are so slow? Incompetence or something else?
 

CroJack

Data Analyst
Staff member
I fail to see why the current owners are required to be part of the mediation. Unless they have dirty hands or are somehow strong arming the Trust...
Probably both.

In my opinion, they colluded during the takeover. They could've included the Trust in the takeover negotiations had they wanted to do that. They haven't. The club was valued £100m at the time of the takeover, they payed £68m to take the full control over the club and now can issue new shares and dillute the Trust's ones. £68m for a Premier League club is nothing. Even for a well run Championship club it's nothing in today's market.
 
Last edited:

Yankee_Jack

Key Player
What do you think it's the reason they are so slow? Incompetence or something else?
Incompetence would be the easy conclusion. But that would be a mistake as it would paper over the fact that we don't understand their agenda.

The subject must always be considered to be a rational actor. If the subject appears to be acting contrary to expectation then the observer doesn't understand the subject's agenda. The correct approach is then to reconsider the framework / context within which the subject is being observed and analyzed.

A rational actor always has an agenda. It is either their agenda and they are the actor. Or, it's the agenda of another party and they are more of an agent, willfully or unwittingly but an agent.

There may be multiple agendas in play. There may be complexities and ambiguities that are not known to us. Trust principals may be agents of another party and maybe conflicted; Legal counsel may be giving weak advice ... Or they are simply unsophisticated and incompetence is not being resolved by smarter legal counsel.

Bottom line for me: I think multiple agendas are in play. There are too many inconsistencies. I'm going to avoid the easy out ... At this point.
 
Top Bottom