New beginnings - 25% Truth, 80% Bollocks

[RobertT]

Standing being involved or not is a big deal, IF he wins the court case and is shown to be the owner of the football club at that time.

The entire defence of the football club, based on what they have told us they submitted to the EFL/FA, was that the football club was no longer owned by any such type of individual and a new regime was in place so we shouldn't be punished for prior owners sins.

Standing winning and also being involved today would undermine that defence.

Standing and Barry are heavily involved together.  Their families own lots of businesses, including one set-up specifically for Louise Barry it seems.  Standing removed himself from many of them at the same time as the power struggle at STFC and his relinquishing of an agents role, but his family (including wife and brother) remain as Directors of plenty of them.

[Mooneyraker]

On that basis, for once, are we rooting for Lee Power? It pains me to type that but it might be cleaner for the club.

[RobertT]

On that basis, for once, are we rooting for Lee Power? It pains me to type that but it might be cleaner for the club.

Only if there is any identifiable link to Standing still being an investor.  If not, then it doesn't matter for our defence.  Obviously, if Power wins we are not on the hook at all.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

I don’t know how these things work, but if Standing wins how on earth does he get his alleged £6m from Power? Surely Power was the legal owner when he was forced to sell to Clem - otherwise that court case couldnt have forced him to sell.

What assurances did Standing have from Power about his ‘investment’ in the club? If anything like Clem’s 15% never being formally ratified, not much you would think.

I think they had a ‘gentleman’s’ agreement but nobody in their right mind would give £6m with no formal structure as to how it would be repaid.

Can someone put money into a club and not formally be a director or have ‘significant interest’?

There’s just too many what ifs for us to speculate.

[Batch]

Good news on the Kielys front I think.

Relevant person = acting with powers of director. Need to go through owners and directors test.

Significant person = having 10% or more shares

Peterborough got a suspended points deduction + fine for not declaring a relevant person.

If we have fallen foul of rules, I think but declaring a significant person would be a lesser crime. Unless they are acting as a relevant person behind the scenes

[Bob's Orange]

Good news on the Kielys front I think.

Relevant person = acting with powers of director. Need to go through owners and directors test.

Significant person = having 10% or more shares

Peterborough got a suspended points deduction + fine for not declaring a relevant person.

If we have fallen foul of rules, I think but declaring a significant person would be a lesser crime. Unless they are acting as a relevant person behind the scenes

And perhaps if you are right we've just got a bit of a slap on the wrist from the EFL and advised to update our website.

[horlock07]

Its a different world in the PL though.

https://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/2119838-evertons-plight-worsens-after-investment-deal-appears-doomed

Not sure our fans would have enough time to track so many people with money in the club on that scale.

[Nemo]

Its a different world in the PL though.

https://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/2119838-evertons-plight-worsens-after-investment-deal-appears-doomed

Not sure our fans would have enough time to track so many people with money in the club on that scale.

At least none of our owners/related parties are under international sanctions, I suppose. At least until Australia launches special military operations in Fiji.

[ChalkyWhiteIsGod]

Your summary of the relationships between Power/Austin (at the end) and Austin/Morfuni are in line with what I'm told.

I suppose, hypothetically, you then ask the question:

Which side is Chris Kiely on and how does that impact the club?

(...and this era has been very much about sides)

Scenes when Kiely reveals himself to be linked with Power the whole time. (one for DV)

[ChalkyWhiteIsGod]

Liam Wells, a young boxer trained by Adam Hart, was wearing a Swindon logo on his tracksuit in January 2019, which suggests some kind of association dates back to then at least.

https://www.boxingscene.com/liam-wells-tipped-big-things-by-coach-adam-hart--135183

Most worrying part of that is the MTK Global logo on the Swindon top.

[ChalkyWhiteIsGod]

Only if there is any identifiable link to Standing still being an investor.  If not, then it doesn't matter for our defence.  Obviously, if Power wins we are not on the hook at all.

Hopefully he has a new liar than the one that kept just trying to delay things vs Clem. Shambolic.

[Bob's Orange]

Swindon Town FC parent company Seebeck 87 Limited have filed a first Gazette notice for compulsory strike-off at #companieshouse #STFC #SwindonTown @Official_STFC

http://thetownend.com/index.php?topic=58890.msg1757646#msg1757646

[Batch]

Was just getting clarification on whether that was significant

In fact the trust have a good explanation from 2021 and I think it still holds (see https://twitter.com/EyesOTBoard/status/1694752264823402629?t=-MoFmvEPdlibhMLsZtSUnw&s=19)

https://truststfc.com/2021/06/08/court-hearing-pre-emption-rights/

STFC is wholly owned by a company called Seebeck 87 Limited (“Seebeck”).

Seebeck is wholly owned by a company called Swinton Reds 20 Limited (“Swinton”).

Whoever owns and controls Swinton indirectly owns and controls STFC.

So yeah. Has something changed?

As I see it seebeck hasn't really got assets and is just anb empty holding company, but it isn't excused regulatory filings right?

In any case would imagine it's an easy fix, just very slack from the club?
----------
Edit: sorry Bob. Missed that looking at the other stuff. So did anyone come to a conclusion

[Bob's Orange]

Was just getting clarification on whether that was significant

In fact the trust have a good explanation from 2021 and I think it still holds (see https://twitter.com/EyesOTBoard/status/1694752264823402629?t=-MoFmvEPdlibhMLsZtSUnw&s=19)

https://truststfc.com/2021/06/08/court-hearing-pre-emption-rights/

So yeah. Has something changed?

As I see it seebeck hasn't really got assets and is just anb empty holding company, but it isn't excused regulatory filings right?

In any case would imagine it's an easy fix, just very slack from the club?

According to Horlock a couple of pages back;

"It just relates to a certain amount of time having passed since documents were due, it may be shoddy paperwork, it may be that they have restructured things and don't need Seebeck sitting in the ownership chain any more, it always seemed odd/overcomplicated without having the full story  having Swinton>Seebeck>STFC Ltd. IIRC the debentures were signed up to when Jed took over using Seebeck as the vehicle, it may be that as they have now gone Seebeck isn't needed any more and will just be allowed to die a death?"

[Batch]

Cheers Bob. Was just about to read back!

Is it as chaotic as it seems behind the scenes I wonder 🤔