Greg

We've some good idea, to try and build things up and get more involved in the running of NUST - hopefully can say more soon. A lot went on hold with the pandemic and takeover etc.

Board meeting tomorrow - we've got in touch with the FSA (as our umbrella body) to ask that they facilitate a meeting with the Premier League but aren't holding our breath on that one.

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment. Absolute rubbish this mind, there's nothing in that letter or response that warranted withholding it from their members once the reply was received. As it has been since they first started out NUST is all about creating a perception that they are in the loop and involved way more than they really are, no better example than this one. I was a member early on but quickly realised my mistake. They've written a letter to the Premier League been ignored / got a holding letter back, and then announced that "they've had a response". Absolute jokers. This couldn't be further from the truth. What did it achieve? What came of the instruction of your legal counsel ultimately? Are you a Member of the Trust? If you are (I don't think you are) and have concerns in this regard you should email [email protected]. Question dodged I've already explained I used to be a member but packed it in. If you took the time to read what I posted rather than just react blindly to criticism you'd have seen that. At the end of the day the Trust went to all of the trouble of instructing legal counsel and got the exact same stock answer as everyone else, which was entirely predictable. If you were a Member you would have received a detailed explanation as to why the letters were not released until now. The overwhelming majority understand that position. You're stilll avoiding the question, so we're done here now. Don’t know how you deal so civilly with people determined to be c***s. He's pretty much refused to answer my questions, not sure how that's "dealing" with anything. As for calling me that if I did it to Greg I assume I'd get a ban. No doubt you'll be OK though. It's been explained - but NUST only represents its members. You aren't a member. How many members do you have now? What is your point though? My point is wondering what the numbers are. Back when I was a member about ten years ago they became a joke of an organisation who managed to alienate and lose half of their members in around 12 months. The farce of that bid to buy the club etc. There's obviously been a massive recruitment drive ( off the back of Rafa going if everyone is honest) and I wondered what the numbers are now. Problem with people like Greg is he doesn't seem interested in people who gave up on the trust. He's said himself if you aren't aember he isn't interested. That's the wrong way of treating people who have been members previously. The new board has built the Trust up from a few hundred members just over a year and a half ago to well over 8,000. We've effectively had to start from scratch. I'm more than open to discussing and debating the pros and cons of the trust and to take constructive criticism with anyone - but not with anonymous people on the internet that are only negative, attack us and what we do and are seemingly unwilling to understand or respect what we do at all. That's a commendable effort I was more than interested in what you were doing again last year until I read the piece by one of the board in the Chronicle talking about owning the club one day still being the longer term aim. Massive mistake that. The whole thing was terribly handled last time and cost the group big time,set you back years. And while it wasn't you, being called a c*** by someone for massively disagreeing with what the Trust does or doesn't do makes it very difficult to respect what they do like you ask. That's all fair. On the fan ownership point - it's the ultimate aim of all Trusts - but it is not realistic at Premier League level for full fan ownership. We have been working on a plan for something around this, what Hearts have done in Scotland for example is amazing but it would be very different to what NUST tried to achieved many years ago - asking people to risks their pensions and life savings was never going to work!

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment. Absolute rubbish this mind, there's nothing in that letter or response that warranted withholding it from their members once the reply was received. As it has been since they first started out NUST is all about creating a perception that they are in the loop and involved way more than they really are, no better example than this one. I was a member early on but quickly realised my mistake. They've written a letter to the Premier League been ignored / got a holding letter back, and then announced that "they've had a response". Absolute jokers. This couldn't be further from the truth. What did it achieve? What came of the instruction of your legal counsel ultimately? Are you a Member of the Trust? If you are (I don't think you are) and have concerns in this regard you should email [email protected]. Question dodged I've already explained I used to be a member but packed it in. If you took the time to read what I posted rather than just react blindly to criticism you'd have seen that. At the end of the day the Trust went to all of the trouble of instructing legal counsel and got the exact same stock answer as everyone else, which was entirely predictable. If you were a Member you would have received a detailed explanation as to why the letters were not released until now. The overwhelming majority understand that position. You're stilll avoiding the question, so we're done here now. Don’t know how you deal so civilly with people determined to be c***s. He's pretty much refused to answer my questions, not sure how that's "dealing" with anything. As for calling me that if I did it to Greg I assume I'd get a ban. No doubt you'll be OK though. It's been explained - but NUST only represents its members. You aren't a member. How many members do you have now? What is your point though? My point is wondering what the numbers are. Back when I was a member about ten years ago they became a joke of an organisation who managed to alienate and lose half of their members in around 12 months. The farce of that bid to buy the club etc. There's obviously been a massive recruitment drive ( off the back of Rafa going if everyone is honest) and I wondered what the numbers are now. Problem with people like Greg is he doesn't seem interested in people who gave up on the trust. He's said himself if you aren't aember he isn't interested. That's the wrong way of treating people who have been members previously. The new board has built the Trust up from a few hundred members just over a year and a half ago to well over 8,000. We've effectively had to start from scratch. I'm more than open to discussing and debating the pros and cons of the trust and to take constructive criticism with anyone - but not with anonymous people on the internet that are only negative, attack us and what we do and are seemingly unwilling to understand or respect what we do at all.

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment. Absolute rubbish this mind, there's nothing in that letter or response that warranted withholding it from their members once the reply was received. As it has been since they first started out NUST is all about creating a perception that they are in the loop and involved way more than they really are, no better example than this one. I was a member early on but quickly realised my mistake. They've written a letter to the Premier League been ignored / got a holding letter back, and then announced that "they've had a response". Absolute jokers. This couldn't be further from the truth. What did it achieve? What came of the instruction of your legal counsel ultimately? Are you a Member of the Trust? If you are (I don't think you are) and have concerns in this regard you should email [email protected]. Question dodged I've already explained I used to be a member but packed it in. If you took the time to read what I posted rather than just react blindly to criticism you'd have seen that. At the end of the day the Trust went to all of the trouble of instructing legal counsel and got the exact same stock answer as everyone else, which was entirely predictable. If you were a Member you would have received a detailed explanation as to why the letters were not released until now. The overwhelming majority understand that position. You're stilll avoiding the question, so we're done here now. Don’t know how you deal so civilly with people determined to be c***s. He's pretty much refused to answer my questions, not sure how that's "dealing" with anything. As for calling me that if I did it to Greg I assume I'd get a ban. No doubt you'll be OK though. It's been explained - but NUST only represents its members. You aren't a member.

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment. Absolute rubbish this mind, there's nothing in that letter or response that warranted withholding it from their members once the reply was received. As it has been since they first started out NUST is all about creating a perception that they are in the loop and involved way more than they really are, no better example than this one. I was a member early on but quickly realised my mistake. They've written a letter to the Premier League been ignored / got a holding letter back, and then announced that "they've had a response". Absolute jokers. This couldn't be further from the truth. What did it achieve? What came of the instruction of your legal counsel ultimately? Are you a Member of the Trust? If you are (I don't think you are) and have concerns in this regard you should email [email protected]. Question dodged I've already explained I used to be a member but packed it in. If you took the time to read what I posted rather than just react blindly to criticism you'd have seen that. At the end of the day the Trust went to all of the trouble of instructing legal counsel and got the exact same stock answer as everyone else, which was entirely predictable. If you were a Member you would have received a detailed explanation as to why the letters were not released until now. The overwhelming majority understand that position. You're stilll avoiding the question, so we're done here now.

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment. Absolute rubbish this mind, there's nothing in that letter or response that warranted withholding it from their members once the reply was received. As it has been since they first started out NUST is all about creating a perception that they are in the loop and involved way more than they really are, no better example than this one. I was a member early on but quickly realised my mistake. They've written a letter to the Premier League been ignored / got a holding letter back, and then announced that "they've had a response". Absolute jokers. This couldn't be further from the truth. What did it achieve? What came of the instruction of your legal counsel ultimately? Are you a Member of the Trust? If you are (I don't think you are) and have concerns in this regard you should email [email protected]. Question dodged I've already explained I used to be a member but packed it in. If you took the time to read what I posted rather than just react blindly to criticism you'd have seen that. At the end of the day the Trust went to all of the trouble of instructing legal counsel and got the exact same stock answer as everyone else, which was entirely predictable. If you were a Member you would have received a detailed explanation as to why the letters were not released until now. The overwhelming majority understand that position. You don't appear to understand that the answer from Masters was irrelevant. We didn't ask him a single question - we provided legal arguments into the process in favour of the takeover to stand up for members views in light of others doing the same against the takeover. We stood up for our members into the process, this wasn't done to get answers from the PL as we know it was a confidential process, nor was it done for likes on Twitter or PR or anything like that - it wasn't done to make angry people on the internet that aren't even members happy.

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment. Absolute rubbish this mind, there's nothing in that letter or response that warranted withholding it from their members once the reply was received. As it has been since they first started out NUST is all about creating a perception that they are in the loop and involved way more than they really are, no better example than this one. I was a member early on but quickly realised my mistake. They've written a letter to the Premier League been ignored / got a holding letter back, and then announced that "they've had a response". Absolute jokers. This couldn't be further from the truth. What did it achieve? What came of the instruction of your legal counsel ultimately? Are you a Member of the Trust? If you are (I don't think you are) and have concerns in this regard you should email [email protected].

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment. Absolute rubbish this mind, there's nothing in that letter or response that warranted withholding it from their members once the reply was received. As it has been since they first started out NUST is all about creating a perception that they are in the loop and involved way more than they really are, no better example than this one. I was a member early on but quickly realised my mistake. They've written a letter to the Premier League been ignored / got a holding letter back, and then announced that "they've had a response". Absolute jokers. Well, their lawyers, who helped draft the letter, advised them that releasing the initial letter might have negatively impacted on the process. You’re not suggesting they go against their legal advice, are you? "The Premier League is unable to comment on a confidential process, but it is reassuring to receive this acknowledgment of receipt of the arguments we presented to the Premier League, which included making them aware that 97% of our members are in favour of this prospective takeover being approved." Reassuring to receive this acknowledgment of receipt of the arguments we presented to the Premier League, really? Yeah we got your letter, and that's basically it. Pretty much a delivered receipt without a read receipt of you were sending an email. You don't appear to comprehend or understand the reasons why the letter wasn't released at the time. This has been explained in detail in the member update email (here's a clue - it had nothing to do with the content of the reply from Richard Masters - which we said multiple times was nothing more than a basic aknowledgment).

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment. Absolute rubbish this mind, there's nothing in that letter or response that warranted withholding it from their members once the reply was received. As it has been since they first started out NUST is all about creating a perception that they are in the loop and involved way more than they really are, no better example than this one. I was a member early on but quickly realised my mistake. They've written a letter to the Premier League been ignored / got a holding letter back, and then announced that "they've had a response". Absolute jokers. This couldn't be further from the truth.

You think this isn't trying? https://nufctrust.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NUST-Letters-with-PL.pdf?mc_cid=a4a1831fbc&mc_eid=fa029130f5 OK, Greg-ol-boy, you asked, and here it is.... Sort of. Congratulations to the NUST, (in relation to the takeover attempt by PIF/PCP/Reubens) they've had a letter, quite a good letter I will agree, sent by a lawyer to the Premier League, knowing full well that the Premier League would give them the same response they've given everybody else. To assume that the Premier League would have given any different response is incredibly naive. Additionally, the NUST has announced (only 7 hours prior to this forum reply, which is being typed as soon as I wake up - in Australia), that they've also requested communication with the Football Supporters Association, and spoken on a few media outlets. As Mrs Brown would say, "that's nice". I put to you the question, has the NUST taken any steps to elicit communication, support, and action from any of the following: Former Newcastle United players with a high profile and likely contacts within the Premier League hierarchy (e.g. Alan Shearer, Peter Beardsley, Les Ferdinand, Steve Harper, Malcolm Macdonald, etc)? A letter, all co-signed by NUFC legends, supporting the takeover, sent to the Premier League and published as an open letter would show strong support from the club's historic figures. Calls directly from them to the Premier League to approve the takeover would apply pressure from within the broader Premier League community. Current Premier League & Championship clubs? Letters, signed by senior figures from within other Premier League and Championship clubs, supporting the takeover, sent to the Premier League and/or published as an open letter would show strong support from other clubs within the Premier League. Prominent business and community figures within the Newcastle area? Letter's, signed by prominent business and community figures would show strong support from the broader Newcastle community. Major sponsors of the Premier League? Letter's requesting support from major sponsors of the Premier League, and referencing support from those mentioned above, may elicit communication from those sponsors to the Premier League expressing concerns about brand damage. One of the things we should all have observed in 2019/2020 is how sensitive sponsors are of criticism towards them from popular causes - we need to make the NUFC Takover a prominent concern of the sponsors. Members of Parliament? Letters to MP's, with reference to support from famous NUFC legends, senior figures of other Premier League and Championship, and support from the Newcastle community (including a physical petition gathered from within Newcastle) would show those MP's just how much support there is, just how much angst there is at its failing, and also provide political cover and pressure for those MP's to start asking questions. MP's are motivated by an active constituency and are pressured by an angry constituency. Members of the Government? Letter's to members of the Cabinet of the United Kingdom, along the lines of the letter sent to the Premier League, and referencing support obtained from those mentioned above could motivate the Cabinet to start making inquiries. Members of the Royal Family? The UK Royal Family has a a very active role in the country's trade relationships and as such could be implored to intervene, to highlight all of the benefits to the United Kingdom and the North East of passing this takeover. In a situation, such as this, it is necessary to build and apply pressure against the Premier League. It is necessary to convince the Premier League that to take the decision or actions that we don't want flies in the face of what their customers, sponsors, and supporters want, and that to do so will cause them trouble. Organisations, like the Premier League (like most large organisations and government bodies) are not motivated to do what is right, they are motivated by what might result in criticism. The Premier League is acting the way it is because it is scared of the backlash it might receive if it approves the takeover - we need to construct a picture for them that the backlash will be worse if they don't approve the takeover. This is not the time to be sitting back and saying, "well, we wrote a letter and got a reply. We've done our bit." Now is the time for the NUST to be standing up strong; showing leadership, energy, and determination; and attempting to focus the distress and anger within the NUFC community towards an ends that helps move Mike Ashley out of NUFC and new (substantially better) owners in to the club. I would have hoped to hear that the NUST had, in fact, done most of the above already - but it is not too late, the NUST just needs to get cracking and play some catch-up. (And, before anyone asks, I would love to help out with this - my excuse is that I am on the other side of the world; that I am not a citizen of the United Kingdom; and have no claim to communicate with any of the above, except maybe the Queen as my Head of State - but even that would have to be via Australia's Governor General, not directly to Buckingham Palace.) I'm busy today with family so can't respond point by point but a lot of this is very unrealistic. Also just to note - on the letter - we didn't write to the PL to get a response, we didn't ask them a single question. The letter was sent to present arguments in favour of the takeover in light of them receiving many letters against it, in a faint hope it could have some (however small) positive influence on the process in face of all the negativity. Many people don't seem to understand that. A lot of the people you refer to, and businesses etc. simply will not put their head above the parapet, because self interest comes first. Take Alan Shearer, he is an employee of the Premier League and his looks after his wider reputation very carefully - he's never going to come out and back something on this. I can guarantee you we are not sitting back - we've not a hell of a lot more than write a letter and will continue to do a lot more. What are you doing personally to stand up for Newcastle fans? Are you a member of the Trust? Have you volunteered your services to the Trust? Being on the other side of the world, in an era of the internet, zoom, teams etc. is not much of a defence...

Turns out it was "sit down and shut up" then. No wonder they didn't want to release the response at the time. Releasing it had nothing to do with the content of the response as we've explained countless times. We never hid the fact is was a basic acknowledgment.

At the bottom: https://nufctrust.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NUST-Letters-with-PL.pdf?mc_cid=a4a1831fbc&mc_eid=fa029130f5 Generic, standard fuck off.

My nearest professional club. Went down to a game earlier this week, pre lockdown. Fulham or Brentford here. The former isn't much fun to 'support' This season obviously - not this week!

You think this isn't trying? https://nufctrust.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NUST-Letters-with-PL.pdf?mc_cid=a4a1831fbc&mc_eid=fa029130f5

NUST letter: https://nufctrust.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NUST-Letters-with-PL.pdf?mc_cid=a4a1831fbc&mc_eid=fa029130f5

Got to seal those cracks, gaps, or joints somehow.

he knows about as much as us. He has said what his paymaster has told him to say. Nothing more.

My nearest professional club. Went down to a game earlier this week, pre lockdown.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53601334

Isaac Hayden? - had his family issues but that was understandable given the circumstances.

The letter that wasn't a publicity stunt, but they felt the need to publicly announce they sent it? Well yes - you don't engage a leading football law barrister to make legal arguments on your behalf in favour of something - and then when he tells you that releasing copies of letters would undermine his correspondence and their impact rendering the exercise pointless- just ignore him and release it all for a few likes on Twitter. Maybe not but do you agree it's done more damage than good to NUST No. The world doesn't revolve around the angry people on Twitter.

The letter that wasn't a publicity stunt, but they felt the need to publicly announce they sent it? Well yes - you don't engage a leading football law barrister to make legal arguments on your behalf in favour of something - and then when he tells you that releasing copies of letters would undermine his correspondence and their impact rendering the exercise pointless- just ignore him and release it all for a few likes on Twitter.