In NUST, we must Trust?

Heroes or villains?

Heroes or villains?

Gathering my thoughts, my notes and my open mind, I ordered a pint of Deuchars last night and settled myself against the bar of The Strawberry at approximately 7.25pm, ready to listen to what the committee representatives of the Newcastle United Supporter’s Trust (NUST), had to say for themselves.

I was under no illusions that with a number of pressing questions sitting snugly in my pocket, that despite my ambivalence (bordering on enthusiasm), I would be seen to be playing Devil’s Advocate nonetheless. However, clearly they had been asked the same questions on a few occasions and have consider the same issues themselves. They answered my questions fairly candidly, although they could not digress on certain key aspects which will no doubt frustrate some people. Unfortunately, these same details are the ones which have led people to distrust the motives of the individuals within the Trust.

Having stood and listened to the commitee members, namely Colin Whittle of True Faith and a solicitor by profession, Mark Jensen of The Mag, Bill (unfortunately not sure of his full name or background) acting as compere. And I spoke at length to Tony Stephenson, who does a lot of the online stuff for NUST (I missed out on Ando doing his ex-player turn, and hope I didn’t put him off with my incessant chat to Ton).

This is what I gathered from the roadshow:

  • Passionate, responsible and forthright people are at the heart of this Trust. It (or NUSC to be precise) was probably spawned by emotions and outrage but now has the safety net of common sense and experience and appears to have matured as an organisation. Though they appear keenly aware that mud sticks and they still need to convince people this is workable and being done for the right reasons.
  • They’ve had some initial business/financial/legal nous but have pushed for expertise both locally and from experts in The City, to determine what is behind the Iron Curtain with regard operating costs, existing debts etc and what might be needed to make this work.
  • They are seeking more local investment/support from the council and are now pushing for more financial and non-financial support from local businesses.
  • There is, as yet, no business plan because of the delicate nature of their proposal (regulation, legislation) but they intend to get one out as soon as possible without making a pig’s ear of it. Their sentiments were, it took Ashley a couple of year’s to bring this club to it’s knees and it’s undoubtedly going to take a while for that to be put right, with or without the Trusts involvement, but they intend to work progressively and as professionally as possible to get a voice on the board.
  • There are pledges in place but everyone is waiting for something tangible (i.e. a plan) to go with but this is still going to take time. And even with a plan, we may still have a case of everybody waiting for somebody else to push that green button.
  • In terms of the 100% ownership going ahead, the planned investment of pensions are going to be protected by a non-elected corporate financial member, should the proposed board structure/model go through. However, they will ensure that the best advice is received by those in a position to contribute in this manner.
  • They desperately want to give more detailed answers to fence-sitters, sceptics and supporters alike but are bound by the present constraints.
  • They will be happy for more ‘experts’ to come along and invest and to guide them in their pursuit. They have set the ball rolling and just want like-minded people to get behind them, either with a couple of mil in their back pockets to help, or just some blood, sweat and tears.
  • There was other stuff which I guess was off the record and doesn’t need mentioning here with regard rumours etc because we aleady know them or have a similar opinion.
  • Their intention is to buy the club outright as they stated on their website and press releases, though they concede that they may have to accept a percentage of ownership and probably not in partnership with the current incumbent, though that is not ruled out. They would intend to invest a decent portion of money to have a decent portion of the say, even if it just means the current or future board do not have carte blanche. They don’t intend that we get involved in the running of the club. Ultimately, they see the German clubs and their 50+1 rule as perhaps being the most probable and sufficient outcome in the short term if they can get this off the ground.
  • They explained quite candidly that they saw Llambias’ invite as PR and having seen the previous takeover proposal by fans be ridiculed (they were witness to it), and they intend to keep their cards quite firmly against their chest for now.
  • I was quite honest about my stance. I’m still ambivalent as many are. However, even with the encouraging information, I may not be in a position to contribute much. I asked them whether they thought that might ostracise people and cause divides. They are aware that’s a precarious point and are seeking to do what they can. I suggested they may need some way of facilitating ‘groups’, so that even 150 of you could put in £10 and still make up a collective vote. Albeit, you might not get your way but then your £1500 (still a ballpark figure anyway) might not get you your result either. That’s where they need to be careful and thoughtful about the semantics of it.
  • I think to sum it up, where they are at the moment is finding out what the appetite is. If there is no appetite, then what is the point? These are supporters and experts giving up their free time to progress things – let’s be frank though, the supporters for the desire to fix the club and the experts with a view to getting something out of it should it go ahead (fees etc). Without finding out what the appetite is, the time and money these guys have already invested and continue to invest in terms of roashows and behind-the-scenes stuff is all for nothing. They may appear to have trodden dangerously close to the boundaries of regulation and legilsation when canvassing for investment simply because of the enthusiam, but seem to be taking the right advice and seeking more expertise to do things in the right manner.

    Sceptics may have seen it as tub-thumping (though I think the sceptics and cynics didn’t bother to turn up, and instead are happy to take 2nd/3rd/4th hand knowledge and pillory their efforts from their online comfort). If it hadn’t been emotive and passionate, I’d have been disappointed and probably a little less trusting. After all, these are supporters, not impartial businessmen.

    The most I hoped for was to come away thinking it wasn’t a load of cock and while there is clearly still a lot of work to do and a long road ahead, it’s not a load of cock in my opinion. This campaign may never get off the ground, it may get part way off the ground and still fall back to earth with a bump, some bruised pride and a lot of disappointment. In the meantime, I hope they keep up the good work. They have my respect and support for what they’re trying to achieve. And I plan to help them as much as I can to make something happen.

    The information above is a mix of answers to questions I posed, the information they provided and some of my thoughts. In terms of the questions you guys have posted on the previous article, I plan to give these to the NUST formally and in turn get some formal and official answers. For those who are interested, the Trust is looking for volunteers to help spread the word and you can contact them if you’re available tomorrow and/or going forward. More information and contacts can be found on their site www.nust.org.uk.

    avatar NUFCBlog Author: bowburnmag bowburnmag has written 234 articles on this blog.

    Related Posts:

    Go to comment box

    57 Responses to “In NUST, we must Trust?”

    1. 1
      avatar Stardust says:

      BBM – thanks for that – I’d be refreshing all day out of curiousity.
       
      Disturbingly – Its pretty much as I had stated.
       
      “There is, as yet, no business plan because of the delicate nature of their proposal (regulation, legislation) but they intend to get one out as soon as possible without making a pig’s ear of it. ” – They have asked people to invest their pensions in this sake “for gods sake” without the knowledge of the consequence of their actions. Nor do they have ANY financials!

      PEOPLES PENSIONS! PEOPLES FUTURES! FAMILIES SAFETY NETS! CARE AND SECURITY FOR WHEN THEY ARE OLDER!
      “There are pledges in place but everyone is waiting for something tangible (i.e. a plan) to go with but this is still going to take time. And even with a plan, we may still have a case of everybody waiting for somebody else to push that green button”

      Again – as I said a lie – pledges are conditional – i.e they have to see the plan first – and the financials. They came out with a whopper of a lie and have been caught red handed. They dont have a penny’s worth of “Commitment”

      Honestly fella – I am sitting here more annoyed that they are confirmed to be as stupid as I thought they were.

      How do they get around Collective Investment Schemes

      It sounds like they have been firmly rapped for solicitating unsophisticated investors and advertising for investment.

      They obviously have ZERO experience of the normal questions, considerations and legislation.

      How are they going to counter time and the price going up as we near being promoted? They have no contingency, they have no tactics, they have no idea?

      Well meaning fools they might be, but every move stinks to high heaven of amateurish donkeys – happy for the world to see the size of their donkeys lugs.

      And by the way – the technicalities of law they require to navigate through – are well known and obvious – to those who understand the consequence of their undertaking. I suggest their position is perilous already and any investment could find its way getting swallowed up by a FSA visit at any moment.

      Again BBM – I sincerely appreciate the update, I appreciate I may come accross as too forthright, thats because I am angry at these people, they simply show themselves up every day. But a big thanks anyway.

      I implore everyone to tell everyone they know who is associated with the club to campaign AGAINST NUST until such times that they release a proposal for dissemination.

      They have floated a dead duck for the world to see – morons.

    2. 2
      avatar Stuart79 says:

      Ham – fisted is the word that comes to mind….

    3. 3
      avatar georgio says:

      When the idea was first ‘launched’ it seemed pretty attractive. However, having waded through the above, they seem to have no idea how long it will take or how to go about it. Or even what they want. I agree with Stardust – some of this stuff is extremely dodgy, and at best MA will be long gone before they get their act (whatever that is) together.

    4. 4
      avatar UTD111 says:

      Bowburn – thanks for that – and for taking the time and trouble to attend the meeting and feed back.
      Most of what you said confirms what I thought (as previously stated in other posts)…..they’re basically still floating the idea to see if it will take off.  They clearly have some professional input but are looking for more in key areas which is understandable.
      I’m certainly prepared to watch and wait to see how the initiative develops.  If I can ever get rid of this flippin flu I might even find the energy to give a hand somewhere.
      I really hope the entrenched “anti” brigade stop trying to strangle the baby at birth.  I personally will certainly not be “campaigning against NUST” – no reason to – let them try to do what they have set out to do.
      No doubt if they overstep the mark with any rules and regulations along the way – either their friends will guide them or, worst case, the necessary regulatory authorities would step in.
      They clearly haven’t done anything wrong so far as no-one has felt it necessary to pull them up – and even Stardy admits there’s nothing he can report them for!! (much as he would love to!!)
      Good luck NUST.

    5. 5
      avatar Micky Toon says:

      Stardust, I don’t know what the logistics are around you attending a NUST meeting, but if you feel that strongly you really should attending a meeting to ask those very questions.
      It seems from BBM blog that the people who are turning up support the NUST and their cause already. There doesn’t seem to be anyone turning up who will fire the difficult questions to the NUST and make them feel uncomfortable.
      I really appreciate BBM’s efforts, but he probably wouldn’t go at them with as much venom as you would. Or would you? Is this just online angst?

      I amy very sceptical about the whole operation and I too fear for the old boy putting his pension into something that may not pay off.

      What I would say to people in simple terms, because I’m a simple person — Think about this. If it wasn’t investing in NUFC and it wasn’t a campaign to oust Mike Ashley, would you still invest?

      Semi seriously – if the answer is yes, then speak to me. I also don’t have a proper business plan, but I do have a business opportunity that will be a safer return than investing with NUST. If I had the money to do it myself, I would. It’s a simple plan, but then all the best ones usually are.

    6. 6
      avatar geordie deb says:

      Thanks for taking the time to go to the meeting BBM and to write the post. Sadly, the responses are as predicted, they haven’t got a clue.

    7. 7
      avatar mmm_pease_pudding says:

      Stardy – I agree with Micky Toon. If they make you so angry be a man and get yourself along to a meeting and tell them so. You can wow with them your supreme intellect, show them up for that they are and leave in smug satisfaction when they can’t answer your questions.  If you can’t be bothered then I suggest you stop being so outright rude about folk you know nothing about. Afterall I thought you were a lover not a hater.
      Apparently they are holding a supporters surgery before the match this week. Not that you would be anywhere near the ground on a match day like.

    8. 8
      avatar ziad says:

      I think the idea of the trust is not at all a bad one as long as the people in charge have a good plan and the fans are willing to invest.
      Until now I am not sure about the whole thing but the effort is appreciated and at this stage “campaiging against the trust” is just being negative.
      Fans democracy is an ideal situation imo. what if the billionaire we are waiting for does not show up?

    9. 9
      avatar Stardust says:

      Micky T – “I really appreciate BBM’s efforts, but he probably wouldn’t go at them with as much venom as you would. Or would you? Is this just online angst?” Unfortunately I am more than willing to be my online self in real life too lol. I am not a ranter though – I tend to just put the facts over politely but to the point. ;)

      If your second element was aimed at simply getting a proportion of fans to buy a stake and a say in the club – its difficult Micky – if say fans bought 20% of the club, each year the club will make a loss (unless we can get back to break even each year – including buying/finding players). When the club makes a loss, since its a company, those debts have to be covered from revenue or money invested (covered) by the shareholders. The trouble is the shareholders of the 20% wont be wealthy people – so finding any extra money is tough.

      That means that the principal (Mike Ashley) steps up to pay the shortfall – he can either loan the club the money (but loans can be called in at any time, and minority shareholders can be bought out for the value the majority shareholder dictates in such circumstance) Or the principal can invest more into the club, which ultimately means the 20% can be diluted down in return for MA stepping up and paying the money. So 20 % can dwindle down to 10% over a short period of time.

      If the fans simply want a voice, great. If they want and need to protect that money – its too tough to do

    10. 10
      avatar Pons Aelius says:

      I think people are being a bit harsh on the NUST. They appear the most organised supporters club for years, far from the ‘Ashley oot’ mob that they started out as. I agree that there’s no chance I would invest in the attempt to buy the club, and for the reasons stated in the other posts I can’t see anyone else, but I do see an enthusiastic group of fans eager for change, who are willing to work alongside the club if necessary.

      NUST will probably never have any power over what the club does, but they are easily the best representative body we as fans have at the moment. I love their enthusiasm and positivity over the possibility of fan ownership. It’s sad I just can’t see it working.

    11. 11
      avatar bowburnmag says:

      Stardust – is it fair to say that their notion should be, whoever can do it, please chuck us £1500 and in return you may get nothing but a sharehold and a means to help direct the club, rather than play on the investment part?

      I know that’s what I was trying to say last night. I’d want nothing but emotional return, forget the financials.

      I think the ‘pension’ thing is for those people who essentially have it spare and have nothing worth more to them than their club and they can give it to the club. That’s the difficulty though, those people would be losing out a whole lot more. It would of course be their pregotative. But that’s not to say it makes it any fairer.

    12. 12
      avatar bowburnmag says:

      What if people didn’t want to relinquish their shares in order for a principal to put the money in? How would that work?

    13. 13
      avatar Stardust says:

      “Stardust – is fair to say that their notion should be, whoever can do it, please chuck us £1500 and in return you may get nothing but a sharehold and a means to help direct the club, rather than play on the investment part?”

      Exactly BBM. They would buy a share – write off the cash – which would dilute down over time (for the reasons in my post above) just for a say – to be represented.

      But when they were openly canvassing for investors – to use their pension funds – without having financials- its tells us all we need to know. this is going nowhere fella – absolutely nowhere.

    14. 14
      avatar Stardust says:

      Re 12- BBM – If I am picking the gist of your question up correctly. People dont relinquish their shares.
       
      If we have a company and I own 50% of the shares and you own 50% and there are 1000 000 shares issued worth £1 each the company is valued at 1.0mn.  (500 000 shares each)
       
      If the company loses 100 000 in a year and as joint shareholders we have to pay 50k each to keep the company solvent great.
       
      But if you could not afford your 50k – I can either loan it to the club on your behalf  (and demand payment at any time if the loan in unconditional – unlikely) or I can invest the money in the club.
       
      So I say I will invest another 100k in the club, but in return I want shares. So we issue 250 000 shares.. I now own 750 000 shares and you still own 500 000 – so my control has raised to 60% and yours dropped to 40% etc . If this happens over time, the shareholding dilutes significantly – and it will in a loss making organisation.

    15. 15
      avatar bowburnmag says:

      Or is it a case of (as I think you’ve inferred above), there’s a slim chance of making some money, if the 2% they were talking about in theory being paid out as interest. But only if we make a profit, which is unlikely? As football clubs rarely make a profit.

      That’s perhaps where they’ve gone wrong, and I accept that. But I’m happy for them to have got the ball rolling and get someone who can make it work, either help them to or take the reigns. They are receptive to that too. It’s merely a case of someone taking a conversation we’ve probably all had round a table at the local, put on the road and are running with it, except they’re hitting curbs and bumps in the road.

      Surely, we give them a break and help them roll out a smooth bit of tarmac and see how far this goes? Maybe even borrow that red bus?

    16. 16
      avatar Rangerman says:

      Why shouls Stardust waste his time going down a firing questions at them when they’ve already shown in the answers above that they don’t really have a clue and are winging it, I think Christianity is a load of balls but that doesn’t mean I should go down to church on a Sunday and fire questions about evolution at them.
       
      I think as a group they are a waste of time but I don’t go down and tell them because they are a bunch of regular fans that will end up falling flat on their faces with this, it’s the same idiots that were behind NUSC but with a new logo.

    17. 17
      avatar Rangerman says:

      BBM – They’ve said everyone will get a 2% return on their money for a certain period of time, nothing mentioned about profit.
       
      Stardust is right about releasing more shares, Sunderland did it under Keane to raise more cash for transfers.

    18. 18
      avatar bowburnmag says:

      Rangerman – surely a better analogy is that you’re a churchgoer but some of the parishioners decide they want to change the parish programme and the way the church is run and funded?

      If you think they’re ill-equipped, you either do something about it.
      Or in your case you let them get on with it but accept at some point you may not be listening to your favourite sermon? And that will effect not just you but some of your fellow parishioners.

    19. 19
      avatar bowburnmag says:

      Yeah chaps, I get what you’re saying, I was thinking a bit literally.

    20. 20
      avatar Stardust says:

      Rangerman – whats even more ghastly is and I quote “Projected returns are 2% per annum in years one and two, with further projections based on information released by the club whilst we undertake due diligence.”
       
      They havent even got an operational framework which will then form the financials. Any claim of 2% is based on nothing ! Its made up lies!

    21. 21
      avatar magpie6699 says:

      Stardust – I can understand your scepticism about whether this will work and I had always given you the benefit of the doubt when others called you an apologist for Mike Ashley. But to say we must campaign AGAINST NUST – that’s going a bit far! As yet they have harmed nobody and certainly not the club – unlike Ashley, Llambias and Wise. At the very least they have earned the respect and support of fans from many other clubs for their ambition and are not the people who have made this club a laughing stock with their various behaviours (see above – Ashley, LLambias and Wise!). Bowburn mag believes they are genuine – unlike some other people (err … need I re-iterate) who have been shown to be deceitful.
      Let’s cut them some slack for now -no-one else is putting their head above the parapet.

    22. 22
      avatar workyticket says:

      I have spoken on the telephone with two representatives of the Financial Services Authority today, and I will be speaking with them again in the next few days to discuss concerns relating to the NUST’s “Yes We Can” appeal.

      They confirmed that NUST ARE on the FSA register of Collective Investment Schemes somewhere, though it seems to be very difficult to find them on the online version with the details supplied. I will double check this just to make sure in my next conversation.

    23. 23
      avatar Stardust says:

      BBM – theres no point in even speaking to them, they are so out of their depth – they have asked for 100million of peoples money – without the ability to look after it!
       
      I wouldnt be in the same room as them – the best they can do is to make a statement saying they had made it all up and close down the offer, before people get hurt by it. Even at this late stage they dont have one credible point to make

    24. 24
      avatar Stardust says:

      An interesting point Worky. Compliance and governance  for CIS is not a straight forward matter (or cheap)  – I assume its a notification prior to the legals.
       
      If they havent got an offer they cant be approved.
       
      The date of registration will be of interest, it’ll be interesting to know if it was pre or post press conference announcing the plans.

    25. 25
      avatar workyticket says:

      Stardust says:
      November 27, 2009 at 4:53 pm

      “Compliance and governance  for CIS is not a straight forward matter (or cheap)”

      You can say that again! :-)

      “I assume its a notification prior to the legals. If they havent got an offer they cant be approved.”

      That’s first on the list, Stardust.

      “The date of registration will be of interest”

      Good point. Noted.

    26. 26
      avatar Geordie German says:

      I’m reading this and my eyes are red and the steam is escaping from my ears. I mean I find this all very confusing. I’m a fan of NUFC, just a simple supporter. I’m not thick, but numbers was never my strong point and finances, forget it. But then maybe I am one of the 90 percent that the NUST are aiming at. A supporter who just wants Ashley out. If I lived in Newcastle I’d willingly knock on doors and walk the streets with a collection box to get Ashley out.
      You know Stardust? I think you should offer your services to NUSF as financial adviser. I don’t think that they could do worse.
      And there was me thinking I’d put a 150 quid in for my sons x-mas present.

    27. 27
      avatar Stardust says:

      GG – the crux of your post is what I have always been annoyed about, I always said they were targeting Joe Public which having now seen they have nothing at all – was grossly negligent and underhand of them.
       
      As for me being an IFA to them,  I am not in that field, nor accountancy, nor corporate finance, but I have just pulled together a number of complex corporate structures across jurisdictions before (which incorporate many of their problems) – I have my own team around the UK and further afield who pull these things together for me – I just have the overview and bring them together to complete the goal.
       
      Going deeper into it though – they were formed in a maelstrom and there was a lack of thought , planning and consistent message, they have never acted responsibly nor at any time have they tried to form an understanding of the owners position.
       
      Having not formed that understanding, how can they possibly expect to act as owners when they take over (not going to happen I know)
       
      Their whole position is hypocritical tosh ( please replace the last two words with any swear words of choice lol)

    28. 28
      avatar Dave says:

      Why don’t you wait as NUST have asked you to do before you criticise its plans as they evolve.
      What a load of gobs@@ts you are on this site, Stardust you are the gobs@@t in chief.
      I will repeat, WHY DON’T YOU WAIT AS NUST HAVE ASKED YOU!

    29. 29
      avatar Stardust says:

      Dave – if you have read anythng of the last few weeks you would know why – fail to prepare – preapre to fail and you my friend just failed.
       
      Please turn out the lights as you leave this thread.

    30. 30
      avatar Dave says:

      I thought the blog owner of this site had closed it down in disgust, obviously not!

    31. 31
      avatar [Blocked by CFC] Micky Toon says:

      Just to be clear my business idea has nothing to do with nufc. It’s a local retail opportunity.

    32. 32
      avatar chuck says:

      Buyer beware, it`l  never get off the ground, a pipe dream and all the rest of the cliche`s.

    33. 33
      avatar Geordie Jayne says:

      I see Stardust is still a pompus ARSE. 

    34. 34
      avatar Geordie Jayne says:

      Stardust if you are prepared to go and listen to NUST and not just criticise let me know when you are going, I will be more than interested to hear you questions, that other fans aren’t prepared to ask mmmmmmmmm.

    35. 35
      avatar CLiNT FLiCK says:

      aye,
      caveat emptor! (sp? me latin’s a bit rusty)
      The fans owning the club is a beautifully, romantic notion.
      But everything must be in order, all the time, generation after generation, forever & ever.
      Is that possible at this point, with this group.
      When building something from scratch, plans & more especially,
      foundations are everything.
      Look before you leap!
       

    36. 36
      avatar komfort says:

      geordie jayne….i’ll cum with you , giz a shout pet..

    37. 37
      avatar Dave says:

      If Lord Stardust is so concerned about his fellow supporters being duped by NUST, and losing their money, why doesn’t he represent his own convictions and ask NUST the questions he feels will prove how amateur their move towards ownership is.
      The answer of course is obvious, he will be talking to people who are committed  to a real cause, who collectively are far more intelligent than Lord Stardust and also have the wisdom to seek professional help in setting up the democratisation of our club.
      Silly boys take their ball home and never listen, I would advise you to wait until the big boys have produced the plans and forget about Stardust and his childish nonsense.
      Once again for the children, WAIT UNTIL THE PLANS ARE IN PLACE, and if you still feel it won’t work then voice your concerns, but be a man/woman about it and do it face to face at the meetings we can all attend with NUST and not on a blog site were you will have no influence.

    38. 38
      avatar geordie deb says:

      Dave
      ‘I would advise you to wait until the big boys have produced the plans and forget about Stardust and his childish nonsense.
      Once again for the children, WAIT UNTIL THE PLANS ARE IN PLACE, and if you still feel it won’t work then voice your concerns, but be a man/woman about it and do it face to face at the meetings we can all attend with NUST and not on a blog site were you will have no influence.’

      Because many of us are challenging the concept does not make us ‘children’. We have been waiting patiently to see what plans will be put in place but little has been forthcoming.  You may be a supporter of NUST and that is your right. I am not, that is my right. It may be easy for you and many others if you live in Newcastle to pop along to one of their evening meetings to challenge or raise questions to the commitee regarding their plans. For many of us that is not easy when we live hundreds or thousands of miles from St James. That means after listening to what NUST have to say on their website, which is their forum to communicate their plans and answer questions,  reading their commentary in newspapers, and hearing from people who have attended their meetings, there is enough information on which to base an opinion and discuss those opinions with fellow bloggers.

    39. 39
      avatar mmm_pease_pudding says:

      geordie deb says:
      November 28, 2009 at 8:38 am

      no offence pet but you can hardly claim to have ‘been waiting patiently’. They only launched a couple of weeks ago and considering the size of the task there is likely to be a long way to go yet.

      I think the point Dave is making is that you are too quick to get the boot in and in that sense he is right. Patience is unerring support after 50 trophy-less years of being treated like crap.

      NUST are trying to organise something the scale of which has never been done before. It won’t happen overnight and mistakes are bound to made along the way – it’s the nature of the beast. It does not necessarily make it impossible or a pipe dream. It just means there is likely to be a few bumps along the way and since when has supporting the toon been any different.

      You’re correct that it is your right to be for or against NUST but please don’t try to claim you have been ‘patient’.

    40. 40
      avatar Stardust says:

      The very same fools not hearing the warnings given by others (who have been down the correct road many times) are the ones NUST (at this stage) are targeting for their investment.
       
      People without understanding, without knowledge, without experience.
       
      The same people criticising my view dont even realise is that I have taken my view, my stance, as a result of the understanding behind the various laws that are there to protect people – and thereon to protect them from themselves and their own gullibility.
       
      Romantic though their notions are – they were fundamentally and morally wrong on every point – in the way they have approached this.
       
      Plans and Financials FIRST. Then ask for investment – so people know what they are getting into. You do not set the snowball off down the hill without knowing where it is going to end up.
       
      Sometimes when an alarm sounds – and you see the smoke – you should think – there just might be a fire. Rabbit and headlights spring to mind.

    41. 41
      avatar Stardust says:

      mmm_pease_pudding – “NUST are trying to organise something the scale of which has never been done before. It won’t happen overnight and mistakes are bound to made along the way”

      You simply dont target peoples pension funds until you know the consequence of the ask.

      The more I think of this – the more I believe it is being “Advisor” led. It doesnt make sense to structure things in this way and or head down the CIS route.

      But NUST will never find that out, they are in the Advisor Funnel – forever being sucked into areas of law and consideration (and they place their naive trust in Advisors as they are “experts” – but they are only experts in the point of consideration) – and that advice costs big bucks (and will have to be paid for now, on contingency or forever rewarded if the scheme is successful or rewarded if it fails.)

      Advisors will make money here – if NUST are simply gullible fools, they need to stop right now, change tack and head off down a simple administration route where the complexities and expense of law are removed.

    42. 42
      avatar bowburnmag says:

      Some folk inspire and some conspire Stardust.

      You should help out, because the points you make, seem to be relevant and important but will get lost to our modest archives.

      Help make it happen, ‘your club and it’s people, needs you’!!

    43. 43
      avatar Stardust says:

      LOL BBM –
      The only way I can see anything working is with a New Board, New Direction.
      The way they act provides no comfort at all – they will always revert to type under pressure – so the above is the only way I can ever see it being a success..

    44. 44
      avatar workyticket says:

      From nufc.com

      We’ve had a number of emails from supporters asking what stage the “Yes We Can” campaign of the Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST) has now reached.

      “We understand that further announcements regarding their progress are imminent, with signups continuing and the behind-the-scenes work essential to meet legislative requirements now well advanced.

      “Details of the NUST advice centre in Newcastle city centre will also be announced soon but ahead of that, there will be a “Supporter Surgery” this Saturday. 

      “This is aimed at giving fans the chance to air any issues related to NUST or NUFC – whether related to the buyout or not – and is being held on the 2nd Floor of The Irish Centre from 1pm-2.30pm.”

    45. 45
      avatar Stardust says:

      Worky ““We understand that further announcements regarding their progress are imminent, with signups continuing and the behind-the-scenes work essential to meet legislative requirements now well advanced.” = “We had no idea what we were getting ourselves into, we had no right to ask people to invest without knowing the financials and are trying to find ways around it” lol

    46. 46
      avatar CLiNT FLiCK says:

      It does sound advisor led.
      Uh oh!
      Filtering, cream & other terms that spell disaster.

    47. 47
      avatar workyticket says:

      Stardust says:
      November 28, 2009 at 12:40 pm

      Stardust, as I mentioned in the other NUST thread, I did notice that a  little qualifier has now been tacked on to the end of their sales pitch:

      “This proposal and campaign is not an investment, serving only as a platform for more detailed proposals.”

    48. 48
      avatar UTD111 says:

      Which confirms what some of us have been saying all along…….

      They are very much at the beginning of this initiative and are still at the stage where there is much to be done!  As I said earlier – too many people in here wanting to shoot them before there’s actually a target…… 

    49. 49
      avatar UTD111 says:

      “You do not set the snowball off down the hill without knowing where it is going to end up”

      Had to chuckle at that one Stardy mate!  Good job some of our greatest innovators and risk takers didn’t dot all the “i’s” and cross all the “t’s” before they just went for it!

      After all – if nobody took any risks, we wouldn’t need the Serious Fraud Office now would we?? Oh…aren’t they wanting to talk to your hero?

      :)

    50. 50
      avatar workyticket says:

      UTD111 says:
      November 28, 2009 at 1:12 pm

      “Which confirms what some of us have been saying all along”

      Yes, that they need to be taken to task if they are financially irresponsible enough to target unsophisticated investors with a plan which has no plan yet.

    51. 51
      avatar workyticket says:

      UTD111 says:
      November 28, 2009 at 1:18 pm

      “Had to chuckle at that one Stardy mate!  Good job some of our greatest innovators and risk takers didn’t dot all the “i’s” and cross all the “t’s” before they just went for it!”

      UTD111, Our greatest innovators DID have to “dot all the “i’s” and cross all the “t’s”  as you put it, as their work had to withstand rigorous peer review before it was accepted. It is the same with finances.

    52. 52
      avatar UTD111 says:

      workyticket says:
      November 28, 2009 at 1:22 pm
      UTD111 says:
      November 28, 2009 at 1:12 pm
      “Which confirms what some of us have been saying all along”
      Yes, that they need to be taken to task if they are financially irresponsible enough to target unsophisticated investors with a plan which has no plan yet.
      ——————————————————————
      Or perhaps that they are still in the stage of floating an idea to test what the interest level will be…..and will only do the heavy work around plans etc if it looks like its a runner.
      As I understand it – what they have at the moment is the equivalent of Expressions Of Interest.

    53. 53
      avatar UTD111 says:

      workyticket says:
      November 28, 2009 at 1:32 pm
      UTD111 says:
      November 28, 2009 at 1:18 pm
      “Had to chuckle at that one Stardy mate!  Good job some of our greatest innovators and risk takers didn’t dot all the “i’s” and cross all the “t’s” before they just went for it!”
      UTD111, Our greatest innovators DID have to “dot all the “i’s” and cross all the “t’s”  as you put it, as their work had to withstand rigorous peer review before it was accepted. It is the same with finances.
      ——————————————————————–
      Don’t agree with this very narrow view.  When we launch into a new project, we can’t possibly know everything that will happen, every problem and issue which will arise. If we did, we wouldn’t need Risk Management Techniques – mitigation and contingency.

    54. 54
      avatar workyticket says:

      UTD111, I do understand what you are saying, but it’s not a question of point scoring, not with myself anyway. Any scheme like this should withstand rigorous cross examination and conform to the rules if it is to succeed, and not leave many thousands of Geordies out of pocket. Even people who strongly support the scheme should be asking lots of questions.

    55. 55
      avatar UTD111 says:

      Worky @54

      I don’t disagree on any of that mate – just a question of timing ie asking the questions at the right time in my view.  Just think some peeps are in knee-jerk mode – jumping the gun and, as I said, firing shots before the target is even there.

      Lets allow NUST to proceed to their plan…..if they get that far, and then it will be the time for serious scrutiny.

    56. 56
      avatar Stardust says:

      UTD111 – WRONG – you donttarget pension funds without knowing the implications.
       
      The caveat they have now added about it not being an investment shows you how far out of their depth these fools are.
       
      Its basics fella – designed to protect you, your family, your loved ones. The fact they dont know this stuff TELLS anyone that they can not run a 100m investment fund. It will be Advisor’s with self interest at heart who do it.

    57. 57
      avatar danny-boy says:

      very interesting read BBM, still not 100% I trust them but you’ve banished a few of the preconceptions I had personally, a little harshly in places

      “Sceptics may have seen it as tub-thumping (though I think the sceptics and cynics didn’t bother to turn up, and instead are happy to take 2nd/3rd/4th hand knowledge and pillory their efforts from their online comfort). ” – ouch! ;)

      I am still sceptical, mostly because the method of getting the message to the public through mainstream sources i.e the central point of the website, still seems to rely quite heavily on stirring the anti-ashley sentiment, it’s comforting to know that the presentations themselves are more constructive and will definitely mean I need to re-asses my stance to it, but I must admit i’ve still overriding doubts in the absence of a visible plan
      thanks for taking the time to attend and passing on your thoughts to it

    Leave a Reply

    Top of page