Huw opens up on takeovers, transfers and taking responsibility
With Swansea City at the foot of the Premier League and facing a revolt from fans, there have been calls for chairman Huw Jenkins to quit and angry frustrations over the decisions that have led to this point. Jenkins has avoided speaking publicly over the
Q There is an accusation from fans of you and the board taking your eye off the ball, to the detriment of the club and for personal gain?
A “Let’s examine the facts. The year before Garry Monk finished, it was the highest finish we’d had. For a variety of reasons, some well-documented, the run of form at the start of the next season was poor – but that had nothing to do with the possible sale of the club.
“We picked up form to get out that situation and finish up 12th, so did we do much wrong at that time and take our eye off the ball? I don’t think we did. Not at that time.
“I think there was a new, bigger challenge facing us and it’s something we’ve faced from then on in and that’s the threat of relegation. That threat kicking in that January was something new for everyone; there was panic off the field, there was panic within the squad of players, and it was a new experience to see the effects that had on people within the club.
“When we’d been going up the league, seeing how other clubs had performed in that situation, I don’t think we appreciated what a difficult task it was. Coupled with the fact that we had a lot of very good squad players who had been with us a long time, players ingrained in the Swansea way of doing things, a lot of them were coming to the ends of their careers together as a group, we found that hard to deal with. I think those are bigger factors than taking our eye off the ball.
“I can’t argue that from that point in we’ve struggled to replace that inner group, the spirit we had.
“And the biggest factor of all, without thinking about taking our eye off the ball, you need clarity and a clear way of thinking from our coach and manager down. I think the past 18 months have been very difficult because of that.”
Q But going back to the summer of 2016, after the share sale, there seemed to be a golden opportunity to move forward, such as with the possibility of Joe Allen coming back . . .
A “And I wanted him back here.”
Q And also around that time there were suggestions Brendan Rodgers could come back?
A “Yes, I spoke to Brendan three times.”
Q Can you clarify what happened then?
A “My biggest regret is not getting Brendan back here at any cost. I’m not going to hide from that. And I told him as well a few times. That would have been the biggest thing that we, or I, should have done differently, and that is make sure that at all costs he came back.”
Q So why didn’t it happen?
A “Our financial position then [January 2016] was extremely tight to say the least, that’s why Jonjo [Shelvey] left. My biggest worry at the time, myself as chairman looking back at our history as a football club, was if we did get relegated, we didn’t have one shareholder responsible for the club’s debt, and our debt is our overdraft to run the club.
“I think the financial side of the club, looking back where we’ve made massive mistakes in the past as a club over the years, I didn’t want that happening while I was chairman. All I can say is Jonjo left to try and help us through that period to get us into the summer, and I couldn’t make strong financial decisions early in that window until I knew there were more players leaving. I was stuck. That prevented Joe coming back. I had discussions with Liverpool to try to do a deal probably around £10-11milion, I’d spoke to Joe and then he had the five-year offer from Stoke, which he had to make a decision on the following day because they were travelling. I’d talked to Joe but I couldn’t commit to it. I was chairman of the football club, we’d got through our years of success on limited funds and budgets, we managed to do it. Then, the longer we were in the Premier League, the tougher it becomes to compete on a wage level to where we’ve got to buy and sell players to try to fund any new acquisitions.
“At that time at 2016 was very simple, we had no one shareholder that could cover our financial position if we got relegated, and the decision to sell Jonjo in January was to get us through to the summer within our agreed framework of our overdraft with the banks. In that summer I didn’t feel right signing up players or a manager without knowing that we had income coming in before the season started in August.”
Q How does it get to the stage where Swansea, the model club, is on a financial tightrope?
A “It got to that stage because we were trying to compete in the Premier League. We can talk about – and I’m not going to name names – clubs we know well, and it’s not easy. The first challenge when you get into the Premier League, you’ve a two or three-year cycle, and then if you want to retain your players you’re upping their wages again. You’ve got a little period where you can be quite comfortable financially and then you’ve got a period where everything starts catching you up and you’ve got to start renewing every contract, and then that continues and continues. With the modern game every renewal is probably £1 million a renewal, so your wage bill goes from here to there. It’s not rocket science. That’s the challenge everyone faces.”
Q On a Saturday, when the atmosphere is almost toxic, is there part of you that thinks you wish you hadn’t sold?
A “I think you did have a group of shareholders in the past that perhaps felt they could do no more within the club because of the way things are and how difficult it was becoming.
“The majority of them didn’t work within the club. I don’t control the shareholders, I only own a small percentage of the club, they can virtually go out and do what they want. It’s not all down to me that point.
“And then you had a group of people wanting to come in to try to take the club on and that’s where we were at.”
Q Is there any player the Americans have funded to bring in?
A “The financial position we were in in 2016, there were discussions that perhaps we would have had to reduce our borrowings at that time, so we would have been selling more players than we were forced to do. You just had no idea what that summer would have brought to us, but we knew that something had to change.
“Of course you can look back and say we spent £15m on Baston and he’s not playing in the team, or this player and that, but we can go through every club in the country and do that. I don’t think there’s any club that gets everything right, it so hap- pens with us that a lot of things have come together and affected us at once. Then we’ve got
t h e added thing with players leaving, but it’s not as if we want that, we don’t go around phoning [Fernando] Llorente to say: ‘Go on, get out of the club.’ These guys are looking to progress their careers and to earn more money somewhere else, and we can’t stop them because we’ll put more risk on the club, because some of these guys want £100,000plus a week and longer contracts. We can’t compete with that. And that’s the reality of us being in the Premier League.”
Q But the frustration of the summer was not so much Llorente leaving, more that there was no activity for a month because of the wait for the Gylfi Sigurdsson deal and it suggested there was no spare cash to buy a player even though you knew he was going?
A “There’s two things there. The thought that we could have done the deal earlier, that was one thing. Then you delay it to try to maximise the sale. But then we’re not in a position where we can gamble on making signings happen and also our negotiating point on Sigurdsson would have been less. So whatever you do is going to be wrong because one would counteract the other.
“I think in a perfect world we’d have liked to do it earlier and probably we would have dealt with that window a bit differently than we did. I can’t argue with that.”
Q Sigurdsson and Llorente going meant that in one summer you sold your most influential players in terms of goalscoring, finished with the lowest net spend in the division, and brought in only one goalscoring player. How can anyone have been happy with that scenario?
A “I don’t think any of us were happy with it and how it panned out or the way it ended on deadline day. As I said, with more time probably we would have made different decisions. But it remains to be seen what the effect on how we have been from the start of the season and how the squad has reacted.
“I don’t think we have seen the squad we have play to its full potential. It will be very interesting to see how Carlos [Carvalhal] handles the squad in a similar situation to last year with Paul [Clement}, to see if he can get more out of them and then we can have a more balanced view of how our summer worked out.”
Q Is the money left from summer there to spend in January?
A “Yes. Despite what some may say, no-one goes into Swansea City’s accounts and takes money out for any reason apart from ourselves running the club and trying to operate within the parameters we have got. That is it.
“The thing you are missing is the position we were in financially before we sold Sigurdsson and how that works out.
“That’s why taking the risk of signing players before you sell is the same position as we have been in for the last two or three years.
“Each summer is the same problem, the risk of signing before selling is too great for us as a football club. The answer to that is to make sure you sell earlier and then things would be different.”
Q But with the new majority shareholders now in, surely that is a situation that has moved on. The point should be that the financial guarantee they provide lessen those risks?
A “They do (lessen the risks) but as touched on earlier, where we were with the old board they would not be able to take the risks we have now.
“Those risks would have been pulled further back, there was a view within the old board that we needed to pull back because we were taking too many risks because the threat of relegation crept in and we had to make sure we were in a position to cope with that.”
Q Is the money available to strengthen in January?
A “There is money available for January and it will be the money left over from the summer. That money has not gone anywhere.”
Q But, beyond that, any signings would have to be funded by sales?
A “If we wanted to go beyond that, it’s what we have always done and how we have always worked.
“The risks are less because of those financial bits that are covered and they are important.”
Q When operating like that, your recruitment set-up is crucial. Are there plans to change it because it has not been successful of late?
A “The recruitment set-up is vital, I agree. We have a good group connected to our recruitment and over the majority of time we were getting 80 to 90% of signings working with us and that’s not forgetting the work of last January too.
“From last summer we would be lucky if that is 50 or 60%.
“The three or four brought in last January made an impact and helped us a lot, but it is critical and it does get harder to plug those gaps and make sure the guys coming in are right for the Premier League.
“My own view is that football has changed a lot these past three or four years. We have had to cope with that as a club, it has gone full circle from
where we were and the challenges we face on and off the field are completely different to before.
“You can see the gulf between the top and the bottom has grown greater, even the clubs we are up against – the so-called smaller clubs – are backed by some wealthy individuals who are prepared to spend a bit of money as well.”
Q So to go back to the point of the Americans, there was talk of going to the next level when they came in, do you understand why fans say they cannot see any tangible benefits from them coming in? What do you say to that? They feel if a consortium buys a club there is an onus to provide some funding to help the playing side because the club’s greatest asset is Premier League status?
A “You are going to get that feeling if it is not working well on the pitch. That is never going to change.
“When things go well, people will pat you on the back and tell you it is going well.
“The facts of football are that things change, there are cycles that every club goes through.”
Q But you just said other clubs around Swansea are spending because they are backed by people with big resources. The Americans clearly do not have that. Is that correct?
A “No, I did not say that at all. I don’t think you should surmise that. There are two things. Financially we are far more secure that we ever were.
“Secondly, and I don’t know where you got the story from about the next level and all these things, they (the Americans) never said anything different when they came in.
“They were attracted to buying the club because of the way we operated, our story and the way we were run over many years. That answers the questions doesn’t it?”
Q On the recruitment front. How does it work? On what basis is it done? Is it transfer by committee?
A “It is different to before, I can’t hide that.
“We operated with a simple structure before, rightly or wrongly that is what we did.
“Obviousl y now, rightly, there are more people involved but what gets lost in a lot of coverage is we work with our managers to bring players in.
“Hardly any decision is made without a joint-approach and agreement with our manager. That’s number one and is a big factor with the new manager coming in.
“I think the fact he has clarity on how he wants to play, thinking about our background, will start to make the recruitment process a lot simpler.
“Plus, he is very solid in his own vision of what he wants, which will help our recruitment no end.”
Q What about the accusations that you are too heavily involved personally?
A “I disagree with that, it is just not true. Of course I am involved with finalising things, be it contracts, final discussions or if we have a choice of one or two to go for.
“I know the problems of bringing in players here that managers don’t want and you’d be wasting your time. You just cause problems with managers, and you are wasting your money which we haven’t got to waste.
“Believe it or not, I have had a fantastic relationship with every manager who has been through our doors.
“There is no manager that has left here feeling like ‘Huw Jenkins has made every decision and I don’t want to go back there and work’. It
has not happened.”
Q Some have asserted that your position is untenable. Do you agree with that and how much responsibility do you take for the current situation?
A “Well I have to take responsibility. I cannot not take responsibility. I think there are reasons (for the situation) but I think probably a lot of people don’t want to listen to the rea- sons because they want to see action and they want to see the team doing well.
“So, yes, I take responsibility for it. I don’t totally agree my position is how they say it. I think if we continue as we are, yes it will be.”
Q If it continues, your position would be untenable?
A “I don’t disagree with that. If we continue on this path of hardly winning football games, yes, I have no doubt it is.”
Q If the club are relegated, you would go?
A “I would certainly consider that. I am not that naive or arrogant or whatever the words are that I am not responsible.”
Q What do you think when you listen to the Jenkins Out chants (above)? A “It is obviously not good. But what it has taken out of me doing this job, my kids would be joining in and saying the same thing. They would be chanting as well to get me home more, I would spend more time with them. Because it does take over your life and, good or bad, it has caused me a lot of personal problems as well. I understand that and a lot of my family would be quite happy if I was not doing the job.
Q If that’s the case, why don’t you quit? A “I am not afraid of that, I not am too afraid to confront things. When I finish, I would rather it be in a position of when things are doing well, not the other way around.
“If we can turn things around and start playing better on the pitch and show a little bit of belief back again, whether I am there or not, nothing would make me happier.”
Q Hopefully Swansea will stay up, but do you still have a decision to make?
A “I think so yes. It’s not about the abuse – as I say I had plenty of that back in League Two – but I do a job and I have some pride in what we have done, so obviously if that does not come to that level and I feel it is not right or we are not hitting those levels or cannot hit those levels again, of course I will feel like that. I think that is understandable.
“When you have been in football long enough you know full well things move on. We had good and bad years as a football club then, up and down like a yo-yo.
“Plenty of people, chairmen and people within the club had plenty of abuse at that time before I got involved. It happens at every other club as well. We are never going to be any different.
“I know sometimes we thought we could be, that we could be different, but gradually on and off the field we have become like any other club.
“And not just looking at the football side which you have mentioned. I think generally we have become like every other because we want success at all costs.”
Q Do you think, then, Swansea are already at a stage where it is seen as being success at all costs?
A “Yes. Football has become that. I understand that. It’s not what we have done over the years, perhaps that’s the difference about how people feel about my decision-making recently. It’s the fact that I am not prepared to gamble at all costs for the football club because I have seen what it has done to us in the past.
“And I did not want to be the chairman doing that. Other people might make different decisions and take the risks and are happy to walk away and leave it to somebody else. I was not prepared to do that.
Q If the worst happens and Swansea go down, some supporters will say the Americans will be gone and take the parachute payments?
A “Those guys would never do that. They are not that type of people, they have good solid reputations in America for all the things they have been involved in.
“The only thing that matters to them is being in the Premier League and making sure the club is there at that level, it’s the only thing that works for them.”
Q Are you confident the club is in good hands with the Americans?
A “Yes. 100%. you have asked lots of questions, nobody can guarantee people are going to make the right decisions on our club every day of the week.
“When the pressure is on and people want instant success there is going to be a variety of things some are happy with some aren’t. We will see on the pitch whether it works or it doesn’t.
“But if we are truthful we haven’t got a clue whether it is going to work or not. That is what you learn in football: you can make as many decisions as you want. The fact is you have no idea if it is going to work. That is what experience brings you.
“You just have to sleep in the night and hope it works the following morning. That’s a fact. Anybody tells you any different they are not telling you the truth.
“That is where we are with that. But the question about them being safe and solid behind our club, yes, 100%.
That’s all I can say.”
Q What difference has the sale made? What have you been able to do that you wouldn’t have been able to do without the Americans?
A “They cover all of our financial guarantees to make sure we’ve got coverage, that’s what they do and it takes that pressure off myself and one or two others that were working in the club at that time.”
Q So there’s no spare cash from them to help with player funding?
A “No, there’s no money put in at this time to do that. No. But you can’t forget that the ongoing situation as well with the trust and other shareholders, that even if they did put money in, there would be the argument about dilution of shares because that’s the way that they can introduce capital.”
Q They invested money by buying shares, but have they put any money at all beyond that to fund the running of the club?
A “We’ve increased our overdraft, we’ve done various things. And they’re obviously trying to increase commercial revenue and grow the club that way, which they will do, they’ve got a lot of big commercial contacts and I don’t doubt they will do that.”
Q Did you do due diligence on the two Americans?
A “Yes.”
Q Did you do due diligence on the 27 who’ve been named as part of the consortium?
A “There are two things. The two people we deal with are honest, trustworthy, well recognised, solid business people in America, the way they put together their way of purchasing the club is virtually down to them, but the two people that we dealt with is Jason and Steve, who I firmly believe are good for this club.
They are solid people that want the club to do well, it’s the only thing that works for them.”
Q Can you see why the fans feel the Americans have not made any tangible difference to their football club when they go along on a Saturday to watch their games – can you understand that perspective?
A “Yeah, of course I can understand that. But I can also understand on the other side of that, there’s no difference to what was there before, so what’s the issue?”
Q They’ve seen their club change hands and regress during that period?
A “But nobody can predict how it would have run if it hadn’t had changed. We just discussed where we were in 2016, that was a very difficult period we were facing, and we had to sell a player to try and balance the books to go through until the summer, so you’ve got no idea what would have happened if we didn’t do it.”
Q Huw, you’ve not spoken like this in a long time. Why now?
A “The main point is that, reluctantly, as a group of shareholders who sold some shares in the club, with the continuing voicing of opinion against certain things and how that has affected the club in certain ways, it’s been felt some parts of that which have been put across in a different way to which we would have.
“It’s been left to run as that and people might say we should have clarified things earlier which we haven’t.
“But we’re at this point everybody feels that it’s time at least a few things were a little bit clearer.”
Q No doubt there will be still a divide of opinions of people seeing it as good or bad, and we’re not going to hide from that.
A “Going back in time, as a group of shareholders we had taken the club into the Premier League and there was quite a lot of publicity in 2014 when everybody knew there were interested parties looking at buying the club. The Trust were part of that at that time. There were reports of meetings and the Trust chairman met the parties in Heathrow, which has all been talked about and commented on before.
“From that date on, there were various shareholders meetings held – and there’s plenty of paperwork to cover that – everybody involved was fully aware that there was a view that the majority of shareholders would like to sell.
“We had South Africans, Americans, one living in Monaco, John van Zweden is obviously Dutch, and the majority of them never took part in the running of the club, and they saw an opportunity to seize from their initial investment. Every shareholder was fully aware of that.
“When things ended with that initial approach from John Moores, things moved on and time passed over six to eight months, but every shareholder was fully aware that there were other interested parties out there looking buying shares in the club.
“That was a constant discussion in every shareholder meeting we had. In late 2015, when there was relatively serious interest in acquiring shares, a lot of discussions went on legally behind the scenes up to about February 2016 to when a terms sheet and formal structure of a possible deal was put together.
“The club were in a poor position on the pitch at that time – in December we had parted with Garry Monk – and any deal that would ever go ahead for our football club at that time would only happen if we stayed in the Premier League. At that time there was a 50-50 chance we would come through the relegation battle and there would still be a deal on the table. That’s a simple fact.”
Q How did the deal proceed from there?
A “We had that timescale on whether we would stay up going through towards the end of the season, and the other side was – because things were going on to get a terms sheet and a legal document together during that time – I felt there was no need to put
added pressure on the club considering the league position we were in, and secondly until there was a deal on the table in writing and the club had a fair chance of staying up, there was no deal at all. That’s the way it was.
“When we got to March, that was the first time I made the trust aware – and some of our other shareholders aware – there was a strong possibility that there would be a deal on the table to consider. That was when we played away to Bournemouth.
“The following week we played Aston Villa at home, there was a meeting held on the Friday night prior to the game which brought the majority of shareholders together just to clarify that the deal was possible.
“There was then a meeting held on the Saturday morning of the game, with the trust – who had four members and legal representation present – and two of our shareholders, to try and convince the trust to sell 11% (of their shareholding in the deal).
“We had a different range of opinions between the shareholders. We talked about their shares because we’ve been fans long enough to consider things and whether they should keep their shares, whether they should have fought for non-dilution so they should always keep 20% going forward, or whether they should sell their shares and cash the money in and be there for the future.
“We had those discussions. Three or four of our shareholders were adamant the trust should sell and bank the money to wait for a rainy day. All that was put over to them in a meeting. That possibility was discussed.
“Within a week, we had the sale and purchase document.
“The trust were given that document the same day as everybody else. No other shareholder had seen any detail about a deal on the table until the same day the trust did.
“The way it’s been put out in many statements and parts of media coverage that they were unaware of the deal is just not true.” Q What have you made of the criticism some trust board members have faced?
A “People like Huw Cooze, it’s disgusting and disappointing that all the good work they have done they’ve ended up feeling they’ve been forced out of positions and the likes of, even now, with Will Morris recently and Phil Sumbler who have done fantastic work over so many years to bring fans together and feel part of the club, it’s so disappointing how that has all ended up. It was nobody’s intention for this to happen.
“We can’t hide from the fact we have a group of shareholders – me included – who felt for the initial investment it was a reasonable thing to consider to sell shares.
“To clarify, the sale and purchase agreement was given to all shareholders the same day. There is dialogue going back and for with all shareholders clarifying certain legal points. That was still in March. The sale wasn’t completed until the end of July.
“There was a four month period that, I felt, because the way we tried to do it, that summer we could have fought each other in the summer, but once August came we needed it to be nailed down and go forward as a group for the good of the club.
“There’s no grey area. Once that difference of opinion spreads from one thing to another, it always leads onto the field. It’s not just us, it happens at every club you see it at. I understand the implications of things like that which are massive for our football club.” Q Were there disagreements over the deal?
A “We still had that four-month period to consider how we wanted to go forward in the deal.
“We had arguments, I had many arguments with some of our shareholders, big arguments where we’ve been friends for years and we fell out over it, because of different views of some of the details, how much was to be sold, not being happy with different things, getting their own lawyers involved, it was hard work with all shareholders just to get a deal together.
“During that period, anything could have changed, any permutations of selling shares could have changed to suit anybody including the Supporters’ trust.
“It could have meant 10% of shares being taken off others to give to them. It could have been done. There’s no ifs and buts, it was there for them.
“So for people to come out and say they didn’t know about the sale annoys me because it’s wrong. Yet there’s been interviews on TV where it’s been said and it’s wrong.
“If they say they didn’t have time, or that the four months wasn’t enough, or we didn’t have clarity about how we wanted to go forward, I agree, but there’s a difference.
“Whether they dislike the fact it’s done, or half of our supporters do and they want me out of my job because of it, it’s a different thing.
“But the facts are facts and it disappoints me the facts have been distorted.
“After the sale was closed at the end of July, there were still ongoing discussions with the trust in particular to try and close a shareholders agreement that would have been comfortable for them going forward.
“I don’t know why that wasn’t finalised, but obviously they couldn’t reach an agreement going forward and we ended up the position we did from late 2016.
“The further disappointment on the field has meant these things continue to be chucked up in public.
“We can go back to when Bob (Bradley) was here as manager, though last January onwards with the good run of form we had things tapered off, but again it rears it’s head when things have been disappointing.
“But where it’s stated things were done behind the trust’s back are not entirely true. This is what happened and people can make their judgements.
“They might thing exactly the same, and I’m not telling you this to make me look better.
“People think I go around saying I do things to make myself look good, but I’ve done this long enough. I had more criticism when we were in League Two and almost went out of the league. There’s no worries about that.
“When I think perhaps the time is right for me to finish, I’ll know it. Though I do take on board a lot of the supporters’ views now and accept it.” Q Did the deal contravene the existing shareholders agreement?
A “I think we all have different opinions on the shareholders agreement. I would say that many decisions taken over the last 12 years surpassed that agreement in many shapes and forms and taken on and taking into account it was not signed by every shareholder.
“Some lawyer will tell me differently no doubt, but the fact is many of those inclusions at that time to look at running the club were surpassed time and time again because of the different financial parameters you were working within.” Q Given the way its panned out, would you have approached the sale differently?
A “I think it could have been handled better from all sides, I think.
“It just needed some truth and honesty really where we stood with the trust as well.
“If they wanted to go down a certain route, we should have had proper . . . even if there were arguments. We should have had those discussions during that four-month period. Then we could have hammered out that deal properly. That is what should have happened. Those four months should have been . . . during those four months it had to be finished. That’s how I would have dealt with it different.
“I left it go along, we thought we had got a new shareholders’ agreement, I speak to Jason and Steve, the lawyers were involved and in the end we got nowhere.
“That is my regret. Those four months. By the time we put pen to paper at the end of July, it should have been finished one way or the other.”
For people to come out and say they didn’t know about the sale annoys me because it’s wrong Huw Jenkins