|
Post by cenydd on Aug 12, 2013 8:53:56 GMT
So the preliminaries are done, lots of transfers have been made, and the season is about to kick off. What are people's thoughts on how things will go this season?
I reckon it's the most interesting season for years, especially in the top half. New managers and both Manchester Clubs, and at Everton, a returning 'special' manager at Chelski, Arsenal and Liverpool possibly improving after a couple of relatively difficult years (or possibly not!), Liverpool and Spurs both possibly about to lose their most valuable players (possibly to other premier league clubs), and Swansea City investing heavily and with the added confidence of playing in Europe after winning their first ever major trophy last season. So many possibilities for what could happen, and so many interesting factors - good to see a bit of a shake up after a few seasons of almost total dominance by the same couple of clubs, I think.
|
|
|
Post by bobbins on Aug 12, 2013 21:27:00 GMT
Its a closed fought game. On one side, we have numerous foreign owned clubs prepared to screw the fans. On the other, we have numerous fans who have bought Sky Sports. Bore draw!
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 12, 2013 23:05:27 GMT
There is actually one club in there that is primarily owned and run by its own local fans.
|
|
|
Post by bobbins on Aug 12, 2013 23:17:22 GMT
There is actually one club in there that is primarily owned and run by its own local fans. Don't be shy! Name it. Its not Swansea or Cardiff...
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 13, 2013 9:02:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bobbins on Aug 13, 2013 19:34:34 GMT
All you've done is destroyed your comment "There is actually one club in there that is primarily owned and run by its own local fans". The link says what we all know: Swansea City Supporters own 20%.
|
|
|
Post by wyly on Aug 13, 2013 21:29:58 GMT
Swansea is a refreshing newcomer, entertaining football...how can anyone not like them...
|
|
|
Post by bobbins on Aug 13, 2013 23:39:10 GMT
Swansea is a refreshing newcomer, entertaining football...how can anyone not like them... Perhaps the creditors who only got 5 pence in the pound (with the owners since awarding themselves a 2 million quids windfall)
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 14, 2013 7:21:39 GMT
All you've done is destroyed your comment "There is actually one club in there that is primarily owned and run by its own local fans". The link says what we all know: Swansea City Supporters own 20%. No, local supporters own at least 65% on the figures specified there. Most of the remaining unspecified smaller share lots will also be owned by local fans who bought as part of the consortium put together by former player Mel Nurse. The Supporters Society group owns 20%, and 45% is owned by local individuals - the consortium who took over the club were a group made up of individual supporters who had sums of money to invest, along with a larger group of fans who put in small amounts to invest collectively. Only 20% of the club is owned by any kind of 'foreign investor' - almost all of the other 80% is owned by local fans of the club. Those local fans took over the running of the club and the positions on the board when the local consortium bought it. The comment that Swansea City is 'primarily owned and run by its own local fans' is entirely, 100% accurate - suggesting that the owners who happened to have enough money to invest in the club individually as part of the local consortium, rather than just as a part of the Supporters group, weren't local fans of the club is complete nonsense - they were, and they still are.
|
|
|
Post by bobbins on Aug 14, 2013 8:21:17 GMT
No, local supporters own at least 65% on the figures specified there. 20%! You see the difference between the fan with the dividend. To the fan its a means to further support the club. To the business owner its a windfall (benefits they've achieved to the detriment of the local community, given the 5 pence payoff) Rubbish! That would suggest that all clubs primarily owned by local businessmen are owned by fans. That would be bobbins. A club owned by the fans would see the supporter trust as the dominant share holder, rather than a minority one with one exec on the board.
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 15, 2013 9:32:50 GMT
You can keep saying 'it isn't so, it isn't so', but it still is. The club was bought by a consortium of local fans when it was virtually bankrupt. Some of them had enough money to invest individually, others via the trust. That consortium (including the Supporters Trust) took direct and personal control over the running of the club. Yes, some of them have had a dividend paid to them (2 million in total, split between them all - hardly a massive amount in terms of the finances of a premier league club), but that is after 10 years of putting their own cash into a failed business and spending 10 year of their own time turning it around from total failure into the multi-million pound success that it is today. Some people, of course, have a natural objection to people getting money out of investing their own time and money in what looked like a completely hopeless project (which was why the club was sold for one pound, and why it had struggled with finding ownership for years, since the previous time it had only just survived going bust a few years earlier) and managing to turn it around completely, but I don't - they put in the money and they put in the hours. The fact that they were business people with a bit of cash to invest in the first place doesn't mean that they weren't local fans. That is why they invested - it didn't exactly look like an attractive or financially sound investment at the time! The fact that they are local fans doesn't mean they shouldn't ever get a return on their investment when they have performed the miracle turnaround in the club/business that they have.
There are certainly very few, if any, other clubs in the Premiership who could be said to be primarily owned and run by local people who have grown up as supporters of the club and spent the years prior to their ownership on the terraces supporting that club (investing their money and time purely on the basis of trying to prevent their beloved club from disappearing entirely), and no others who have any significant investment at all from a supports trust type of group. What has happened at Swansea City over the last decade is a remarkable story, however you look at it - a failed club on the brink of bankruptcy sitting at the foot of the bottom division of the league, bought up and saved by a consortium of its own local supporters who took over the running of the club (with no initial experience whatsoever of running a football club, of course) and took it to the top half of the Premier league in 10 years. Attempts to paint it as something else on the basis that some of those investors have eventually had a bit of money out of their investment, time and effort are quite obviously just pure nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by bobbins on Aug 15, 2013 10:05:43 GMT
Yes, some of them have had a dividend paid to them (2 million in total, split between them all - hardly a massive amount in terms of the finances of a premier league club) Note that the fans re-invested it into their club. That is what a fan does! The others took it as a windfall, alien to fan activity and particularly tutworthy as numerous locals suffered from the 5 pence in the pound con.
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 15, 2013 10:32:03 GMT
You keep going on about the 5 pence in the pound deal, but it was certainly not a 'con' - it was a perfectly normal Company Voluntary Arrangement to stop the club from going into liquidation, which the creditors themselves voted overwhelmingly in favour of accepting. www.thefreelibrary.com/Swans+future+assured+as+creditors+vote+in+favour+of+5p+in+pounds...-a084173249That prevented the liquidation of the club, which would have been something that it would not have come back from (and the creditors still wouldn't have got their money back anyway). There is nothing at all wrong about a company that is deeply in debt doing this kind of deal with creditors to avoid the company failing altogether. Of course, some of them will have accepted it because they had an interest in seeing the club continue, but it was their choice whether to accept it or not. They knew it would allow the club to then continue and possibly do better in the future, which it did. And after that the new owners managed to get the finances in order and develop the company. There's nothing wrong with that at all - any company that is about to go bust tries to do a deal with creditors over its debts, and some survive and go on to make money again. That's just a perfectly normal part of business. Nobody wanted it to have to happen like that, but it was a part of what saved the club from extinction.
|
|
|
Post by bobbins on Aug 15, 2013 17:53:36 GMT
You keep going on about the 5 pence in the pound deal, but it was certainly not a 'con' - it was a perfectly normal Company Voluntary Arrangement to stop the club from going into liquidation, which the creditors themselves voted overwhelmingly in favour of accepting. Forced to accept because otherwise they get naff all! The facts aren't difficult here. Only 20% of the club is owned by the fans. The rest is owned by people prepared to make money from the club, despite how the club diddled many locals out of their dosh.
|
|
|
Post by cenydd on Aug 15, 2013 17:59:23 GMT
The facts aren't difficult here. Only 20% of the club is owned by the fans. The facts are indeed very simple, and impossible to deny. Only 20% of the club is not owned directly by fans who, before becoming involved as part of the consortium of owners, have spent their lives standing on the terraces or sitting in the stands supporting the team through the good times and the bad, and who only got involved to save the local club that they supported from disappearing altogether.
|
|