Greg

Link: https://actionnetwork.org/letters/write-to-your-mp-demand-transparency-from-the-premier-league?delivery_id=50062190

Just below 10k, had over 3000 new members.

Done months ago tbh and cost f*** all. And better than the Man City badge.

£1 to join (a share), £1 yearly subscription.

It should be - if it's not clear you would need to raise a ticket here: https://nufctrust.co.uk/support/

3000 new members in last 24 hours.

Or they could all work together, egos aside. It's not all about one group amalgamating and becoming the biggest/only voice. They could and they should but more @ = more egos unfortunately. Easier to co-ordinate stuff and deploy different action to suitable skill sets as a singular. Ultimately as long as they keep going and trying anything with the best intentions wether it be as one group or not is the main thing. Look what one guy off his own back can achieve today. Wether it just a little bit of traction it’s still important. Greg[/member] Out of interest did Toon For Change consult NUST before sending their letter today to Masters? No. But will be speaking with various 'fan groups' tomorrow.

Reuben brothers are major Tory donors...

So it was more important to get numbers (and peoiples money) that to be honest with them about the Trusts intentions going forward? Looked that way at the time, and to see it confirmed is no surprise. Nope. We've been open and honest about the need to build the membership from day 1. The Trust doesn't run on magic beans and I can assure you if it was about money it would cost a lot more than £1 for a share and £1 a year for annual membership. We reduced the price so low because it's not about money - it's about making the Trust open and accessible to all. The money is safe - it's in the accounts - which get audited and filed as they have to. We've spent a little bit this last year or so but not much - on the work to fight the Strawberry Place developments for example but there's our finances are healthy, and safe, ready for when we need money to do things - like for example........now!

Liverpool done the same and look where it got them. It staggering the amount of we cannot win so why bother in the mass population over the way corporations treat us not just in football. Agreed - but the Liverpool situation was primarily driven by the fact that they were a matter of hours away from being insolvent and going into administration. My point was Sunderland fans did nowt. The more people kick up a fuss and shine a light on the obvious corruption in the premier league the better. I agree.

Some good questions - I've answered where I can.

Liverpool done the same and look where it got them. It staggering the amount of we cannot win so why bother in the mass population over the way corporations treat us not just in football. Agreed - but the Liverpool situation was primarily driven by the fact that they were a matter of hours away from being insolvent and going into administration.

I may be wrong, but i just assumed the NUST would mobilise a credible push for answers more than anything else. What you have suggested is fantasy and I hope no one joins in that belief. Question is, if 10,000 sign up under that belief will NUST care. I doubt it. Well those 10,000 will - NUST is the constituent of its parts - one member, one share, one vote. If you are a member and unsatisfied stand on that ticket for election to the board at the next election (happens every year), give up all of your spare time for free and try and make a difference. If members vote for NUST to protest outside the PL building will NUST do that ? The AGM won't be for a while so that might be a little late - and that would be a strange thing to vote on at an AGM. All PL staff are working from home btw.

I may be wrong, but i just assumed the NUST would mobilise a credible push for answers more than anything else. What you have suggested is fantasy and I hope no one joins in that belief. Question is, if 10,000 sign up under that belief will NUST care. I doubt it. Well those 10,000 will - NUST is the constituent of its parts - one member, one share, one vote. If you are a member and unsatisfied stand on that ticket for election to the board at the next election (happens every year), give up all of your spare time for free and try and make a difference.

Fundamentally disagree. Reminds me of Labour and Starmer calmly playing by the rules while the Tories p*ss all over every established convention there is. The PL won't respond to politeness or anything of the kind, they'll respond to something that's going to hurt their bottom line and nothing else. Bit like Mike in that regard actually. If you think otherwise I'm sorry but you're f***ing deluded. And how would you so that with abuse and spam? It’s not about being polite - it’s about undertaking coordinated targeted and meaningful action rather than spamming twitter and doing nothing but making noise in your own bubble.

Well maybe I would have taken it the way it was intended if you hadn't acted like you did yesterday. I think it is best we leave it there.

A key line from today's member update mind: “The board of the Trust does not have all the answers on what to do next. We know that abuse, intimidation, and spam will not get us the answers we seek.” We're working out what to do next, and will be some big online type meeting very soon to more member feedback - we had hundreds of really good ideas emailed in yesterday after we tweeted asking for ideas (some of them a bit crazy but mostly well thought out and positive). Also working on other mechanisms for getting more members involved in running the Trust. The main message is that we have to be united, and we have to do this (whatever it is) properly and professionally to try and get action/results.

Great to hear

We are a member led organisation and it costs £2 to join - of course members that actually contribute to NUST deserve to get the update first for crying out loud. Updates will be put on website later for everyone else - and Chron already covering it. It was a piece of constructive criticism Greg, complete with an alternative suggestion. You don't need to be "crying out loud" about it. Unless that's not allowed either. It wasn't really constructive at all - it came across as self centred, there is a thurst for knowledge from a lot of people that don't support the Trust to know everything and demand ridiculous things and just rant anonymously on the internet. We always tell members important info first and then follow up more widely afterwards. - that is only right- the contriubue to the Trust, the support it, they are why we exist. I told you what I thought was wrong and why, then offered what I believe was a reasonable alternative. That's constructive criticism. Clearly what you won't have is any form of criticism at all, constructive or not. Not sure that asking that you let potential members know what Staveley had to say is a "demand for ridiculous things" either. If the chronicle were carrying it within minutes you'd have been just as well letting people know yourselves and trying to attract members that way. And we did - after we emailed members it was put on the website. You've sniped and sniped and sniped and so got the answer you deserve. Just read back so some of this thread - if anyone wants to discuss the pros and cons of the Trust then I am happy to do so when I can if it's in a sensible and constructive manner. Just like yesterday when you were sniping again - because you wanted information - you refused to understand or comprehend the explanation given, the same here with you not being able to comprehend or understand why members that support and contribute to the trust should get information and updates from the trust first with it following more widely shortly after that.

Yeah tremendous just think it needs some more traction in media now ie sky, bbc, talkshite etc. Daily Stars on it, it’s a start www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/newcastle-fans-demand-premier-league-22458774.amp Cheeky bastards quoting me in that.

We are a member led organisation and it costs £2 to join - of course members that actually contribute to NUST deserve to get the update first for crying out loud. Updates will be put on website later for everyone else - and Chron already covering it. It was a piece of constructive criticism Greg, complete with an alternative suggestion. You don't need to be "crying out loud" about it. Unless that's not allowed either. It wasn't really constructive at all - it came across as self centred, there is a thurst for knowledge from a lot of people that don't support the Trust to know everything and demand ridiculous things and just rant anonymously on the internet. We always tell members important info first and then follow up more widely afterwards. - that is only right- the contriubue to the Trust, the support it, they are why we exist.

Lot's of new members - we've had to buy a new email server tonight!

We are a member led organisation and it costs £2 to join - of course members that actually contribute to NUST deserve to get the update first for crying out loud. Updates will be put on website later for everyone else - and Chron already covering it. As a ' members led ' organisation what was your response previously to members asking that you lead a boycott / demonstrations ? Exactly as we said at the time.

We are a member led organisation and it costs £2 to join - of course members that actually contribute to NUST deserve to get the update first for crying out loud. Updates will be put on website later for everyone else - and Chron already covering it.

Greg, these are my ideas: 1. Ask the CMA to investigate anti-competitive behaviour by the PL and member clubs in colluding to prevent the takeover. 2. Create a stock email that members from throughout the UK asking them to support Chi’s correspondence with Masters and to support an investigation into the PL by the CMA 3. Actively engage Alok Sharma, Ed Milliband and Lucy Powell to persuade them to push the CMA to investigate the PL. be sure to point out that this issue creates a precedent which has ramifications for 90 other clubs, not just our own 4. Through the FSA engage with other supporter groups. Remind them of times that NUFC fans have helped out their clubs and then ask club groups to engage their own clubs to tell them that interfering in another club’s takeover is not cool. 5. Ask the PL whether they have investigated the information provided to them by C4 about Everton not disclosing Usmanov’s involvement in their takeover. 6. Engage with the Chronicle to run some highly negative stories on the PL on their front page. 7. Draw up a long list of ex-players in terms of their national stature and invite them to become involved in NUST and get involved in the critique of the PL. 8. Need some sort of responsible protest. A front door boo for the PL throughout Newcastle maybe? 9. Accept that moving forward it is going to be hard to run protests and constructively engage with PL and NUFC. Choose which you want to be an open the door for a non-affiliated group to take the other role. Excellent constructive feedback. I'll add them to the list.