Jack owners to pocket two million

That includes the trust who will pick up a tidy 400 grand...nice work if you can get it...

That includes the trust who will pick up a tidy 400 grand...nice work if you can get it...

£1m to shareholders so £200k to the trust in fact.

Fully deserved for all involved.

That includes the trust who will pick up a tidy 400 grand...nice work if you can get it...

Explain more Corky please.

Swansea City have announced a £16m profit for the six months to 30 November 2012 and with it, for the first time, a dividend for the club's shareholders – £1m for this and last season in the Premier League.

The chairman, Huw Jenkins, says the £2m dividend justly rewards the owners, mostly directors too, who have worked unpaid to steer a remarkable rebuilding, but it risks taking a little shine off Swansea's halo. In a game acclimatising to a new culture, in which club owners are no longer "custodians" but motivated by making money for themselves, Swansea have stood out as an exception, until now.

Since the current group of nine owners, notably including the Swansea City Supporters' Trust, put in £50,000 each in 2002 to buy the club and save it from its grimmest crisis, none has taken a penny out. The partnership with the supporters' trust, which raised £200,000 over the years to buy 20% of the club and has an elected director, Huw Cooze, on the board, is hailed as a model, recently described as "probably ideal" by the Premier League chief executive, Richard Scudamore.

Now the trust stands out too, in its attitude towards the £2m windfall. The other owners will be paid the dividend in proportion to their shareholding and are free to keep it. Martin Morgan, who owns 22.5% of the club according to its ownership statement, will receive £450,000. Brian Katzen, another original shareholder, owns 20%, having paid in £200,000, so will be paid £400,000.

Jenkins, who was paid a £200,000 salary last year and is widely admired for the shrewd way he has steered the club's recovery, owns 12.5%, so his share of the £2m dividend will be £250,000.

The trust surveyed its members in anticipation of the payout – 20% of the £2m dividend, £400,000 – and 78% responded that the trust should keep it, waiting for more shares to buy so it can increase its stake. As no other owners are selling, the trust will spend a little of it sponsoring south Wales junior football leagues and put the rest in the bank for investment should the club need it.

Jenkins argues the dividend is correct, as it reflects the club's aim to make a profit, not huge losses like so many others. Dividends, he said, are a more "tax-efficient" way of remunerating directors because national insurance is not paid on them. And he argues payments to directors could be disguised in the general wage bill, while a dividend must be declared: "We have been open," he told the Guardian. "Our shareholders are mostly working directors and you can't keep expecting them to be unpaid, with the millions going out to players and managers." Yet some sense of Swansea as devotees to a more purist way for football is being shaken. Then there is the company voluntary arrangement (CVA), on which the club's great progress since 2002 has been built – debts to a barrage of creditors, amassed by the previous regime, were settled for 5p in the pound. The City and County of Swansea was owed £35,000. Three other local authorities had to write off money and Dillwyn Llewelyn community school was owed £1,175. Swansea NHS trust was owed £1,960, the South Wales police authority, £10,448.76 and the Welsh Ambulance Service, £1,063.97. St John Ambulance was there too, its training company owed £2,411.10. The total owed to unsecured creditors was £271,208, less than a third of the dividend the owners are now declaring for themselves.

Jenkins said he believes the creditors were never fully recompensed, although St John Ambulance says its debt was recouped via advertising at the ground. The local council clearly did not hold a grudge because shortly afterwards it built the Liberty Stadium with £27m public money for the Swans and is delighted with the wider economic benefits brought to a recession-hit region. Still, it would have been classy to recompense all those old creditors from the Premier League bounty before the owners helped themselves.

After football clubs first formed into companies in the 1880s the Football Association restricted dividends, to prevent owners taking money out for themselves. The character of the clubs as member associations was to be preserved, and owners and directors were to be custodians, not in it for profit. In the Premier League era that rule was serially bypassed when the clubs floated on the Stock Exchange, and the modern FA finally gave up on it.

Swansea City had seemed to embody the former ethos, a beaming exception, and now, with this dividend, that has changed. Except for the supporters' trust, which holds its shares as a mutual body, still for no pay, just for the committed sense of belonging.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013 ... s-windfall

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/apr/08/swansea-halo-owners-windfall

That article is inaccurate.

http://www.swanseacity.net/news/article ... 60627.aspx

Were games away from promotion and you bring a topic like this up!

Just thought it was an interesting article about profits that can be made in the premier leagur on average gates of twenty thousand we can average 7,000 more a game at an average of £25 works out as £175,000 a game just on the gate or £3,500,000 a season

Just thought it was an interesting article about profits that can be made in the premier leagur on average gates of twenty thousand we can average 7,000 more a game at an average of £25 works out as £175,000 a game just on the gate or £3,500,000 a season

The increase in PL payments next season means gate income becomes even less relevant to clubs than it is now. It's much more of a level playing field for a club with a 20k average to compete with a club with a 30k+ average.

Just thought it was an interesting article about profits that can be made in the premier leagur on average gates of twenty thousand we can average 7,000 more a game at an average of £25 works out as £175,000 a game just on the gate or £3,500,000 a season

I don't know the details of their accounts as i'm not really interested but wouldn't a chunk of that profit come from player sales, such as Allen and Sinclair?

Well if you are right then it's time for all premier league fans to support the football supporters federation campaign called twenty is plenty ...all fans that travel to away games would only pay twenty quid a ticket...if gate receipts are unimportant why would clubs oppose this?

www.fsf.org.uk

Just thought it was an interesting article about profits that can be made in the premier leagur on average gates of twenty thousand we can average 7,000 more a game at an average of £25 works out as £175,000 a game just on the gate or £3,500,000 a season

I don't know the details of their accounts as i'm not really interested but wouldn't a chunk of that profit come from player sales, such as Allen and Sinclair?

The Accounts reveal a profit before interest and tax of £20.4m, which is made up of a profit from operations of £5.6m and £14.8m arising from player transfers including the sales of Joe Allen to Liverpool and Scott Sinclair to Manchester City.

After adjusting for net interest receivable and a taxation charge, the net profit for the period was £15.9m

Just thought it was an interesting article about profits that can be made in the premier leagur on average gates of twenty thousand we can average 7,000 more a game at an average of £25 works out as £175,000 a game just on the gate or £3,500,000 a season

I don't know the details of their accounts as i'm not really interested but wouldn't a chunk of that profit come from player sales, such as Allen and Sinclair?

The majority did, we still gained £5 million player sales a side and have cup final money and Danny Graham sale money that aren't included on it.

They deserve money, they haven't had any return on their original investment in 11 years and have done wonders for the club. The main point of this is to keep the owners happy as we'd like to prevent them from selling out.

You can make a lot of money in the Premier League if your run the right way, but in a lot of cases clubs who've accumulated large amounts of debt to get in to the division have built up much higher debt trying to stay in the division (Wigan, Bolton, Fulham, QPR, Portsmouth, Blackburn).

Just thought it was an interesting article about profits that can be made in the premier leagur on average gates of twenty thousand we can average 7,000 more a game at an average of £25 works out as £175,000 a game just on the gate or £3,500,000 a season

I don't know the details of their accounts as i'm not really interested but wouldn't a chunk of that profit come from player sales, such as Allen and Sinclair?

The Accounts reveal a profit before interest and tax of £20.4m, which is made up of a profit from operations of £5.6m and £14.8m arising from player transfers including the sales of Joe Allen to Liverpool and Scott Sinclair to Manchester City.

After adjusting for net interest receivable and a taxation charge, the net profit for the period was £15.9m

Cheers. Good business to be fair.

Just thought it was an interesting article about profits that can be made in the premier leagur on average gates of twenty thousand we can average 7,000 more a game at an average of £25 works out as £175,000 a game just on the gate or £3,500,000 a season

I don't know the details of their accounts as i'm not really interested but wouldn't a chunk of that profit come from player sales, such as Allen and Sinclair?

The majority did, we still gained £5 million player sales a side and have cup final money and Danny Graham sale money that aren't included on it.

They deserve money, they haven't had any return on their original investment in 11 years and have done wonders for the club. The main point of this is to keep the owners happy as we'd like to prevent them from selling out.

You can make a lot of money in the Premier League if your run the right way, but in a lot of cases clubs who've accumulated large amounts of debt to get in to the division have built up much higher debt trying to stay in the division (Wigan, Bolton, Fulham, QPR, Portsmouth, Blackburn).

I wasn't asking as some kind of dig, if anything it was to clarify that you don't make that kind of profit without player sales so our fans don't get too excited! And yes I wouldn't criticise any owner taking a dividend as in football you take it while you can

Just thought it was an interesting article about profits that can be made in the premier leagur on average gates of twenty thousand we can average 7,000 more a game at an average of £25 works out as £175,000 a game just on the gate or £3,500,000 a season

I don't know the details of their accounts as i'm not really interested but wouldn't a chunk of that profit come from player sales, such as Allen and Sinclair?

The majority did, we still gained £5 million player sales a side and have cup final money and Danny Graham sale money that aren't included on it.

They deserve money, they haven't had any return on their original investment in 11 years and have done wonders for the club. The main point of this is to keep the owners happy as we'd like to prevent them from selling out.

You can make a lot of money in the Premier League if your run the right way, but in a lot of cases clubs who've accumulated large amounts of debt to get in to the division have built up much higher debt trying to stay in the division (Wigan, Bolton, Fulham, QPR, Portsmouth, Blackburn).

I wasn't asking as some kind of dig, if anything if was to clarify that you don't make that kind of profit without player sales so our fans don't get too excited! And yes I wouldn't criticise any owner taking a dividend as in football you take it while you can

I know, it was more aimed at the guardian article that was criticising the owners for taking it out. We did do superbly in the transfer market to be able to get a £15 million profit from player sales whilst improving on our squad a lot.

The jacks should pay back the creditors who got 5p on the pound!

The majority did, we still gained £5 million player sales a side and have cup final money and Danny Graham sale money that aren't included on it.

They deserve money, they haven't had any return on their original investment in 11 years and have done wonders for the club. The main point of this is to keep the owners happy as we'd like to prevent them from selling out.

You can make a lot of money in the Premier League if your run the right way, but in a lot of cases clubs who've accumulated large amounts of debt to get in to the division have built up much higher debt trying to stay in the division (Wigan, Bolton, Fulham, QPR, Portsmouth, Blackburn).[/quote]

You highlighted small clubs with lower capacity grounds like Swansea, maybe it's because of the small grounds and lack of commercial opportunities??

You have done well the last few years by keeping your budget low and your Managers have done well in the Market, but that can only last so long, a few bad buys and a manager leaving you in the lurch and you are screwed as you are punching above your weight commercially and have no rich owners.

It's going to be a very interesting few years ????

The jacks should pay back the creditors who got 5p on the pound!

Totally agree but watch the jacks on here now say all creditors are now better off. They forget that without the cva they would still be in lower leagues and that because of them and the likes of Leicester teams now have points deductions. When people say swansea are well run they are talking out of their hats.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22073892

The jacks should pay back the creditors who got 5p on the pound!

Totally agree but watch the jacks on here now say all creditors are now better off. They forget that without the cva they would still be in lower leagues and that because of them and the likes of Leicester teams now have points deductions. When people say swansea are well run they are talking out of their hats.

We were run appallingly by previous owners but not even yourself Gareth can deny than Swansea are now well run.

You highlighted small clubs with lower capacity grounds like Swansea, maybe it's because of the small grounds and lack of commercial opportunities??

You have done well the last few years by keeping your budget low and your Managers have done well in the Market, but that can only last so long, a few bad buys and a manager leaving you in the lurch and you are screwed as you are punching above your weight commercially and have no rich owners.

It's going to be a very interesting few years ????

A lot of them have had rich owners, but they aren't well run clubs and the owners just spent money that they club wasn't bringing in.

Why can it only last so long? We're appointing the right managers and will continue to do so, because we've got the right people in charge. Martinez, Sousa and Rodgers all left us but we were able to appoint the right replacement. If Laudrup goes than Weighorst will replace him. Michael Laudrup will sign good players, because he and his backroom staff know what they're doing.

You just keep waiting for us to suddenly fail, but there's nothing to support the case that we will. We just keep on improving and have currently got a stronger squad than we've ever had before, and next season we'll have a stronger squad than we had this year.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/apr/08/swansea-halo-owners-windfall

That article is inaccurate.

http://www.swanseacity.net/news/article ... 60627.aspx

Has Jenkins got his own business as well or is he just at Swansea now???

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/apr/08/swansea-halo-owners-windfall

That article is inaccurate.

http://www.swanseacity.net/news/article ... 60627.aspx

Has Jenkins got his own business aswell??? How well is that doing ????

No, his firm went bust. A good friend of mine lost his job as a result. He told me that Huw Jenkins was spending so much unpaid time on the club, that he took his eye off the ball of his own business in difficult times for his industry.

If you want to beat him with that stick go ahead, but it's a low blow.

[quote="Ernies tooth"]Were games away from promotion and you bring a topic like this up!

[/
Well i thought it was interesting read,if your zzzz go to bed,fool

The jacks should pay back the creditors who got 5p on the pound!

Totally agree but watch the jacks on here now say all creditors are now better off. They forget that without the cva they would still be in lower leagues and that because of them and the likes of Leicester teams now have points deductions. When people say swansea are well run they are talking out of their hats.

We were run appallingly by previous owners but not even yourself Gareth can deny than Swansea are now well run.

Well run now but would not be in your current position if you hadn't done it which is why it really grates on me when sky/talksport say you are an example to all clubs. Had points deductions been in place i very much doubt that a CVA would have been invoked and as such you would have plodded on in the lower leagues in debt and unable to improve your squad.

A lot of them have had rich owners, but they aren't well run clubs and the owners just spent money that they club wasn't bringing in.

Why can it only last so long? We're appointing the right managers and will continue to do so, because we've got the right people in charge. Martinez, Sousa and Rodgers all left us but we were able to appoint the right replacement. If Laudrup goes than Weighorst will replace him. Michael Laudrup will sign good players, because he and his backroom staff know what they're doing.

You just keep waiting for us to suddenly fail, but there's nothing to support the case that we will. We just keep on improving and have currently got a stronger squad than we've ever had before, and next season we'll have a stronger squad than we had this year.[/quote]


Transfer Market is always a gamble, so far you are up, but your luck can change just as quickly and other managers like Southamptons are looking at the lower Spanish Market, so the deals won't be there this season.

I think a wealthy owner is important as long as they don't just through money at it, and also trying to find new income streams is going to be very important. It's a world wide Market if clubs can cash in around the world it may just make a massive difference to their long term future.

Time will tell as I said it's going to be a very interesting few years !!!

The jacks should pay back the creditors who got 5p on the pound!

Totally agree but watch the jacks on here now say all creditors are now better off. They forget that without the cva they would still be in lower leagues and that because of them and the likes of Leicester teams now have points deductions. When people say swansea are well run they are talking out of their hats.

We were run appallingly by previous owners but not even yourself Gareth can deny than Swansea are now well run.

Well run now but would not be in your current position if you hadn't done it which is why it really grates on me when sky/talksport say you are an example to all clubs. Had points deductions been in place i very much doubt that a CVA would have been invoked and as such you would have plodded on in the lower leagues in debt and unable to improve your squad.

We would probably have gone bust otherwise due to the way the club had been run under previous owners so it was the only option.

What would you have done?

The jacks should pay back the creditors who got 5p on the pound!

Totally agree but watch the jacks on here now say all creditors are now better off. They forget that without the cva they would still be in lower leagues and that because of them and the likes of Leicester teams now have points deductions. When people say swansea are well run they are talking out of their hats.

We were run appallingly by previous owners but not even yourself Gareth can deny than Swansea are now well run.

Well run now but would not be in your current position if you hadn't done it which is why it really grates on me when sky/talksport say you are an example to all clubs. Had points deductions been in place i very much doubt that a CVA would have been invoked and as such you would have plodded on in the lower leagues in debt and unable to improve your squad.

We would probably have gone bust otherwise due to the way the club had been run under previous owners so it was the only option.

What would you have done?

You would not have gone bust and you know it. Cant blame the club for doing it but it is morally wrong and retrospective punishments should have been brought in. i.e no team can enter the next division until all creditors are paid off in full.

The jacks should pay back the creditors who got 5p on the pound!

Totally agree but watch the jacks on here now say all creditors are now better off. They forget that without the cva they would still be in lower leagues and that because of them and the likes of Leicester teams now have points deductions. When people say swansea are well run they are talking out of their hats.

We were run appallingly by previous owners but not even yourself Gareth can deny than Swansea are now well run.

Well run now but would not be in your current position if you hadn't done it which is why it really grates on me when sky/talksport say you are an example to all clubs. Had points deductions been in place i very much doubt that a CVA would have been invoked and as such you would have plodded on in the lower leagues in debt and unable to improve your squad.

We would probably have gone bust otherwise due to the way the club had been run under previous owners so it was the only option.

What would you have done?

You would not have gone bust and you know it. Cant blame the club for doing it but it is morally wrong and retrospective punishments should have been brought in. i.e no team can enter the next division until all creditors are paid off in full.

If Mel Nurse had not done what he did and the CVA had not gone through we were finished.

As for retrospective punishments, that's just ridiculous. You want to make up rules to punish a club for an action that wouldn't have been afflicted upon them when taking that action?

Barking.

It's also a bit hard to take a lecture on the subject from a fan of a club that has lived beyond it's means for as long as CCFC has and is only still in existence because of a man who decided to change your colours and divide the fans.

But I really can't be arsed to have the same argument again. Safe to say, we ARE well run, as you admitted.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/apr/08/swansea-halo-owners-windfall

That article is inaccurate.

http://www.swanseacity.net/news/article ... 60627.aspx

Has Jenkins got his own business aswell??? How well is that doing ????

No, his firm went bust. A good friend of mine lost his job as a result. He told me that Huw Jenkins was spending so much unpaid time on the club, that he took his eye off the ball of his own business in difficult times for his industry.

If you want to beat him with that stick go ahead, but it's a low blow.

Hmmm it just demonstrates that business's can seem to be doing well from the outside making good profits and paying good dividends, then someone takes their eyes of the ball and everything can change very quickly and all of a sudden things look very different. Very interesting...