Betway betting sites banner

NUST – Your club needs you?

Posted on November 25th, 2009 | 122 Comments |

Yes, you!
Yes, you!
I’m sort of loathe to detracting from onfield matters because after another hard-fought win, we’re once again top of the pile. But the NUST has been very busy off the pitch lately and they and their intentions have been fairly well-documented and discussed lately.

Having said that, much of the talk has been based on conjecture because the details still aren’t entirely clear although it seems there has been more clarity in recent weeks. Even though that has led to condemnation from some.

While many are attracted by the notion of a voice on the board, they are still sceptical about how it could work and now that NUST has gone on record to say they intend to buy the club outright, most people are unsure how this will work. Others have dismissed it as a non-starter, while still others have implied it is almost an immoral and reprehensible step to take which should be dropped immediately.

Well, Peter Williams has written to us to inform us that he is the new blog liaison for NUST. As many details still appear sketchy and there are still certainly more questions than answers, he has told us that he will be more than willing to answer any questions you may have about the Trust or the “Yes We Can” campaign. He has also offered to send us any relevant press releases and rumours if we’re interested. And wants to know if we would be interested in supporting the Trust in the “Yes We Can” campaign.

Now when I say ‘we’, I’m talking the blog collective, as we have quite a few regulars here now. As many of you will know, our esteemed blog owner, workyticket and my fellow article writer, geordie deb are extremely sceptical if not downright scornful of the proposal at the moment. I’m somewhat more ambivalent however, and they have afforded me the opportunity to ask any of you, whether you have any questions. And if we get enough response to suggest that some of you wish to support the campaign, then we may put the blog’s name forward to represent that collective of fans.

Let me know your thoughts and please if anybody genuinely has any questions, I will put them to Peter and feedback the answers in another article. If you don’t agree with it, please at least try to be civil with your responses.

Cheers
BBM

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

Related Posts:

Posted on by bowburnmag in category: Bowburn Mag and Newcastle United Supporters Trust , with tags: , , ,
Comment on this post

122 Responses

  1. Morning Bowburn
    Four questions I have:
    1. How much money have they actually collected so far? ie in the bank, not pledges which are meaningless as they may never turn into cash when push comes to shove. In the summer it was claimed they had pledges of £20million, which recently turned into £10million, so what is it really?
    2. Why do they not have a detailed business plan available for scrutiny by those they want to part with their hard earned cash?
    3. Why did they turn down a meeting with the club when they have complained vociferously regarding lack of communication from them in the past. Aren’t they supposed to be the self professed ‘voice of the fans’? Well plenty of fans I know were very disppointed with the attitude taken by NUST in that instance. When the club gives the opportunity for dialogue, NUST taking such a heavy handed approach is not very clever IMO. If you want to negotiate with someone there’s not point taken such an aggressive stance in the first instance.
    4. Why is the example of Barcelona continually used, when it is a completely different situation to the proposed buyout of NUFC? It seems a little disingenious.
    Anyway, look forward to the answers.

  2. I have one essential question.

    With the level of club debt the Trust would inherit, how could the trust guarantee investment in the squad?

    It has been clearly shown that even the richest possible investors like Barry Moat would struggle to finance  the club. How could a fans collective possibly offer enough invesment to secure and maintain Premier League status?

    I can tell you for certain that if I was to fork out over a grand on the toon I would struggle to buy a season ticket never mind helping to provide further investment for the future.

  3. In order to sustain a place in the Premier league (fingers crossed) the squad needs a massive overhall. Given the “quality” of what we have now and the small size of the squad, I reckon at least £30 – £50m on players (if we want  to buy quality and not rely on free’s) plus whatever they’ll end up paying on wages. Add to that the other operating costs and the purchase price, which will increase  if we go up and MA sniffs A chance to make more money, they’re looking at around £300 just to  buy the club and survive one year in the prem. How do they plan to do that? And please, have a sensible answer not just TV money.

  4. I think for many, the NUST started life (albeit under a different name) on such a dodgy footing that they will struggle to reclaim any credibility. That said I admire their attempts and like BBM remain indifferent to their cause until I know quite a bit more.
    My one concern/question is…”Given the club are so unwilling to release any kind of information to the public, especially of a financial nature, how can they/we ever hope to know exactly what kind of funds are necessary to achieve what they hope to achieve. Until you know the true sale price, player salaries, future revenue streams, overdraft situation not to mention the special MA ‘loan’ situation, everything else becomes rather speculative”.

  5. With all the club has been through for the past decades I think it’s a pity so many people are so scathing about this. I find it quite sad. I’m not saying it’s the answer but a lot of people seem to have written it off before it has been given a chance. For me when the dust settles if it is remotely possible to get the club in ownership of fans then they will get my support. Afterall I’m pretty sure we couldn’t be any worse at running the club than what has gone before us.  Since our FA cup triumphs in the 50s apart from a few years with joe harvey,  keegan and sir bob the team has pretty much been woeful and the running of the club has always been a shambles.

  6. Toon Monkey says:
    November 25, 2009 at 9:00 am

    Those figures seem a little loose to say the least. I don’t think we would necessarily need to spend that – look at Burnley. The bottom of the Premier League ain’t all that and survival would be achievable with two or three sound investments in key positions.

    With regards finance if NUST could raise enough to buy the club with minimal debt then we could easily self generate enough to be competing towards the top of the table. I think a lot of people don’t realise what this club is capable of doing by itself – without a chelski or oil rich sugar daddy.

    Ran sensibly and with wise investment (iei without Michael Owen type pop star signings) the club would easily have enough money. It always has because we put the money there through our season tickets, merchandise purchases and sky subscription money. The problem has been that that money has always been either wasted or siphoned off into fat owner’s pockets.

  7. mmm_pease_pudding –  I’ll see your Burnley (who are still prove they can stay up) and raise you Hull (probably), Ipswich, Bradford, Sunderland, Birmingham and many other clubs who over the years have lasted one season only to go down the next. We need long term planning not plasters over the cracks. Even now Hughton is saying he’ll look at Championship players not future Prem players when the window opens in January.  Short term planning is what’s messed this club up for years.

  8. mmm_pease_pudding – I don’t mind admitting I love the idea, even if I don’t know how plausible it is realistically. And yes, it seems entirely possible that we could do no worse as either part-owned or completely fan-owned administration, than some of the past and present boards.

    One of my main issues, is that I’m not in a position to put my money where my mouth is, if I were to champion this.

    But I do agree that this club can and should be much more self-sufficient than some people make out. In terms of promotion, it’s as much to do with good management as anything else. We don’t need to spend a fortune. It may be a slightly longer road to relative success but it will be all the sweeter if we managed to do it between us?

  9. My take on this is that it’s a romantic notion that appeals to the fans on an emotional level.  Never mind Sir John Hall and his “team of 11 geordies”  this would be Geordies owing the club.  All of us!  Get in!
    Or perhaps not.  Whether you like to admit it or not football, especially the EPL is only for the big boys now.   For me, the Championship is how the EPL was when we were promoted to it way back when.  Anyone could win the league and anyone, well almost anyone, could go down.  Take a look at Liverpool.  They were knocked out of the Champions League and everyone is saying that Rafa should go and they are finished as a club!  I don’t believe they are finished as a club, but their league position and the fact that they are no longer in the Champions League will mean the owners looking for Rafa’s head and the fans wanting more players.  In order to do this they will have to look at spending around £30m at least.  Just where would we get that money from?
    Perhaps we can be self sufficient, but it will mean that we are a middle of the table team at the very best.  Perhaps the odd cup run, to be knocked out in the quarters by Chelsea, but that would be it.
    Would that be enough?  Judging by some posts on here and Ed’s old blog, it would not be.
    The harsh reality is to be a force in the EPL, never mind european football, we would need vast investments by very rich people.  The old lad down the road from you, cashing in his pension for NUST,  just doesn’t cut the mustard I’m afraid.

  10. I will watch with interest ANYONE who has a go at ousting the present corrupt and discredited regime.  At least NUST are willing to try.

    Too many people in here have been quick to slag off the NUST at what is a very early stage of their efforts.  I even saw one uninformed fool claim that NUST is “run by donkeys”…….says more about the person making the comment methinks.

    Lets wait and see how this develops?

  11. concerns are UTD that the NUST are taking large sums of money from people without a proper plan for all to see, their trading on the mistakes that the Ashley regime has made – not cool, youre right what you say about early stages, problem is they are taking the money at “early stages” too, and already saying that if it doesn’t happen you won’t get it all back
    i’m all for waiting to see what happens, but I’m damn sure not putting any money up till I know what they’re doing
    8)

  12. I agree Danny-Boy. I’m not putting any money in either at present. But if things start to look promising, my cash could well be on the move!

  13. Come on guys (and gals) give the NUST a chance , at least they are having a go to find a solution to our problems. Too many fans are moaning about Ashley etc but when it comes to the crunch are not willing to take any action. Come on NUST you could be our only hope.

  14. and thats the problem UTD, their grand plan relies on having the money first, but they can’t/won’t guarantee it, quite simply, I trust them as far as I can throw them
    if their our only hope Jock we ARE doomed
    sorry to say, Stardy’s “run by donkeys” is an opinion I share

  16. don’t get me wrong, I would love to see it succeed, I have my doubts how it would run – I just really cannot see how they will make it work, and, they are offering no info on what the plan is, the roadshows should be called stageshows – thats all they are, rhetoric and table thumping to stir the passion of the general public – it makes me sick

  17. I have a big bag of metaphorical salt that I use to dip old Dusty’s opinions in these days. What with his refusal to accept that Mike Ashley is a durdy dawg and his insistence that I’m a club-hating caveman for not standing by Ashley and for griefing Jonas, it’s hard to take him seriously anymore.

    That and the fact that he seems to have in-depth knowledge of everything. The circles he mixes in are more like one big celestial equator.

  19. Well like I said – I’m prepared to wait and see how this develops. 

    I can understand why they haven’t put all their cards on the table at this stage – to do so would be commercially naive. As this blog has already proven that there are people just waiting to cause trouble for them (for whatever reason)  – tactic: get them bogged down by arguing incessantly about every detail and thereby attempting to grind their initiative to a halt and discredit them in the fans eyes…..for the same reason I can understand why they decided not to meet with the regime at this stage – they will choose the time when they’re good and ready, good tactics.

    They certainly do not come across as “donkeys” – I’m surprised you subscribe to that one Danny-Boy.  

  20. No BBM, sorry if I gave the impression I had, i’m working from my mortal hatred of the concept of taking average joes money to take over the club with the grinning promise that if it doesn’t work he won’t get it all back, but how we might be rid of the ogre and his chuckling sidekick if it does

  21. dannyboy – “thats all they are, rhetoric and table thumping to stir the passion of the general public”.

    I’m just suggesting it’s a little unfair to pass their meetings off like that without attending or having a reliable source give you feedback?

  22. I just can’t see it UTD, their asking everyday people to give up their pensions for christs sake, and all I hear from the camp – mostly on the NUST website is fuel for the anger toward Ashley, I’ve made my opinion & point known – I don’t even think Ashley is the problem, we had a good time under him & Mort, Llambias is the issue
    to look somebody in the eye & say to them “give me £1500 so that I can add you to the list of buyers – we must have X amount to raise the money of course, and if we don’t get enough you’ll get it back, minus a sum for “Admin fees””, I find absolutely incredible
    there is nothing commercially naive about letting the people you want to stump up for your plan know what the plan is – it’s all about simple common decency at the end of the day

  23. sorry BBM, that’s the opinion I get from everything I hear from them, the website is full of it
    I apologide for assumption that the roadshows are the same

  24. Perhaps after Thursday I can provide some sort of feedback ,as I intend to go to the one at The Strawberry.

  25. i’d be interested to hear what goes on for sure, in case you missed it – my opinion on the issue is quite strong :P

  26. Danny Boy – I agree wholeheartedly with your comments (except the roadshow, as I haven’t been to one as I don’t live in the NEast and therefore can’t comment.  )

    Utd111
    I don’t agree with your comments. I don’t think asking them detailed questions about their ‘business plan’ is ‘people causing trouble for them’.
    You could use that argument if they only want moral support, but they are asking for people’s money for heavens sake and not just a couple of quid as loose change to throw in a collection bucket, but thousands of pounds that represents people’s future and the comfort of their old age.
    If they want people to blindly sign away thousands of pounds that’s fine but let’s have a detailed look at their business proposal and let’s see if the figures stack up. Too many people lost out last time around when SJH wanted people to cough up the cash and that was £500.

  27. ok for balance, I may have been a little harsh to the roadshows – sorry to all, for clarity I haven’t been to one because I don’t live in the NE either
    my opinions are based on what I’ve read primarily on the NUST website & discussions I’ve had – I get the opinion that simply NUST’s plan is to get enough anti-ashley support through PR stunts (latest is the giant story that a bloke called Mike Ashley from Gosforth has signed on) to gather the £100m required to buyout the club
    sadly, I can’t see it happening, which would mean that the people who DID put in would lose a percentage of their investment – mostly pensions

  28. When did Mike Ashley or his agents tell them that 10% was acceptable as proof of funds? And, if he hasn’t, why do they refuse to meet with him or his agents to discuss this (and other issues) before asking for money from peoples savings, pension funds etc, and risking a proportion of those funds in rather large ‘administration’ fees?

    Why haven’t they released the full financial details of their plan before asking people for money? This is the way things are usually done.

    What amount will the bid be? £100 million? £80 million? Less? What if the club are promoted before they raise the funds, and are hence worth ALOT more?

    What if some Ultra High Net Worth Individual comes in and makes another bid for the club that is better than theirs? Or, if Ashley just turns them down flat, will they exhort fans of the club to take action against the club until Ashley relents?

  29. Geordie Deb
    That’s your perogative of course – I just think there are too many people who, for whatever reason, are out to strangle the baby almost before it’s born……and why should NUST provide them with further opportunity?

    By the way – I was a John Hall bondholder, handed over my £500.  I don’t believe I “lost out” particularly….it was particularly pleasing that it helped me to get tickets attend all of our recent cup semis and finals…..and I didn’t feel I was “jumping the queue” having followed United for 47 yrs.

  30. Perhaps my memory fails me but on one of their early leaflets didn’t the NUST pour scorn on the idea of buying out the club, telling people to stop being so ridiculous??

  31. UTD111  – I wasn’t a Bond holder but a normal season ticket holder and I also managed to attended all of our recent cup semis and finals. Still feel you got a good deal?

  33. As much as I don’t like the current set up and think in an ideal world, NUST’s idea sounds great, I really can’t see it working.   We have to look at the big picture now.  Football as a game has never changed over the years apart from the amount of subs used etc, but football itself has.  It’s a big business now.  How can the nomal fan in the street aford to put their cash/pension into an account to buy a club?  Makes it even worse with the time we are living in now.

    Anybody with any money and sense wouldn’t touch a football club unless they are prepared to make a loss and have some ‘fun’ along the way.  I really can’t see anybody making any money out of a club, unless you have a top 4 finish every season and even then, no doubt lots ov debt has been built up to get there in the first place.

    What we really need is somebody to come in with a load of cash and not worry about how much they lose out in the process of trying to make th club good again.  I’m not talking about mega debt like Liverpool or Manu here, just enough to invest in good players and other staff.  The money that is then made runs the club and the profits are used to buy other players.  The owner is willing to take a loss so he/she can enjoy their club.  The downside is, with times like this, who would have the money or want to do it?

  34. I wasn’t a season ticket holder, nor a bond holder and I only missed the finals.  :p
    I also managed to get primo Champions league tickets for every home game.  Half way line, SJH stand every time and for only £27.

  35. Toon Monkey @31
    To be honest – it wasn’t about “getting a deal” – it was always clear that the bond, name on seat, free cup tickets etc wasn’t what it was about.
    My money, and that of others, backed SJH and KK in giving us some of the most exciting teams and seasons it has been my priviledge to witness at yournamehere.com@St James’ Park……

  36. Hi All,
    I cant speak for them but,  I’m fairly sure that the Trust are aware of the scepticism around the ‘Yes we can campaign’ not working without details of the business plan being released.
    Also as far as I’m aware, to date NUST haven’t actually asked anyone to actually turn over their hard earned pennies, but have actually appealed to see who would be willing to do pending the finer details being clarified.
    Just wanted to chip in with my two pence worth.

  37. Nust can never function like Barca which took generations and generations to become what they are right now.Plus their city population is 3 times higher than Newcastle’s with only 2 teams of which 1 is almost a non existant club and that is Espanyol.
    DO you have any idea how many Roma’s fans would like Rosella Sensi out of the club,almost 90% of the total fan base want her out but can a City of 4 mill of which 1.5 mill are only Roma fans do the Barca’s style of management???,,,dont think so!!
    Nobody can,,cos you cant go against years and years of tradition in the Spanish Football where fans vote for their club president.I just cant see it happen,,sorry.
     

  38. it’s obviously still somethign that divides the fans, and that’s one of my biggest concerns, we’ve all got mostly very divided opinions, how dpes that translate into the running of a club if they ARE successful?

  39. Following on from BBM @17 and his reference to Stardust, that font of all knowledge whose experience and contacts far outstrip us meer mortals, a Google search has revealed his address as……

    461 Bullshit Boulevard!

    My apologies to Clapton or perhaps Stardust could pass them on next time he sees him?

  40. We can’t even agree on who should be awarded man of the match, let alone anything of any importance if the club was ever in the control of the fans.

  41. I don’t want to grief Dusty too much by the way, I was hoping he was around to counter me. If not, then I apologise. Sure you agree lesh?

  43. Well he brings it on himself, that’s without doubt. Still never sure when he’s looking for a reaction and when he believes what he’s saying.

    I think sometimes he goes so far round one way, he comes out the other side and even he’s not sure.

  44. lol
    sadly, sometimes he has a good point, which is lost amongst all the rest of the bloody nonsense he spouts!!
    8)

  45. Bowburn – You can ask them why they are pursuing this route now when they previously laughed off the idea of buying the club in one of their very early leaflets. I think it was the same one where they ridiculed Llambias.  To be honest I’ve never had any time for them since then as they came across as idiotic fans rather than a respectable voice for the Toon.

  46. Safe to say that Stardust’s round the bend Bowburn.

    As you say, he probably believes his own fantasies as he spins ’em!

    He’s either demonstrating great determination not to bite to these posts, he’s not seen ’em yet or, more likely that his mammy’s put him down for his afternoon nap.

    Ah, got it…. he’ll be giving evidence to the Chilcot [Iraq invasion] enquiry!

  47. Nonsense – who me? ;)
     
    Many things to counter the above but unfortunately I am flat out with hardly enough time to bloody sleep these days.
     
    1 – It is a huge mistake to allow any publicity for these donkeys until they have outlined a credible business plan with detailed financials. It allows them to prey on the gullible and trusting – their responsibility is to outline a case for investment (thats what it is folks – if they are going via SIPS to raise it). If they make a pitch for investment they should answer every question in great detail on DAY 1 – and not gradually make it up and release it as they go along – gathering up poor gullibale fools along the way and grabbing money from their futures without any thought applied.
     
    2 – UTD 111 – “I can understand why they haven’t put all their cards on the table at this stage – to do so would be commercially naive. ” INCORRECT in its entirety – as time elapses and we remain at the top of the Championship with an increased likelihood of getting promoted – the PRICE GOES UP. Therefore you can not slow roll out a fund raising project and hope to buy the club if promoted as the fund (even if it raised 100m – which it wont) can no longer afford to buy the club as it will be worth 200million – and fortunately for NUST and the corporate financiers at that point their nice little admin  fee kicks in – who loses out again – Joe Public.

    I would implore Worky , BBM and anyone else NOT to give these fools a moments notice UNTIL they outline a case for investment complete with legals re how they dont contravene FSA rules on Collective Investment Schemes etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc

  48. Stardust – it would be much more helpful if you were constructive in your feedback and give me some pointers to put to the IFAs they have working for them. ;)

    One thing to consider from your point of view – ask the question and get the answer and if you’re not happy, then ridicule them? Surely their plan is hingeing on due diligence, by virute of those constraints they’ll be unable to have an absolute business plan in place? They need to test the water to see whether this could even get off the ground first? Nobody has handed any money over yet?

  49. UTD111,
    I’m thinking like you.
    To be honest, I’m not that bothered about having a say in the running of the club, except insofar as i can be assured that it will be run professionally, that the fans will be communicated with and that we have a chance of staying in the Premiership and improving if we get promoted. Anything that helps rid us of the present regime, therefore, is fine by me.
    I see absolutely no sign that MA cares for anything but his pockets – which, to be fair,  may well mean avoiding too much loss rather than making a profit. However, he is supported by an imbecile (DL) and has not the wit to get in a real pro to do that job, nor do I think he will EVER invest in the squad in any meaningful way. The best you can say is that he hopes to get promotion on the cheap and sell the club for a higher price. But the club does not seem to be that attractive a proposition, does it, judging by the lack of genuine interest, either as a PL or CC team. So what happens if yet again, there is no sale? A.-  We are back in the doo-doo as MA’s first gamble fails – so he moves to his second one of pocketing all the Sky money and investing nowt again.
    I say let’s give this lot a chance. Let’s hear what they have to say as it unfolds. It will be useful to keep those links with spokespeople from the group.
    Finally, from what I have read, I can’t see where anyone would stand to lose oodles of money. My reading is that you will only end up paying out significantly if a successful purchase goes ahead? If not, you lose 5% of your 10% deposit on admin costs. I make that only £7.50 on a pledge of £1500 (the  minimum price for a whole “share”) – much less if you are giving less. I’ve said it before, I’ve wasted much more money on broken promises and shattered dreams from Ashley – including paying 3 years up front for a season ticket. Was I the only one who had an expectation that we had a go-ahead new billionaire  owner who was prepared to indulge himself by wasting some money on making the Toon more successful, but instead has found that I have had to watch my team play rubbish football in the Premiership and then no more than OK in a fairly rubbish league – as well as becoming the laughing stock of the football world.
    Can it really be worse than what we have now? Let’s keep an open mind.
     

  50. Stardust says:
    November 25, 2009 at 2:26 pm

    “I would implore Worky , BBM and anyone else NOT to give these fools a moments notice UNTIL they outline a case for investment complete with legals re how they dont contravene FSA rules on Collective Investment Schemes etc”

    I agree wholeheartedly with most of your points on this issue Stardust, I have made them myself too. However on this one, au contraire mon frère! They should be deeply probed with some intelligent and informed questioning, including why they haven’t outlined a “credible business plan with detailed financials” yet. Otherwise, the only thing people will have to go on is their version.

  51. put it simply, to raise £100m at £1500 a stale would take 66666.66666… investors, at £7.50 a person, that would make a cool £500,000 for doing very little – seeing as how we are currently unaware of any actual business plan
    three letters spring to mind
    C O N

  53. My questions will probably be (due to my limited financial and investment knowledge, and some of which are the semantics of it) –

    At what point do supporters have to commit and is there a dropdead date? It is precarious in the sense that the money needs to be committed at some point and how do they ensure that this is all deposited in a timely fashion? What if it’s ‘all talk and no walk’ from some supporters? The ones who commit may end up losing out because of the ones who don’t. Financially and emotionally (i.e. disappointment).

    Presumably they will want to continue taking on investors? So supporters will continue to join, as some supportes may leave for whatever reason, while more investors means more money?
    If there is no dropdead date, then will some supporters just want to sit and let others take the initiative and see whether or not it works before committing? In which case, who will have the balls to do it with so much scepticism and will that hinder the process? i.e. it’s not just one person waiting to hit a button to invest their money when it comes to the crunch, it’s thousands of the buggers.

  55. worky – The Newcastle United Supporters Trust is the trading name of Newcastle United Supporters Society Limited, registered under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965 -78.

  58. bowburnmag says:
    November 25, 2009 at 3:13 pm

    “worky – The Newcastle United Supporters Trust is the trading name of Newcastle United Supporters Society Limited, registered under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965 -78.”

    I know, and I had their numbers too. That’s the information I’ve been using to try and find them on the register.

  59. guilty as charged, its the “give me your money and THEN i’ll tell you what our plan is” that makes me cynical mate
    8)

  61. Danny-boy – could be a CON, sure. But what 3 letters would you apply to our present regime at the club? CON would be the very least! How about liars, cheats, fools……

  62. “guilty as charged, its the “give me your money and THEN i’ll tell you what our plan is””

    You’re right, that does make you cynical. :)

    (without stating the obvious) In as much as it makes you cynical to see it that way but I genuinely think it won’t happen that way.

    – Pledge

    – Plan

    – Cash

    In that order, would be fine by me.

    As long as you can lend me £1500? ;) 

  63. all applicable Magpie6699 but at no point have they asked the bloke on the street to put money into a bank account…..
    8)

  64. but if that’s the case BBM, how are they going to demonstarte their plan to our beloved chairman?
    surely there are contractual options to look at rather than just “drop the money in this (cayman island) account”?
    if i had £1500 lying around mate, my missus would be shoe shopping right about now…..
    8)

  66. workyticket says:
    November 25, 2009 at 3:10 pm
    Anyway, what does “backed by the Financial Services Authority and has Inland Revenue approval” actually mean?

    Trusts or any organisation that falls in its domain of regulation are not ‘backed’ by the FSA – they are expected to comply with the FSA’s regulatory regime.

    To be approved by HMRC (Inland Revenue doesn’t exist as such – it merged with HM Customs in about 2003), an organistation with Trust status  simply has to comply with HMRC’s expectations in respect of the way that monies are used and distributed.

    I stand to be corrected and hope that helps.

    Stardy, any thoughts?

  67. lol
    slightly different though, the team will be playing football, maybe not in the EPL/championship/football league but they will still be playing!!
    8)

  68. I’d say we’ve lost more than £7.50 relatively speaking since they took over? Not a bad hit to take £7.50 when it could mean so much more if it comes off?

    One of the sticking points is where does that £500k if it fails? Payments to IFAs, Solicitors, local charities, investment for kids from the local community to attend games? Get it documented and people might be happier with it.

    As for demonstrating to Mike?

    Surely, they’ll gather their thoughts, formulate their plans and approach Mike, who will then decide if he needs ‘x’ amount deposited somewhere, allow due diligence, agree if something could happen, have talks, some more talks and then put a package together?

    (did he need proof of funds for due diligence? or just to engage in ‘talks to sell’?)

    Just my crazy simple logic like. 

    Lots of t’s to dot and i’s to cross along the way… 8O

  69. lesh says:
    November 25, 2009 at 3:41 pm

    “Trusts or any organisation that falls in its domain of regulation are not ‘backed’ by the FSA – they are expected to comply with the FSA’s regulatory regime.

    To be approved by HMRC (Inland Revenue doesn’t exist as such – it merged with HM Customs in about 2003), an organistation with Trust status  simply has to comply with HMRC’s expectations in respect of the way that monies are used and distributed.”

    Absolutely correct Lesh, that was why I asked the question. ‘Backed’ and ‘approved’ could be seen as a potentially misleading choice of words.

  70. very much so, and that’s the simple reason I don’t trust them
    I said before, I’d be happy to see it come off, I think total ownership is way too big a target but a decent share in the club would be good, I’m just not convinced enough to put my money in, no matter how big or small the loss would be should it go south
    I don’t like or trust the way they have gone about it, every brief that drops out seems to be geared at firing the masses against Ashley’s position – and I’ve said over and again, I don’t think he’s our problem
    it’s, at best (in my eyes), a dirty way of doing business – particularly with other peoples money

  71. If I had some savings, and I could spend without it crippling me I’d gladly spunk £1500 (or an amount as a collective) on something like this if it meant getting nothing back financially at the end of it, but I could say we tried to realise our own destiny and perhaps regaining some decency as a football club along the way.

    I find it disconcerting that people are so quick to jump to the conclusion that fellow fans (with business nous) would be prepared to be part of something that would intentionally shaft other fans so callously. Or is it me being naive?

  72. Apart from what I’ve already said on the subject, it also comes down to me trusting their abilities at a business level.
    Who do the trust have on board who knows all the ins and outs of running a successful business and a also a successful football club.
    Now, if they had David Dein or even Richard Branson leading them, I’d be more confident in the whole venture coming off.   As it stands they are just a bunch of fans, like you and me.
    Now ask yourself this – Would you trust yourself to be able to run NUFC and at the most break even?
    BBM – Out of all the people on here, I trust your opinion the most, so I look forward to what you bring back from the meeting.  I know it will be well balanced and realistic.

  73. Stardust says:
    November 25, 2009 at 2:26 pm
    Nonsense – who me?
     
     
    2 – UTD 111 – “I can understand why they haven’t put all their cards on the table at this stage – to do so would be commercially naive. ” INCORRECT in its entirety
    ———————————————————————–
    …In your opinion….
    Sorry Stardust but, even by the use of capitals (shouting), nothing you said counters my argument earlier about timing.  It is prudent to release information when your own strategy dictates it – not when people who wish to destroy you are demanding it.

    As stated earlier – I’m quite happy to wait and see how this initiative unfolds – and in the meantime, it’s not costing me anything…….

  74. They have now updated themselves now questions have been raised.

    “This proposal is not an offer for investment, serving only to provide a platform for more detailed proposals.”

    Wasn’t there before, which is some kind of progress.

  75. Agreed Worky @69, the use of such language (Backed’ and ‘approved’) could be seen as a potentially misleading choice of words.

    That being so and to enhance the Trust’s credibility in the eyes of the public, potential investors, lawyers and finance houses and dare I say it, Ashley and his City advisors, its spokesmen/ woman really ought to adopt more business-like language!

    Using language that employs terms like [the non-existant] ‘Inland Revenue’, ‘backed’, ‘approved’ etc sounds amateurish and the Trust’ll never be seen as anything other than a fans’ organisation – not a serious player in a potential £100-£200m transaction.

    C’mon guys, tidy your act up and remember the old adage – you never get a second chance to make a first impression!

  76. Whoops!  

    To avoid any misunderstanding in my earlier post @75, the words ‘C’mon guys’ are directed at the NUST!

  77. I think that’s the issue Lesh. Due to the way things have unfolded and been communicated since the summer , they have already made an impression and with many people it’s an impression that lacks credibility.

  78. mmm_pease_pudding
     
    With regards finance if NUST could raise enough to buy the club with minimal debt then we could easily self generate enough to be competing towards the top of the table. I think a lot of people don’t realise what this club is capable of doing by itself – without a chelski or oil rich sugar daddy.
     
    ………..
     
    This club has made a loss of £134 million in the past 10 years, even if you don’t include the dividends paid out when we were a PLC you are still looking at a loss of just over £100 million, that includes runs in the Uefa cup and the CL too in that time.
     
    They seem to presume that they are going to get every decision right and not make any mistakes like previous people in charge, there is no guarantee that whoever comes in as manager is going to be a success and all of his signings are going to turn out to be excellent pieces of business.
     
    Here’s a few questions that you can fire at them if you like.
     
    1) How do NUST plan on selecting possible candidates for the role of chairman for the share holders to vote on? Have they got any potential chairman lined up and what previous experience of running a football club do they have?
     
    2) If I were to buy a share at £1500, how liquid would my investment be and if I didn’t like the way the club was going or I had sudden cash problems, how quick could I get my money out?
     
    3) If I were to put £25,000 in as part of my pension, how would I go about drawing that money out at retirement age? Would the club be paying me a monthly pension? If there was a sudden spike in interest rates would I be able to move it out of NUSC and put it in to a high interest account and how long would it take?
     
    4) How safe is my pension and are there any guarantees that I will get my money back at the time of retirement and what age will I be able to start collecting it?

  79. Yea,
    who would actually run the club, & wouldn’t it just be an avenue back to
    the bad old days of some kind of ‘boys club’ for the initiated?
     

  80. Rangerman – does that include the obscene salaries given to the shepherd clan, the money winging its way to Douglas in Gibralter and dodgy warehousing deals with Bruce Shepherd? Between 98 and 06 we did not fair too badly if you discount dividends – http://www.football-finances.org.uk/newcastle/2006/profits2.htm
    The fact is that over the last 10 years we have wasted fortunes on transfer fees and overpaid on wages. There has been minimal investment in youth and we turn over managers quicker than anyone.  The club has been a shambles.
    No-one is saying fan ownership would be perfect and of course mistakes would be made. Making mistakes with a bit of dignity would do me.
    With the right wage structure and sensible long term player investment this club could sustain itself and be competitive in the top flight. If it doesn’t then we will be where we are on merit and there’s no shame in that.

  81. mmm_pease_pudding – Shepherd was paid £500,000 a year which isn’t above what the other big clubs in the Premiership were paying out at the time, I did point out that we still made a trading loss of over £100 million even if you don’t include dividends, the warehouse scam cost us £150k per year so it hardly made a huge dent in our outgoings.
     
    Instead of just looking at our profit and loss you should also look at our debts and net assets which shows the club was technically insolvent by the time Ashley bought us, you also have to remember that the money spent on transfers in the past decade when we managed to make a loss of £100 million before dividends isn’t anywhere near the likes of Villa, Purs and Sunderland are spending now.

    We’ve wasted money on transfers but all clubs have, you can’t guarantee every player is going to be a success the same as you can’t guarantee every manager will be but one thing is certain and that is if we want any sort of success we are going to have to take the risk and spend some on a consistent basis year after year.

    You’ve changed from being competitive towards the top of the table to just being competitive in the Premiership btw.



     

  82. The fact is NUST can not canvass “unsophisticated investors” i.e ordinary folk for money. They have to be directed to an FSA level approved body.
     
    Nor can they operate a Collective Investment Scheme without full FSA approval and compliance.
     
    One thing I would say to the NUST members – did you realise your subscriptions were going to be used to pay for lawyers and accountants to start a take over bid of the club?
     
    For heavens sake everyone WAKE UP – ITS A DISGRACE.

  83. Certainly shook a hornets nest here  !
    Hey ! certainly a romantic notion.
    Could it work ?, dont believe so, not at  this stage in history.
    If, like in Germany, it became law and is overseen by the Federal Government, ok,  but that aint gonna happen here.
    The answer may be to put it back on the stock market, the fans like before can buy shares in the club.
    Personally,  dont  believe that would be  the  best  solution either, but it`s an alternative.
    The problem being , fans of NUFC, are among the most vociferous and demanding groups in the country, thinking because they show up for games that entitles them  a voice and special rights in regards to how the club is managed.
    None are about to admit, they bear any responsibility for the revolving door system of management , it`s always someone else`s fault.
    It`s difficult enough to run a club with a structured management system,
    could you imagine having to deal with  the divided opinions of thousands of fans .
    Brings to mind the designed racehorse by committee  =  a camel.
    Afraid this may all end up both in tears and the courts.
    The perfect  situation for a bit of larceny, beware !
     
     

  84. I should clarify point 82 – So in effect they are using a dodge of law to direct ordinary folk to FSA bodies – to grab money off ordinary folk who would as sophisticated investors would never even consider a scheme announced like this – without details – in a million years.
     
    I am disgusted that these morons are getting free publicity and this blog has added to it. I appreciate some will need to debate and discuss the various notions – but the only way to stop them robbing ordinary folk is to stop their PR.
     
    A more sensible thread would have been “reasons not to invest with NUST” but again this allows them to go away and reshape and repair their shambles to fit opinion – they are not fit enough to produce a credible document and proposal marketed let alone spend 200million of peoples money.
     

  85. No way they could provide the funds we need to compete realistically in th PL.

    Big money is needed if were going to achieve anything, ask Chelsea, Man Utd, Man City, Spurs or Villa.  

  86. chuck says:
    November 25, 2009 at 7:12 pm

    “None are about to admit, they bear any responsibility for the revolving door system of management , it`s always someone else`s fault.”

    Or demanding constantly that he should sell the club at the worst possible times no matter what the consequences, which they are now berating him for, yet still demanding that he leaves which makes no sense whatsoever.

    Stardust says:
    November 25, 2009 at 7:23 pm

    “For heavens sake everyone WAKE UP ”

    Stardust, from most of what I’ve seen in most of this discussion, it rather looks as if they have, or were fully conscious all along.

  87. Stardust says:
    November 25, 2009 at 7:23 pm

    “I am disgusted that these morons are getting free publicity and this blog has added to it. I appreciate some will need to debate and discuss the various notions – but the only way to stop them robbing ordinary folk is to stop their PR.”

    Stardust, that really does make no sense at all. Are you really saying that if someone engages in financial practice that is potentially improper, people should just keep quiet about it, not say anything and just let them get on with it without challenging them in any way?

  88. Worky – look for instance at UTD111 – he thinks they are acting properly – he is misguided and unfortunately blessed with enough “notional intelligence” to get sucked in.
     
    Anyone with any background of fund-raising can see the nonsense of this scheme. The more publicity they get, the more people are scammed, as I said blogs titled “Reasons not to invest in NUST” would be far more appropriate.
     
    For instance the line by BBM “He has also offered to send us any relevant press releases and rumours if we’re interested. And wants to know if we would be interested in supporting the Trust in the “Yes We Can” campaign.” Is scandalous – they have not produced anything – they claimed to have 20million (a lie as they would already have the operational proposals and be registered as a CIS)

    They are using this blog to get publicity and get enquiries for money – I suggest a far more stringent approach for articles and “Edlines” or you will have blood on your hands, and poor ordinary folks fleeced, with its certain collapse.

  89. Stardust says:
    November 25, 2009 at 7:59 pm
    Worky – look for instance at UTD111 – he thinks they are acting properly – he is misguided and unfortunately blessed with enough “notional intelligence” to get sucked in.
    —————————————————————–
    Ha ha!  The arrogance of this twerp LOL

  90. Stardust, pet…..

    My stance as outlined earlier is – I am happy to see how this initiative unfolds……and have not been “sucked in” by anything so far….. 

    Your assumptions about me, my business knowledge and my “notional intelligence” (LOL) are as usual so wide of the mark as to be laughable.

    As ever – your arrogance and assumptions about other folk continue to make you look a buffoon.  Keep it up though mate, it’s a scream.

  91. “Anyone with any background of fund-raising can see the nonsense of this scheme.”

    I have experience in fundraising for collective organisations, and I know that if  something improper is going on, the only thing to do is to raise the alarm bell, and that worst thing to do is to say nothing about it. If things go unchallenged, then they spread out of control.

    “Is scandalous – they have not produced anything – they claimed to have 20million (a lie as they would already have the operational proposals and be registered as a CIS)”

    Most people have taken that at face value. Who is the person who has been checking the FSA register every few days to see if they are on it?

    “They are using this blog to get publicity and get enquiries for money – I suggest a far more stringent approach for articles and “Edlines” or you will have blood on your hands, and poor ordinary folks fleeced, with its certain collapse.”

    I really take exception to that, Stardust. If lots of people are going to be “fleeced” as you put it, then informed people like yourself who are content to just stand by and let it happen would have far more “blood on their hands” as you put it in typically colourful fashion.

  92. Stardust

    If you truly believe NUST are perpetrating something untoward/underhand/or even illegal(?) – shouldn’t you be making your views known to the relevant authorities?

  93. Worky – I understand the debate v no publicity angle – but the downfall of this “plan” will fail on no PR. They would get coverage and deserve it if they acted properly – they are not.
     
    I also likewise disagree with my saying nothing approach – I have told people the facts – they have had the warning signs flashed in front of their eyes with a big red STOP sign on – yet still  I am ridiculed for providing people with an insight – I will laugh with a smug grin when those fools who were warned lose money.

  94. UTD111 – as I said by not having a plan – by not releasing details, by inviting expressions of interest, they are stirring up enquiries without doing anything BUT are targeting unsophisticated investors i.e. non HNWI’s. THAT IS PLAIN WRONG but a dodge in law (skirting on the line of subjectivity to whether there is a wrong or not )as it targets people with no experience, as those with it see this as a nonsense.
     
    The Collective Investment Scheme has to be ran under FSA regs, again they have not provided an investment document so it is impossible to see if this applies but as things stand I can not see how it can not. The amount of people required thereon to run under compliance is a significant cost each year – again madness.
     
    I also can not see how they canvass for investors to provide proof of funds – for what? there isnt a published plan? Again – a clever rouse to get around the law by the those running it who are relying on the ignorance of folks not to see through it.
     
    So they invite Joe Public blindly to register at with an FSA body or IFA and provide proof of funds to receive info. Its chancery of the highest order and once more a dodge.
     
    There are many other points to hit them with – but timing is crucial post release of info – and as for the time to report them – well lets just say they need to be on far firmer ground than they are now – as many informed people who may hold them in little regard are prepared to fire the bullets – perhaps Mr Ashley himself ?
     
    These people are acting in an opportunist manner – no more or less – winging it as they go, without resources to do it themselves so they seek to make the most of their position and opportunity. As I said everything they have done so far disgusts me – particularly the fact they first inferred they had 20m  – total crap.

  95. Yo !  WORKEY
    No mention of Football , competition or sport ?
    Seemed to generate plenty of  opinions though,  could it be the fans are more interested in the business side of the game than the actual playing of it ?
    Nah ! just another good opportunity to get in a few verbal put downs .

  96. well well well.
    Fancy stardust calling the nust a disgrace.
    The very man who hates the common man. The very man who supports the dispicable mike ashley.
    I’ve got a great idea stardy. Why dont you just keep your big red nose out of the clubs business and get yourself back at the front of santas sleigh.
    Your dispicable opinions are not welcome!

  97. Stardust @94 (in particular) – that post contained a lot of good points however, your essay was totally discredited by your use of the English language.

    Using caps to shout (apart from HNWIs of course) and the use of words like ‘chancers’, ‘dodge’, ‘crap’ does nothing to add credibilty to your argument.  Mr Stardust, your dismissive, arrogant language more often than not undermines the obvious intelligence you have.

    Please do yourself a big big favour and begin to regard your fellow-posters as human beings who deserve better than to be talked down to and patronised!

  98. Lesh – 97 – LOL. Oh the irony.
     
    As a side issue I was thinking about a name change – Jedward perhaps?

  100. Stardust – please do me a favour?

    Write down in layman’s terms –

    a) Why this is not a good idea in theory (for the ‘sophisticated investors’).

    b) Why it’s illegal?

    c) What is the right way to go about it (please pretend for a moment that you are vehemently against it, and tell me what you think would need to happen).

    You don’t need to patronise me, just don’t use so much jargon and get to the point (I sometimes struggle with this so I’m not taking the p*ss).

    I value your opinion on it and would like to put forward your arguments tonight and put your questions to them formally, but I feel like I’d need an interpreter at the moment.

    Cheers
    BBM

  101. For ‘illegal’ please read immoral and reprehensible. Assuming you agree that regulation is being covered?

  102. Surely the main issue has to be why the NUST are following this route now after initially laughing off the idea and saying it could never work?

  104. Cheers Bowburn, for some reason it had actually slipped my mind until I read this article, but I’m 99% sure they issued a leaflet including a piece which basically said that fans wanting to buy the club needed to get real, and that it was totally unworkable.

  105. To be fair Macas, I’m pretty sure you and I held the same view when it was being discussed on Ed’s blog. So after you mentioned it, it got me thinking, and although I haven’t yet looked into it, I think you might have something.

    I suppose the obvious counter were it to be true, is that they could have matured since then. I guess I might get an indication of how far they’ve come since then, or not as the case may be.

  106. BBM –  Some Questions for Tonight:
    a) Why this is not a good idea in theory (for the ’sophisticated investors’) – Sophisticated Investors require a full business plan or prospectus complete with detailed projected 3 to 5 year financials and a variance model of what if scenario’s (for example what if we stayed in the Championship) to evaluate the Return on Investment. The NUST have repeatedly said “for those that want to invest” and have encouraged people to dip into their pension funds (I am really aghast at that one). So in essence they have asked for money and not provided the very basics of what is required or expected. they are preying on the vulnerable, ill-informed and those without experience to put their hand in the air and give them the cash. Any experienced investor is treating them as a joke at present.
     
    The Questions : Did the 20million Investment actually exist – if so what is their current level of investment (They wont answer) – and if it did – where was the prospectus and financials to enable investors to establish value.
    Q. Why did they target Joe Public’s pension fund without allowing him the right to see the financials. Why did they target Joe Publics Pension fund without a financial model in place? (Its their life savings after all)
     
    Q. Have they acted morally correctly by targeting Joe Public without having a plan ready – are they being opportunistic (they cant answer that honestly)
    b) Why it’s illegal? They have a major problem – they want to buy the club but are penniless. The only way they can do it is to get money. To get money they have to get investors. To get investors they have to get publicity. To get the publicity they inferred they had 20million in pledges. There is the first problem – no one who is an experienced investor would pledge a penny without seeing a prospectus – Then they stated in their first press conference that they were going to prepare the financials! So again it targets Joe Public to raid their life savings. This all takes time – as time moves forward and the likelihood of promotion increases the price goes up, so they are doomed from day one as their case hasnt been presented  “what if scenarios” are not factored in – such as promotion when the price doubles – does their bid collapse?
    However they havent actually launched any investment yet by not producing a document – they also refer people to FSA bodies, IFA’s etc to provide proof of funds and shepherd them to people with a vested interest to take their money too.
    Again this is all very underhand but subjective to whether the lines of investment advertising to unsophisticated investors has been crossed. However – when a body or group brings together a pool of people to collectively invest in a project (other that for sole enjoyment) and where profits and revenue will be generated and redistributed to that pool – it forms a Collective Investment Scheme (required FSA governance from day 1 and compliance throughout) again huge safeguards are in place to protect ordinary folk here – and the compliance issues are huge. Again its disgusting that they dont produce their document first (which would be tore to shreds in the press – thereby killing the project stone dead and not getting any subscribers). So in essence they are by not releasing the documents – getting Joe Public once more to put money up.
     
    The Question – Does this scheme under the FSMA convey a Collective Investment Scheme and what safeguards, registration and compliance has been complete in order to present this to market?  – no doubt they will be reading this and preparing a defence – something I am vehemently against (which is what I was alluding to to Worky yesterday) as they have acted disgracefully. No one should trust these people they have acted like profiteers NOT people caring about the club or people of the North East. By discussing this here we are basically giving the bank robber a map of the vault.
    c) What is the right way to go about it (please pretend for a moment that you are vehemently against it, and tell me what you think would need to happen)
    Present a prospectus with full financials (and what if scenarios) BEFORE they advertise and target Joe Public. To not do so is simply unforgivable and stinks of opportunism – with the victims spread throughout the North East.
     
    Hope that wasnt patronising fella.

  107. You may be right but I don’t think it does much for their credibility when they have two completely opposing viewpoints.  Not sure why I forgot about it for so long, but what stuck in my mind at the time was the thinly veiled contempt for the fans who were suggesting it. Along with the childish jibes aimed at Llambias they came across as not the kind of people you would want representing the club.  Personally I don’t think the idea of fans buying us could ever work in this day and age and at such a big club, but to almost insult those fans in one of their official leaflets didn’t quite sit right with me.

  109. Just to clarify ” However – when a body or group brings together a pool of people to collectively invest in a project (other that for sole enjoyment)”

    They have already ruined that line and can no longer go down the enjoyment route, by stating people should “invest” and that people should use their pension funds – which again show its a for profit arrangement.

  110. Worky,  your reference to BBM’s questions going down “like Eichmann at a Bar-Mitzvah” is priceless – a gem!

  111. Cheers, that reads much better (I could sense the restraint in your writing!!).

    It clarifies much of what I thought you were getting at and yes they are definitely good points. My only musing would be that for people like yourself, I don’t think it matters what I come back with, you have made your mind up. Even if they give what seem like otherwise plausible answers, you’re just going to say they are full of cack. I’m not being funny, nor am I saying you would be incorrect in your assessment. Just making an observation.

    I ask this, because I just wondered if due to the nature of events and how this was all spawned, these guys may have been previously ill-informed, ill-advised and rudderless. Could it not be that they now have professionals in place, who also care about the football club and are trying to make a real go of this for the good of the football club and it’s supporters? Now it might be doomed to failure nonetheless, but is it not fair to say that they could be doing this for the right reasons, even if they are still not going about it the right way? Hence there should be less anger and more feedback to them. Help, don’t hissy-fit, so to speak?

    Also, could it be that this is fairly unique and ground-breaking stuff that could ultimately happen in the best interests of everybody with the right guidance and controls, should they continue to communicate and earn trust and respect from supporters?

    These are the reasons why despite all of your relevant concerns and criticism, I’m keeping an open mind on matters.

    But I do agree, the original sentiments should have been more about the putting money in to get non-financial rewards as a main objective.

  112. Rangerman says:
    November 25, 2009 at 7:03 pm

    You miss my point to be honest. The warehouse reference wasn’t about the amount of money – it was what it symbolised. Basically the club being fleeced for as much as the owners could get out.

    I stand by my comment that the club should be able to be competitive in the top half of the PL under its own resources. Take away the top 4, Spurs, Man City, Villa & possibly the Makems and no other team is particularly getting financed by a sugar daddy. Surely we can better the likes of West Ham, Bolton, Blackburn, Hull, Wigan and the likes?

    Regardless my sentiment was in my final sentence –  if we can’t compete at that level within our means then we will end up being where we belong.  But in my opinion a well-run NUFC investing what it can afford should be able to aim for the top half of the Premier League.

  113. Bowburn
    5 minutes looking at their website, pretty much tells you what you need to know. Empty vessels and all that

  114. BBM – “Even if they give what seem like otherwise plausible answers,” – in all honesty fella – there are no acceptable plausible answers. There is only one way (the right way) to properly ask for investment from sophisticated investors and the markets are heavily regulated to make sure that happens. When you realise they have pitched this at ordinary folks – with families to feed and – pitched it as an investment from their pension funds – it really disgusts me.

    Their only excuse can be niavity – thereon can anyone put up 100million to people who dont know what they are doing

    or

    Chancery – the worst case – with opportunistic money making at the heart of it.

  115. Stardust – it’s quite refreshing that you see ‘naivety’ as an option. Now I’m not saying categorically that’s the case but it seems to me by it’s nature, the Trust may well be steeped in naivety. So it seems a more obvious choice than ‘chancery’, I concede that’s also because it sits better with me. But then I don’t know why a group of Newcastle fans would want to knowingly stitch other fans up?

    So if lessons need to be learned before it’s too late. We should all have our say and either make it right or leave it alone entirely?

  116. Incidentally, you’re inferring that the IFAs and solicitors are the ‘chancers’? In view of banging the drum, so that come what may, they will get a payout regardless?

    Have I got that right?

  117. “But then I don’t know why a group of Newcastle fans would want to knowingly stitch other fans up?”

    Money, Power, Greed – give weak men an opportunity and they will always fall for it. I believe they are fundamentally flawed as individuals from the way they formed – out of anger and hate without thinking through. They acted emotionally not pragmatically.

    But both options frighten me – as either way it is not a good result – and you simply can not learn on the job when you have 100m to allocate.

    One other point – I still can not believe they didnt meet Llambias when he offered. What if he had said – OK your 20m buys 20% of the club and a say in how its ran? It makes no sense they didnt meet up – for all the reasons I have outlined – it is because they werent ready – because they dont have a real plan yet or any real investment.

  118. 116 – no certainly not the IFA’s – they are there to interpret the package for the unsophisticated.
     
    The people behind the scheme – certainly (whoever they are). But they must not have a Corporate Financier on board – which is astounding – as they would have insisted and be bound by law to make sure it was presented in the way I have described. If they are involved and using borderline means – thats more disturbing.

  119. Stardust says:
    November 26, 2009 at 4:12 pm

    I reckon they didn’t meet Llambias because it was probably seen as a cheap publicity stunt by the regime.  Llambias himself has said a fans buy out wouldn’t happen, so why would he want to meet them?

    That meeting would have only been for one persons benifit – Llambias.  They have had plenty of offers to meet various supporter groups and turned them all down.

    Why now have they decided they want to meet with this group? 

  120. Another splendid example of the NUST’s inconsistency and their prediliction for telling people exactly what they want to hear. They campaign vociferously for the appointment of Alan Shearer as manager. Then, when Chris Hughton is appointed on a permanent basis, their ‘interim chair’, Neil Mitchell is quoted as saying:

    “Chris Hughton’s appointment shows Mike Ashley continues to call the wrong shots. We still await a manager with a proven record.”