| This investment by the yanks 20:01 - Dec 27 with 9765 views | wetjack |
We were having a good discussion in the pub yesterday before the game regards this investment in the club which by all accounts does not seem to be an investment but a sale of shares by the shareholders
I saw the trust statement earlier in the week that they could not give us more information at this point in time but we had some questions that I don't know whether anyone can answer for me
I. We assumed that the trust would not sell any shares? Is this the case?
ii. What benefit is there to the football club for this sale
iii. Huw Jenkins has said that he wants to provide protection for the trust - does this mean that he is going to give some of his shares to them?
iiii. have the shareholders actively pushed for a sale or has this kind of landed in their lap
v. what happens to the shareholders that sell in terms of their roles as directors of the club?
vi. what powers do the trust have to veto the club
vii. the banner that has appeared for the past few games on the east stand is a trust banner - yes?
viii. would a change in ownership be for the best for the club if some of the directors want out?
viiii. how much say will we as fans get in the deal
Sorry for all the questions, would be happy if someone has some answers |  |
| |  |
| This investment by the yanks on 14:50 - Dec 28 with 1825 views | morningstar |
| This investment by the yanks on 14:39 - Dec 28 by exiledclaseboy |
I don't know about the figure but I didn't know myself until Phil mentioned to me a couple of months ago that there was a difference between ST "members" and paid-up members. I duly paid my subscription and am now a "proper" member. Lord knows how many others thought/think the same as me, that as long as you've bought your ST you're a proper member of the Trust. If TDH's figure is correct, and I suspect it might be close, it's something else that the Trust should be communicating much more pro-actively. [Post edited 28 Dec 2014 14:41]
|
Agreed. Have got the page up, just waiting for the wife to come home with the card. It's made me feel quite ashamed for being so apathetic. |  |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:02 - Dec 28 with 1786 views | whiterock |
No time like the present to join if you want a say | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:13 - Dec 28 with 1761 views | Phil_S |
Looks like if in doubt there is just a time to resort to making up information
122 members. from the balance sheet? Would love to know where this figure comes from because it simply isn't true. Not even close.
It is right that the constitution of the Trust does allow for the board to make the decision without even reference to our members but we are completely unanimous that we do not want that to happen which is why we have said repeatedly (even in the communication we sent out last week) what will happen
So in short TDH is talking complete bollocks, maybe he is listening to the people who are hell bent at the moment on damaging the Trust which so far extends to trying to discredit me as much as possible and telling anyone who will listen that the recent banners are the result of the Trust (even the OP made reference to this)
As Whiterock says if you want a say then sign up and get your voice
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:20 - Dec 28 with 1742 views | morningstar |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:13 - Dec 28 by Phil_S |
Looks like if in doubt there is just a time to resort to making up information
122 members. from the balance sheet? Would love to know where this figure comes from because it simply isn't true. Not even close.
It is right that the constitution of the Trust does allow for the board to make the decision without even reference to our members but we are completely unanimous that we do not want that to happen which is why we have said repeatedly (even in the communication we sent out last week) what will happen
So in short TDH is talking complete bollocks, maybe he is listening to the people who are hell bent at the moment on damaging the Trust which so far extends to trying to discredit me as much as possible and telling anyone who will listen that the recent banners are the result of the Trust (even the OP made reference to this)
As Whiterock says if you want a say then sign up and get your voice
This post has been edited by an administrator |
So the board can make the decision alone, but you will ballot the members? ....... Bottlers!  | |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:27 - Dec 28 with 1720 views | Phil_S |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:20 - Dec 28 by morningstar |
So the board can make the decision alone, but you will ballot the members? ....... Bottlers! |
Of the two litre variety | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:34 - Dec 28 with 1697 views | whiterock |
The thing is TDH has stirred the pot without any substance, and moved on, his work here is done | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 16:03 - Dec 28 with 1638 views | tomdickharry |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:13 - Dec 28 by Phil_S |
Looks like if in doubt there is just a time to resort to making up information
122 members. from the balance sheet? Would love to know where this figure comes from because it simply isn't true. Not even close.
It is right that the constitution of the Trust does allow for the board to make the decision without even reference to our members but we are completely unanimous that we do not want that to happen which is why we have said repeatedly (even in the communication we sent out last week) what will happen
So in short TDH is talking complete bollocks, maybe he is listening to the people who are hell bent at the moment on damaging the Trust which so far extends to trying to discredit me as much as possible and telling anyone who will listen that the recent banners are the result of the Trust (even the OP made reference to this)
As Whiterock says if you want a say then sign up and get your voice
This post has been edited by an administrator |
First and foremost its not"122 members" but "paid up Trust members",if it is simply not true not even close perhaps you could explain what the following means.Perhaps I am reading the accounts wrongly.
http://www.swanstrust.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Trust-Audited-Accounts-Ma
Point 7 in the notes - Share Capital. | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 16:06 - Dec 28 with 1622 views | sixpenses |
| This investment by the yanks on 15:13 - Dec 28 by Phil_S |
Looks like if in doubt there is just a time to resort to making up information
122 members. from the balance sheet? Would love to know where this figure comes from because it simply isn't true. Not even close.
It is right that the constitution of the Trust does allow for the board to make the decision without even reference to our members but we are completely unanimous that we do not want that to happen which is why we have said repeatedly (even in the communication we sent out last week) what will happen
So in short TDH is talking complete bollocks, maybe he is listening to the people who are hell bent at the moment on damaging the Trust which so far extends to trying to discredit me as much as possible and telling anyone who will listen that the recent banners are the result of the Trust (even the OP made reference to this)
As Whiterock says if you want a say then sign up and get your voice
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Thanks Phil for reconfirming that so quickly
As ever think the best solution it to firmly officially discredit any such openly stated untrue rumours, only adds to the credibility of the Trust and detracts from any detractors as well as showing openess and committment to accountability to members. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| This investment by the yanks on 16:08 - Dec 28 with 1614 views | Phil_S |
First and foremost it is neither so you are wrong. Again.
The bit that you want to be looking at is on Page 6 of the accounts - its all there under donations and subscriptions (or whatever the heading is) | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 16:10 - Dec 28 with 1604 views | dgt73 |
Why do people make comments as if it's gospel, when it's only rumours. ? |  |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 16:53 - Dec 28 with 1551 views | sixpenses |
| This investment by the yanks on 16:08 - Dec 28 by Phil_S |
First and foremost it is neither so you are wrong. Again.
The bit that you want to be looking at is on Page 6 of the accounts - its all there under donations and subscriptions (or whatever the heading is) |
In fairness it is a little confusing and TDH did say perhaps he had misread them.
Perhaps TDH would care to share with us the source of his refuted comment
"according to the Trust heirachy those paid up members will have no vote to determine the fate of any investment offer, its only the Trust board members."
It would be useful to know where such things are coming from so they can be discredited at source.
Do we vet membership applications (not sure how obviously season ticket membership / ongoing Jack Army membership could cover probably the majority of bona fide members but unsure what controls we have). I know it was joked about before but with multi millions potentially at steak there could be potential to rig the vote using bogus members.
p.s. DaiLew clear off with your pathetic down arrow self gratification on this thread please - some things are too important to play childish games. | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:15 - Dec 28 with 1524 views | exiledclaseboy |
| This investment by the yanks on 16:08 - Dec 28 by Phil_S |
First and foremost it is neither so you are wrong. Again.
The bit that you want to be looking at is on Page 6 of the accounts - its all there under donations and subscriptions (or whatever the heading is) |
Under "Members Subscriptions" for both 2013 an 2014 there's no figure. |  |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:16 - Dec 28 with 1520 views | NOTRAC |
It looks to me after reading the relevant pages of the accounts hat something appears to be seriously wrong with them.
First there is no income shown for subscriptions on the profit and loss account, which doesn't make sense for a start.
Secondly there is no mention of subscriptions or shareholders on page 6 as suggested by Phil.
Thirdly the share capital is shown on the Balance Sheet at only £122 which is also the same amount that is referred to on page 7, which is the query raised by Tom Dick and Harry.
Further explanation needed I think. | |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:41 - Dec 28 with 1470 views | NOTRAC |
Reading the Trust constitution it appears that the Trust has two types of members .There are members who pay their £1 each year.In the accounts these amounts are treated as donations, and are written off through the Income and Expenditure account each year.Those members have very little rights.
The real members of the Trust are the ones who have paid at some time or another a further £10 and are then allocated a share.There are only 122 of those, and no one has paid to become full members for at least two years, thus nil for members subs in the accounts.
I would guess that in reality on matters of real importance it is only the shareholders I.e the 122 members who have paid the £10 who are allowed to vote.
You lose your right to those shares if you do not pay the annual £1.
That's how I read it .Please tell me Phil if I am wrong. | |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:44 - Dec 28 with 1464 views | tomdickharry |
| This investment by the yanks on 16:53 - Dec 28 by sixpenses |
In fairness it is a little confusing and TDH did say perhaps he had misread them.
Perhaps TDH would care to share with us the source of his refuted comment
"according to the Trust heirachy those paid up members will have no vote to determine the fate of any investment offer, its only the Trust board members."
It would be useful to know where such things are coming from so they can be discredited at source.
Do we vet membership applications (not sure how obviously season ticket membership / ongoing Jack Army membership could cover probably the majority of bona fide members but unsure what controls we have). I know it was joked about before but with multi millions potentially at steak there could be potential to rig the vote using bogus members.
p.s. DaiLew clear off with your pathetic down arrow self gratification on this thread please - some things are too important to play childish games. |
Its buried somewhere in the endless investment posts when I find it I will share it. | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:49 - Dec 28 with 1410 views | bermudajack |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:41 - Dec 28 by NOTRAC |
Reading the Trust constitution it appears that the Trust has two types of members .There are members who pay their £1 each year.In the accounts these amounts are treated as donations, and are written off through the Income and Expenditure account each year.Those members have very little rights.
The real members of the Trust are the ones who have paid at some time or another a further £10 and are then allocated a share.There are only 122 of those, and no one has paid to become full members for at least two years, thus nil for members subs in the accounts.
I would guess that in reality on matters of real importance it is only the shareholders I.e the 122 members who have paid the £10 who are allowed to vote.
You lose your right to those shares if you do not pay the annual £1.
That's how I read it .Please tell me Phil if I am wrong. |
I'm sure I paid the extra £10 membership just before this season started (July/ August)
How can you check this? |  |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:50 - Dec 28 with 1406 views | Phil_S |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:15 - Dec 28 by exiledclaseboy |
Under "Members Subscriptions" for both 2013 an 2014 there's no figure. |
I cant see the accounts on the phone but isn't there anything referring to things like share fund, donations and the like?
Should account (at a guess) to around £10k per annum | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:52 - Dec 28 with 1395 views | Phil_S |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:41 - Dec 28 by NOTRAC |
Reading the Trust constitution it appears that the Trust has two types of members .There are members who pay their £1 each year.In the accounts these amounts are treated as donations, and are written off through the Income and Expenditure account each year.Those members have very little rights.
The real members of the Trust are the ones who have paid at some time or another a further £10 and are then allocated a share.There are only 122 of those, and no one has paid to become full members for at least two years, thus nil for members subs in the accounts.
I would guess that in reality on matters of real importance it is only the shareholders I.e the 122 members who have paid the £10 who are allowed to vote.
You lose your right to those shares if you do not pay the annual £1.
That's how I read it .Please tell me Phil if I am wrong. |
OK, you are wrong
I don't know a fully updated number this year but last year we were around 800+ paid up members, this years is higher but I need Alan or Jim who have access to the database to confirm this | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:54 - Dec 28 with 1385 views | Phil_S |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:44 - Dec 28 by tomdickharry |
Its buried somewhere in the endless investment posts when I find it I will share it. |
Happy hunting as you won't find something that isn't true | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:56 - Dec 28 with 1373 views | bermudajack |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:50 - Dec 28 by Phil_S |
I cant see the accounts on the phone but isn't there anything referring to things like share fund, donations and the like?
Should account (at a guess) to around £10k per annum |
Page 6, under Donations & sponsorships, share fund worth £ 9,252 in 2014 👠| |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:58 - Dec 28 with 1365 views | NOTRAC |
Yes there is but that is written off through the Income and Expenditure account and constitutes part of the profit for the year.
The members shares on the Balance sheet are shown at £122.
The payment of the annual £1 is therefore written off as a donation in the accounts .
The purchase of shares for £10 hasn't been advertised for a number of years and this why it appears that no one is becoming a shareholder in the Trust anymore.
I would suggest ( I do not know) but fot this system to be in place there must be rules somewhere setting out the rights of the shareholders as distinct from the annual subscribers who appear to be treated as donors in the accounts | |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:58 - Dec 28 with 1363 views | Phil_S |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:56 - Dec 28 by bermudajack |
Page 6, under Donations & sponsorships, share fund worth £ 9,252 in 2014 👠|
I'll have a peep later at the full detail or better still I am sure Uxbridge or Stu Mac will be around at some point and have more expertise looking round a set of accounts than me | | | |
| This investment by the yanks on 18:00 - Dec 28 with 1359 views | exiledclaseboy |
| This investment by the yanks on 17:50 - Dec 28 by Phil_S |
I cant see the accounts on the phone but isn't there anything referring to things like share fund, donations and the like?
Should account (at a guess) to around £10k per annum |
The "Share Fund" at 2014 was £9,257.
So I assume that's X amount of members and their £10 each plus some other people making extra donations? | |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 18:06 - Dec 28 with 1335 views | NOTRAC |
The share fund is treated as income for the year.That means that in reality it is not a fund.It is purely income for the Trust.
The share members (122 of them) hold shares and so long as they continue to pay their £1 a year they continue as shareholders.
What is needed is why have these shareholders.What are their rights over and above the annual members.
If there are important issues and decisions to be made by the Trust will the annual members have less rights than the shareholders.
Important points which I feel need clarifying. | |
| |
| This investment by the yanks on 18:06 - Dec 28 with 1335 views | Phil_S |
| This investment by the yanks on 18:00 - Dec 28 by exiledclaseboy |
The "Share Fund" at 2014 was £9,257.
So I assume that's X amount of members and their £10 each plus some other people making extra donations? |
I'd like to say yes but without actually being able to see the accounts I won't answer just yet
As a general rule those making regular donations and all membership subs go into the share fund although I had a feeling we showed donations separately when I looked at the accounts?
As far as I know we have never advertised the number of members that we have either full or e-members (which for Notrac was explained at the start of this season and last but we agreed this year was badly communicated last year) | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
