| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here 19:22 - Dec 29 with 30613 views | Darran |
Are you aware of the intricate details of what Birch said about the academy today (below) and were aware of what he was going to say about the academy in today’s matchday programme?
A lot has been mentioned on forums and social media about the future direction of our Academy. As I have stated previously, we continue to keep all aspects of our operations, not just the Academy, under review as we adapt to the restrictive financial life outside the Premier League. Once we have the transfer window out of the way I will provide supporters with a further update.
My aim is to remain open, honest and regular in my communications to supporters, whether it’s good or not so good news. But we need to get through January and complete ongoing reviews first, before I can properly update you. So please bear with me a little longer. |  |
| |  |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:29 - Dec 30 with 1643 views | Darran |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:26 - Dec 30 by londonlisa2001 |
The last time it was challenged the club refused to give the information. Without, in my opinion, damaging conditions attached,
Not sure it’s been challenged recently. Not to my knowledge anyway. |
It must have been challenged mun there’s Trust Board members hanging around with him every match day. | |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:31 - Dec 30 with 1636 views | exiledclaseboy |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:26 - Dec 30 by londonlisa2001 |
The last time it was challenged the club refused to give the information. Without, in my opinion, damaging conditions attached,
Not sure it’s been challenged recently. Not to my knowledge anyway. |
The last time was when they asked those who would have access to sign a restrictive NDA that would, in effect, have meant that those board members (and affiliates) with access to the information would have been unable to share that information with anyone else on the Trust board or even confirm that they were satisfied with what they’d seen. There was even a clause in there stopping those who had access to the information confirming that they’d had access to the information. It was frankly ridiculous. |  |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:33 - Dec 30 with 1631 views | waynekerr55 |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:31 - Dec 30 by exiledclaseboy |
The last time was when they asked those who would have access to sign a restrictive NDA that would, in effect, have meant that those board members (and affiliates) with access to the information would have been unable to share that information with anyone else on the Trust board or even confirm that they were satisfied with what they’d seen. There was even a clause in there stopping those who had access to the information confirming that they’d had access to the information. It was frankly ridiculous. |
And yet there are still people willing to blame the Trust. Fúck a duck. |  |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:36 - Dec 30 with 1617 views | longlostjack |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:06 - Dec 30 by londonlisa2001 |
During the summer of reorganisation the Trust asked a number of detailed questions that weren’t answered. In addition, the management accounts were not supplied for some time.
The management accounts are now supplied.
They are relatively detailed, but insufficient. They answer a lot of the ‘what’ but none of the ‘why’.
Just my opinion. |
Just to make it absolutely clear of the importance between the what and why - do you mean what the money has/will be spent on is clear but not why it has been spent ? If, for example, there are fees related to the acquisition of the lease for the Liberty stadium booked but no detail is given as to what these fees are actually for ? |  |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:37 - Dec 30 with 1609 views | londonlisa2001 |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:31 - Dec 30 by exiledclaseboy |
The last time was when they asked those who would have access to sign a restrictive NDA that would, in effect, have meant that those board members (and affiliates) with access to the information would have been unable to share that information with anyone else on the Trust board or even confirm that they were satisfied with what they’d seen. There was even a clause in there stopping those who had access to the information confirming that they’d had access to the information. It was frankly ridiculous. |
Indeed. |  | | |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:43 - Dec 30 with 1587 views | jack247 |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:31 - Dec 30 by exiledclaseboy |
The last time was when they asked those who would have access to sign a restrictive NDA that would, in effect, have meant that those board members (and affiliates) with access to the information would have been unable to share that information with anyone else on the Trust board or even confirm that they were satisfied with what they’d seen. There was even a clause in there stopping those who had access to the information confirming that they’d had access to the information. It was frankly ridiculous. |
Excuse my ignorance, but why does a 21% shareholder have to sign an NDA or have any conditions imposed to see the accounts? | | | |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:45 - Dec 30 with 1570 views | exiledclaseboy |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:43 - Dec 30 by jack247 |
Excuse my ignorance, but why does a 21% shareholder have to sign an NDA or have any conditions imposed to see the accounts? |
That’s what we said. Were you there?  | |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:46 - Dec 30 with 1565 views | waynekerr55 |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:43 - Dec 30 by jack247 |
Excuse my ignorance, but why does a 21% shareholder have to sign an NDA or have any conditions imposed to see the accounts? |
Because the "fans" signed over the voting rights in their shares which gives the owners over 75% voting rights and as such nigh on total control of the club.
All done in the club's best interests, of course... | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:51 - Dec 30 with 1549 views | vetchonian |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:46 - Dec 30 by waynekerr55 |
Because the "fans" signed over the voting rights in their shares which gives the owners over 75% voting rights and as such nigh on total control of the club.
All done in the club's best interests, of course... |
And there are still some who defend those "fans" for their actions | |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:57 - Dec 30 with 1522 views | NeathJack |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:31 - Dec 30 by exiledclaseboy |
The last time was when they asked those who would have access to sign a restrictive NDA that would, in effect, have meant that those board members (and affiliates) with access to the information would have been unable to share that information with anyone else on the Trust board or even confirm that they were satisfied with what they’d seen. There was even a clause in there stopping those who had access to the information confirming that they’d had access to the information. It was frankly ridiculous. |
Sounds like exactly the sort of thing that people with nothing to hide would demand. Nothing to see here... |  | | |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 22:03 - Dec 30 with 1497 views | londonlisa2001 |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:36 - Dec 30 by longlostjack |
Just to make it absolutely clear of the importance between the what and why - do you mean what the money has/will be spent on is clear but not why it has been spent ? If, for example, there are fees related to the acquisition of the lease for the Liberty stadium booked but no detail is given as to what these fees are actually for ? |
I’ll give you an example.
In the published accounts for the year ended July 2018, the club reported an impairment of close to £15m on players. That’s the ‘what’.
The detail of exactly how that number is made up (players, contracts, offers, valuation, loan fees etc etc) is the ‘why’. That’s what’s lacking in my view. I’m sure it’s available, just not to the Trust as far as I have seen. That’s the info that allows you to make a judgement rather than just say ‘ok’. | | | |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 22:09 - Dec 30 with 1470 views | thornabyswan |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:31 - Dec 30 by exiledclaseboy |
The last time was when they asked those who would have access to sign a restrictive NDA that would, in effect, have meant that those board members (and affiliates) with access to the information would have been unable to share that information with anyone else on the Trust board or even confirm that they were satisfied with what they’d seen. There was even a clause in there stopping those who had access to the information confirming that they’d had access to the information. It was frankly ridiculous. |
So why do trust board members lord it up in the box then needs to stop in my opinion. [Post edited 30 Dec 2019 22:15]
| |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 22:14 - Dec 30 with 1443 views | Swanjaxs |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 22:09 - Dec 30 by thornabyswan |
So why do trust board members lord it up in the box then needs to stop in my opinion. [Post edited 30 Dec 2019 22:15]
|
Bang on mate!!!
Lay down with dogs and you end up getting fleas!
The trust should grow some bolloxs and tell the Americans where they can shove their privileged seats after the way they treated the trust with contempt.
Message to the Trust...
Them or us? |  |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 22:17 - Dec 30 with 1427 views | SwanDownUnder |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 21:31 - Dec 30 by exiledclaseboy |
The last time was when they asked those who would have access to sign a restrictive NDA that would, in effect, have meant that those board members (and affiliates) with access to the information would have been unable to share that information with anyone else on the Trust board or even confirm that they were satisfied with what they’d seen. There was even a clause in there stopping those who had access to the information confirming that they’d had access to the information. It was frankly ridiculous. |
Ive been mis-informed, thought Stuart had seen them, sorry | | | |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 22:20 - Dec 30 with 1397 views | longlostjack |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 22:03 - Dec 30 by londonlisa2001 |
I’ll give you an example.
In the published accounts for the year ended July 2018, the club reported an impairment of close to £15m on players. That’s the ‘what’.
The detail of exactly how that number is made up (players, contracts, offers, valuation, loan fees etc etc) is the ‘why’. That’s what’s lacking in my view. I’m sure it’s available, just not to the Trust as far as I have seen. That’s the info that allows you to make a judgement rather than just say ‘ok’. |
Thanks. | |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 07:31 - Dec 31 with 1269 views | Cooperman |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 13:54 - Dec 30 by Uxbridge |
A few times, yes. Mainly if there's been a reason to, which there has usually been. The likes of our SD and AD have more reason than me to be there though, given their respective roles and activities. |
Reasons such as? |  |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 07:56 - Dec 31 with 1257 views | swancity |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 07:31 - Dec 31 by Cooperman |
Reasons such as? |
There aren’t any.
The same mistakes continue to be made with Trust people still trying to (unsuccessfully) justify it. | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 08:53 - Dec 31 with 1213 views | Cooperman |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 07:56 - Dec 31 by swancity |
There aren’t any.
The same mistakes continue to be made with Trust people still trying to (unsuccessfully) justify it. |
We’ll see. I’ve now asked twice. | |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 09:51 - Dec 31 with 1166 views | swancity |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 08:53 - Dec 31 by Cooperman |
We’ll see. I’ve now asked twice. |
Dont hold your breath | |
| Only an idiot would eat a turkey curry on Christmas day |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 09:51 - Dec 31 with 1166 views | Joe_bradshaw |
If people don’t like what’s going on with the Trust the answer is in their own hands. The Trust is a democratic organisation and people can be voted out. Of course, you have to be a member to take part in the democratic process.
I am not saying that Trust officials shouldn’t be criticised, of course they should when appropriate and if that criticism is justified it should lead to the obvious solution at the next Trust election. |  |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 09:54 - Dec 31 with 1162 views | Phil_S |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 08:53 - Dec 31 by Cooperman |
We’ll see. I’ve now asked twice. |
Having been there personally 3 times in the 18 months since I was re-elected, I have seen a small benefit. The first time was to have a discussion with a representative of the American contingent. The second was the first chance to speak and meet with Trevor Birch and the third was a follow up to that conversation. (the opportunity to outline the stance of the Trust particularly in the balance between local relationships and ownership disputes)
I wont speak on detail on behalf of Andy but I know he has used it as the opportunity to raise concerns/issues on subjects such as Swans TV and also to discuss some items with the finance director - largely queries that he has had which can arise from the monthly management accounts that he sees.
Cath I know has pushed forward the growth and awareness of the DSA and things like the sensory room through her presence (not just in Swansea but gaining understandings of what other clubs do in this area)
And for Stuart, I maintain as a director of the football club he has the absolute right to be there every game given he is one of only two directors who tend to watch us now on a regular basis (the other being the Chairman)
From my perspective its always been a duty to attend (hence why I have only ever done it when I feel there has been a necessity) and - as stated elsewhere - I personally would not have us attending but that ia not the majority view of the Trust board (none of whom for my knowledge this season have attended) which is that the four key officers of the board (Chair, Vice Chair, SD and AD) should attend when it is appropriate to do so. This is also pretty much in line with the legal view as well
And despite that view - we need to remember that until the outcome of a legal case may dictate otherwise we still own more than 1/5th of the football club and have a director (and an associate director) on the board of the football club. We certainly have more right to be there than many of the regular attendees (despite my view on attendance)
And finally thats me out and away from here now until sometime tomorrow evening so wishing everyone on here a Happy New Year, 2020 will bring some interesting things no doubt including changes for everyone - embracing them is always key. Happy New Year Jacks
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 10:00 - Dec 31 with 1148 views | NotLoyal |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 09:54 - Dec 31 by Phil_S |
Having been there personally 3 times in the 18 months since I was re-elected, I have seen a small benefit. The first time was to have a discussion with a representative of the American contingent. The second was the first chance to speak and meet with Trevor Birch and the third was a follow up to that conversation. (the opportunity to outline the stance of the Trust particularly in the balance between local relationships and ownership disputes)
I wont speak on detail on behalf of Andy but I know he has used it as the opportunity to raise concerns/issues on subjects such as Swans TV and also to discuss some items with the finance director - largely queries that he has had which can arise from the monthly management accounts that he sees.
Cath I know has pushed forward the growth and awareness of the DSA and things like the sensory room through her presence (not just in Swansea but gaining understandings of what other clubs do in this area)
And for Stuart, I maintain as a director of the football club he has the absolute right to be there every game given he is one of only two directors who tend to watch us now on a regular basis (the other being the Chairman)
From my perspective its always been a duty to attend (hence why I have only ever done it when I feel there has been a necessity) and - as stated elsewhere - I personally would not have us attending but that ia not the majority view of the Trust board (none of whom for my knowledge this season have attended) which is that the four key officers of the board (Chair, Vice Chair, SD and AD) should attend when it is appropriate to do so. This is also pretty much in line with the legal view as well
And despite that view - we need to remember that until the outcome of a legal case may dictate otherwise we still own more than 1/5th of the football club and have a director (and an associate director) on the board of the football club. We certainly have more right to be there than many of the regular attendees (despite my view on attendance)
And finally thats me out and away from here now until sometime tomorrow evening so wishing everyone on here a Happy New Year, 2020 will bring some interesting things no doubt including changes for everyone - embracing them is always key. Happy New Year Jacks
This post has been edited by an administrator |
It’s the legal action which is main issue Phil, and lack of what seems like any ...
Action. The latest stating the lawyer is ill is feels like an excuse rather than a slight inconvenience. |  |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 10:06 - Dec 31 with 1138 views | Uxbridge |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 08:53 - Dec 31 by Cooperman |
We’ll see. I’ve now asked twice. |
Not as if I said to Monny I was going to be offline yesterday . And it's not as if this has been done to death before. Anyway, one final go, which is mainly just my view.
There's a couple of things I couldn't talk about, for obvious reasons, but I'll talk about the things I can. Access is relatively limited these days, has been for some time and limited to "officers", either to those who are the direct links between the Club and Trust on day to day stuff (which is primarily the SD and AD) and then maintaining links between Club and Trust leadership (which is more Chair/VC stuff).
I know from speaking to Stu, while he does have weekly meetings with the senior managers down the stadium, matchday is the one time he knows he can guarantee people will be there so is able to ask the questions we need asking. It's a small example but a couple of days ago at the Pod I was asked what's happening with the Bowling Night. I knew Stu was there, so he asked Birch or someone else, and a plan was put in place for its announcement. It's a small example but it shows how that access can, and has, be used at other times for more important things. Cath has been doing a lot of work with the club on the new Sensory room and other initiatives, as I'm sure regular readers of the matchday programme and the articles on the website will know, and I know her access has proved useful particularly with her DSA hat on for fundraising, addressing members concerns around access and the like.
From a broader Trust/Club perspective, which is probably where Phil or I would come in, the benefits are probably somewhat softer or less quantifiable. Putting the legal case aside, which may well terminate things anyway, the majority view has long been that it's important that we, if possible, develop a good relationship between the club and the Trust's respective leaderships to try, as much as possible, to work together where it's in both our interests.
I'm sure it's common knowledge that relations were pretty strained, to say the least, with the previous administration. When the changes were made, not even a year ago now, we're starting from a zero base. Mistrust was rife, and probably on both sides, but some of the same people were still involved. The Trust had stuck the boot into the club quite publicly on many occasions. That creates a certain bunker mentality, probably on both sides if I'm being honest, and that's blown up a few times, mainly due to the fact that there hasn't been the proper processes in place to nip it in the bud. I'll give an example, and may well get in trouble for doing so but hey ho. The club wanted to make a public statement on something and wanted the Trust to join in. The Trust didn't think it was a particularly good idea, mainly in the way it was proposed rather than the principle (which was admirable), so declined. Rather than discuss it at the start, the issue festered and escalated and blew up. It's resolved now but took some time to do so, whereas if the process had been in place to have a conversation at the start it would ever have been an issue in the first place and ended with a far better result.
There'll probably be some asking "Well, can't Stu do that" but, no, not really. It's too much for one person, and anyway the SD needs to focus on their fiduciary duties rather than taking on everything else. He can't take on all other aspects of the Trust, of which there are many.
My other half is a very wise person and she often says to me, Business is People. If we want the Trust to have influence at the Club, then it needs to be visible, speak to people, it needs to have the discussions with the people at the club making decisions. On a matchday, most if not all of the senior leadership of the club are there. If the Trust isn't there, then that won't happen. Sometimes for entirely cynical reasons, as we've seen in the past, but sometimes because simply we're not there and people listen to the people that are there, it's human nature.
As and when the legal button is pushed, that may well change things anyway. The overlords from on high may wake up and tell Birch et all to cut ties. They may decide to do so themselves. I don't know the answer to that. However, while we have access to those making the decisions on the ground, I believe we should use that and state our views. Take Birch's recent programme comments on the Academy and other things. One of the things we will want to know is what the plans are there, and why certain decisions are being taken. By being in the room we will be in position to ask those questions. The question will be whether we'll have sufficient information being provided (like we very much did not last year under the previous administration on the ground) and whether we agree with the decisions being made. Whatever happens, we'll let the members and fans know our thoughts in that regard.
There'll be some that virulently disagree with what I've written there, but there we go. Other views are available. It's a shame we even have to have these conversations, and I hold the former shareholders in complete contempt for that. They broke this. |  |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 10:08 - Dec 31 with 1134 views | Uxbridge |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 09:54 - Dec 31 by Phil_S |
Having been there personally 3 times in the 18 months since I was re-elected, I have seen a small benefit. The first time was to have a discussion with a representative of the American contingent. The second was the first chance to speak and meet with Trevor Birch and the third was a follow up to that conversation. (the opportunity to outline the stance of the Trust particularly in the balance between local relationships and ownership disputes)
I wont speak on detail on behalf of Andy but I know he has used it as the opportunity to raise concerns/issues on subjects such as Swans TV and also to discuss some items with the finance director - largely queries that he has had which can arise from the monthly management accounts that he sees.
Cath I know has pushed forward the growth and awareness of the DSA and things like the sensory room through her presence (not just in Swansea but gaining understandings of what other clubs do in this area)
And for Stuart, I maintain as a director of the football club he has the absolute right to be there every game given he is one of only two directors who tend to watch us now on a regular basis (the other being the Chairman)
From my perspective its always been a duty to attend (hence why I have only ever done it when I feel there has been a necessity) and - as stated elsewhere - I personally would not have us attending but that ia not the majority view of the Trust board (none of whom for my knowledge this season have attended) which is that the four key officers of the board (Chair, Vice Chair, SD and AD) should attend when it is appropriate to do so. This is also pretty much in line with the legal view as well
And despite that view - we need to remember that until the outcome of a legal case may dictate otherwise we still own more than 1/5th of the football club and have a director (and an associate director) on the board of the football club. We certainly have more right to be there than many of the regular attendees (despite my view on attendance)
And finally thats me out and away from here now until sometime tomorrow evening so wishing everyone on here a Happy New Year, 2020 will bring some interesting things no doubt including changes for everyone - embracing them is always key. Happy New Year Jacks
This post has been edited by an administrator |
We probably need some feature on this board when we can see when other people are typing Sort it out ... | |
| |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 10:08 - Dec 31 with 1132 views | Phil_S |
| FAO Supporters Trust Board Members that post on here on 10:00 - Dec 31 by NotLoyal |
It’s the legal action which is main issue Phil, and lack of what seems like any ...
Action. The latest stating the lawyer is ill is feels like an excuse rather than a slight inconvenience. |
As I stated in one of the threads (may have been this one) to say the lawyer is ill is the reason for delays is just not true. It has slowed us down slightly more than we planned but only last Monday (23rd) I attended a call with two reps from the legal firm, our legal affiliate and another member of the board to get the latest from QC in terms of what more is needed.
As soon as this break is over then there is a further trawl through people's memories, emails, documents, statements and exchanges etc to answer the latest set of QC questions which can then be provided back to them.
There has been no statement stating any delay has been down to a lawyers illness just something passed on at the pod which unfortunately is incorrect.
If I was to estimate we may be a week or two further back as a result but cant see it being more than that
The problem is people assumed straight after consultation (despite us detailing that it wasnt the case) we would be in a court room almost overnight when the reality is that was way off, this was just our mandate to pursue that route as the only avenue available | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
