Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale 12:25 - Dec 22 with 15022 viewsMattG

5
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 12:30 - Dec 22 with 7574 viewsbonymine

Excellent post again the momentum and public awareness is growing day by day.

Poll: Why is this site so quiet these days ?

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 13:11 - Dec 22 with 7487 viewsWhiterockin

I would now like all the details to be made public and a fresh vote to take place. I voted for the sale, so it is not the case of a member being outvoted seeking a fresh vote.
1
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 13:45 - Dec 22 with 7430 viewsBobby_Fischer

Yes yes!

Poll: Who should take over from Jenkins?

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 14:46 - Dec 22 with 7334 viewsYossarian

Excellent. I would also like the SCSA to campaign to persuade the Council not to go ahead with the sale of the Liberty Stadium leas3 to these Corporate monsters. It might help to persuade them that they should look to plunder and asset strip elsewhere

"Yossarian- the very sight of the name made him shudder.There were so many esses in it. It just had to be subversive" (Catch 22)

1
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 15:06 - Dec 22 with 7305 viewsKilkennyjack

Great idea.

Always good to have a second vote.
Thats democracy.

Feck the will of the people. Things change.

Beware of the Risen People

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 15:20 - Dec 22 with 7275 viewsOldjack

Don't wag the head with tail remember ,it's a non starter according to some of the hierarchy within the Trust ,the untouchables some call them

Prosser the Tosser dwells on Phil's bum hole like a rusty old hemorrhoid ,fact You Greedy Bastards Get Out Of OUR Club!

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 15:56 - Dec 22 with 7187 viewsVetchfielder

If I had been asked beforehand as to which way the Trust were going to go with this, I would have guessed that they would have opted for a second vote.

To me, it would have been easier and less risky for the Trust Board to state that some members feel the landscape had changed a little and we are going to put it back to the members for another vote. Then whatever result a second vote came up with, they could always claim justifiably that they had been completely democratic throughout the whole process.

In that second vote, the people who voted for the deal could still do so if they were still happy with it. The people who have changed their minds as a result of recent events could then join the others in voting against the deal.

By rejecting the call for 2nd vote, I think they are opening themselves up for a degree of criticism - a level of criticism greater than if they'd gone for a 2nd vote. Indeed, this thread is all about that - the SCSA stepping up and calling on the Trust to change their minds. It just feels to me that they've opted for an approach that is likely to give them more conflict and hassle.

Proud to have been one of the 231

4
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 16:27 - Dec 22 with 7110 viewsWhiterockin

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 15:56 - Dec 22 by Vetchfielder

If I had been asked beforehand as to which way the Trust were going to go with this, I would have guessed that they would have opted for a second vote.

To me, it would have been easier and less risky for the Trust Board to state that some members feel the landscape had changed a little and we are going to put it back to the members for another vote. Then whatever result a second vote came up with, they could always claim justifiably that they had been completely democratic throughout the whole process.

In that second vote, the people who voted for the deal could still do so if they were still happy with it. The people who have changed their minds as a result of recent events could then join the others in voting against the deal.

By rejecting the call for 2nd vote, I think they are opening themselves up for a degree of criticism - a level of criticism greater than if they'd gone for a 2nd vote. Indeed, this thread is all about that - the SCSA stepping up and calling on the Trust to change their minds. It just feels to me that they've opted for an approach that is likely to give them more conflict and hassle.


Spot on.

How can the trust claim to represent us if it doesn't do what the majority of members now want them to do.
[Post edited 22 Dec 2017 16:28]
0
Login to get fewer ads

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 16:37 - Dec 22 with 7076 viewsmonmouth

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 16:27 - Dec 22 by Whiterockin

Spot on.

How can the trust claim to represent us if it doesn't do what the majority of members now want them to do.
[Post edited 22 Dec 2017 16:28]


The majority didn't even vote did they?

I agree though. They will face some searching personal questions without a second vote - without the recommendation and arm twisting spin - that will turn their lives upside down when they are laughed at by the YeeHah's, and the drag rights are enforced for pennies after they've signed away the only barfgaining chip they have for less than a quarter of the actual value of the shares.

I think it would still go through, much as I would personally prefer it didn't. I guess it depends muchly on whatever Lisa, Andrew and Dai turn up.

Poll: TRUST MEMBERS: What DID you vote in the, um, vote

1
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 16:46 - Dec 22 with 7050 viewsWhiterockin

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 16:37 - Dec 22 by monmouth

The majority didn't even vote did they?

I agree though. They will face some searching personal questions without a second vote - without the recommendation and arm twisting spin - that will turn their lives upside down when they are laughed at by the YeeHah's, and the drag rights are enforced for pennies after they've signed away the only barfgaining chip they have for less than a quarter of the actual value of the shares.

I think it would still go through, much as I would personally prefer it didn't. I guess it depends muchly on whatever Lisa, Andrew and Dai turn up.


Speaking to the trust members that I know, who voted for the sale originally, ALL now feel a second vote is required with the facts put forward. These are all trust members, who did vote and voted for the sale.
1
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 16:54 - Dec 22 with 7020 viewsJACKMANANDBOY

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 16:46 - Dec 22 by Whiterockin

Speaking to the trust members that I know, who voted for the sale originally, ALL now feel a second vote is required with the facts put forward. These are all trust members, who did vote and voted for the sale.


Yes. Details have varied so a new vote is justified.

Besian Idrizaj Forever a Jack
Poll: When will Duff Revert to 4 at the Back

1
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:03 - Dec 22 with 6996 viewsmax936

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 14:46 - Dec 22 by Yossarian

Excellent. I would also like the SCSA to campaign to persuade the Council not to go ahead with the sale of the Liberty Stadium leas3 to these Corporate monsters. It might help to persuade them that they should look to plunder and asset strip elsewhere


Unfortunately its to late for that one, that deal has been completed.

Poll: Will it Snow this coming Winter

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:06 - Dec 22 with 6981 viewsAguycalledJack

Surely if the dynamics of the proposed sale (as previously voted on) have changed then there has to be a second vote.
0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:18 - Dec 22 with 6953 viewsexiledclaseboy

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 16:37 - Dec 22 by monmouth

The majority didn't even vote did they?

I agree though. They will face some searching personal questions without a second vote - without the recommendation and arm twisting spin - that will turn their lives upside down when they are laughed at by the YeeHah's, and the drag rights are enforced for pennies after they've signed away the only barfgaining chip they have for less than a quarter of the actual value of the shares.

I think it would still go through, much as I would personally prefer it didn't. I guess it depends muchly on whatever Lisa, Andrew and Dai turn up.


To be honest, I'm in a favour of a second vote anyway because the mood of the fanbase seems to have shifted significantly in recent weeks. But the findings of the people you've named will be crucial in deciding whether that eventually happens.
[Post edited 22 Dec 2017 17:28]

Poll: Tory leader

1
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:31 - Dec 22 with 6879 viewslonglostjack

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:18 - Dec 22 by exiledclaseboy

To be honest, I'm in a favour of a second vote anyway because the mood of the fanbase seems to have shifted significantly in recent weeks. But the findings of the people you've named will be crucial in deciding whether that eventually happens.
[Post edited 22 Dec 2017 17:28]


It would be good if Lisa could get a copy of the current management accounts too. I'm no lawyer but surely a shareholder with a 21% stake has access to those?
[Post edited 22 Dec 2017 17:32]

Poll: Alcohol in the lockdown

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:32 - Dec 22 with 6870 viewsVetchfielder

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:18 - Dec 22 by exiledclaseboy

To be honest, I'm in a favour of a second vote anyway because the mood of the fanbase seems to have shifted significantly in recent weeks. But the findings of the people you've named will be crucial in deciding whether that eventually happens.
[Post edited 22 Dec 2017 17:28]


Are you aware of the current number of members that have made a request for a second vote?

Proud to have been one of the 231

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:33 - Dec 22 with 6869 viewsmonmouth

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:18 - Dec 22 by exiledclaseboy

To be honest, I'm in a favour of a second vote anyway because the mood of the fanbase seems to have shifted significantly in recent weeks. But the findings of the people you've named will be crucial in deciding whether that eventually happens.
[Post edited 22 Dec 2017 17:28]


The virtual certainty of relegation rather than a possibility changes the ‘expected’ payment values anyway doesn’t it? I can’t remember the figures because I was so disgusted by the deal. But that in itself could be seen as a material change because it has been caused by the actions of the Yanks and their hapless employee training ground expert failed roofer, the very people the deal insists we can trust.

Poll: TRUST MEMBERS: What DID you vote in the, um, vote

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:35 - Dec 22 with 6859 viewsexiledclaseboy

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:32 - Dec 22 by Vetchfielder

Are you aware of the current number of members that have made a request for a second vote?


I'm not, no.

Poll: Tory leader

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:36 - Dec 22 with 6850 viewsMattG

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:33 - Dec 22 by monmouth

The virtual certainty of relegation rather than a possibility changes the ‘expected’ payment values anyway doesn’t it? I can’t remember the figures because I was so disgusted by the deal. But that in itself could be seen as a material change because it has been caused by the actions of the Yanks and their hapless employee training ground expert failed roofer, the very people the deal insists we can trust.


The price for the initial 5% was fixed at the same level as the original sale - circa £5.2m for 5%.

The only thing that changes with relegation is the obligation on the Yanks / Jenkins to purchase an additional 0.5% per year which only applies when we are in the PL.
0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:39 - Dec 22 with 6841 viewsmonmouth

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:36 - Dec 22 by MattG

The price for the initial 5% was fixed at the same level as the original sale - circa £5.2m for 5%.

The only thing that changes with relegation is the obligation on the Yanks / Jenkins to purchase an additional 0.5% per year which only applies when we are in the PL.


Thanks Matt

Poll: TRUST MEMBERS: What DID you vote in the, um, vote

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:52 - Dec 22 with 6789 viewsVetchfielder

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:36 - Dec 22 by MattG

The price for the initial 5% was fixed at the same level as the original sale - circa £5.2m for 5%.

The only thing that changes with relegation is the obligation on the Yanks / Jenkins to purchase an additional 0.5% per year which only applies when we are in the PL.


And also, if we are relegated, that the Americans are unlikely to want to take up the option of the further 3% ?

Proud to have been one of the 231

1
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 18:03 - Dec 22 with 6754 viewsbonymine

Yet another stark reminder here from the past in terms of the lies and what we are dealing with here in Jenkins ;

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11731/9724954/swansea-chairman-huw-jenkin

Poll: Why is this site so quiet these days ?

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 18:10 - Dec 22 with 6720 viewslonglostjack

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 18:03 - Dec 22 by bonymine

Yet another stark reminder here from the past in terms of the lies and what we are dealing with here in Jenkins ;

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11731/9724954/swansea-chairman-huw-jenkin


Liar liar the pants are well and truly on fire.

Poll: Alcohol in the lockdown

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 18:23 - Dec 22 with 6690 viewsWingstandwood

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 18:03 - Dec 22 by bonymine

Yet another stark reminder here from the past in terms of the lies and what we are dealing with here in Jenkins ;

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11731/9724954/swansea-chairman-huw-jenkin


God! Ain't there now arf a snowballing sh#tload of hard hitting evidence about that would be absolutely fab ammo to use in a courtroom situation to expose Jenkins. Thats if more dynamic legal action is ever deceided upon! What with that 'FAKE' boardmeeting etc.

My worry despite that now is? Despite being presented with a tap-in open goal the (new appointments not included) Trojan horse impostors within the current Trust board are hell bent in wanting to put a bunch of low-life scumbag filth way before the trust and supporters.

Argus!

0
SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 19:14 - Dec 22 with 6599 viewsMattG

SCSA Demand Second Vote on Trust Share Sale on 17:52 - Dec 22 by Vetchfielder

And also, if we are relegated, that the Americans are unlikely to want to take up the option of the further 3% ?


Agree that is unlikely but it's not wholly dependent on us retaining PL status.
0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2024