peasepud

bobyule - Im not in a position to answer your query at the mo, not because I dont want to or arent allowed to but because I dont really understand the facts around that myself so Id be wary of any answer I give. What you say makes sense though, however its not matching in with my understanding on certain bits so please bear with me. The full financial information will be out shortly (at least a few days thought) , theres a few things still being discussed and amended with the partners and a few additional thoughts and ideas that have come from these type of Q&A's are being looked at therefore it all needs to be watertight and properly organised first. We dont want to be releasing the financial info and then two days later saying "oh this has now changed" or even more worryingly, 2 days after people have started signing up to it. At the moment, we're getting a handle on how many of you would be interested, not until all the info has been released would be looking for people to start committing. I know its a little frustrating but imagine what its like for us! we know this can work, when you read all the stuff that comes out then Im sure you will be convinced too. If nothing else has been learnt from the shaky start we had as the NUSC, we've at least learnt not to rush things out and dive in making statements and promises we cant keep.

Would like to know myself. try to contact NUST direct as they sent off the old strips to the orphanage which in return had the orphanage making the donation back. Im sure we can get you contact details or arrange some kind of collection.

It does sound a lot, I agree however you have to remember this is a handling fee per investor as such, each investor pledging £1500 would incur a handling fee (if we didnt go ahead) of £7.50. If you think theres the admin to manage that and get the money back to the investor then thats not a huge amount. Also to note, this isnt our handling fee, its a proper full solicitor that is running that side of things and handling the ESCROW so none of that fee will find its way into the NUST. £7.50 for a solicitor seems quite cheap tbh!

The overdraft is an unknown however its less than £40m now as per Barclays rules. We;d only really find out the true stuff when we do due diligence, if the clubs in a s*** state and we couldnt afford to run it then we wouldnt buy otherwise we'd be putting the club in deeper crap than it is now. This is what kind of f***s everything for everyone at the moment. We only find out how much the club costs after due dilligence... Yes but then again, all that the NUST have done so far is asked for people to REGISTER there interest in the idea, the next step will be to pay a 10% refundable (minus 5%) deposit, followed by due dillegence if it gets that far, then pay up the rest of the money and hopefully the end result is we get rid of Ashley. At the minute people are getting too far ahead of themselves. Exactly, and if it then turns out that we werent buying the club the deposits are returned (minus the 5% hamdling fee) so as I said before if you were looking to invest £1500, you'd pay a deposit of £150 to the Escrow account and if it all went pear shaped, you'd get £142.50 back.

The overdraft is an unknown however its less than £40m now as per Barclays rules. We;d only really find out the true stuff when we do due diligence, if the clubs in a shit state and we couldnt afford to run it then we wouldnt buy otherwise we'd be putting the club in deeper crap than it is now.

If you had read a few posts up you would have seen the same queries What is this, a f***ing comprehension test? I didn't see any semblance of an answer, but maybe nobody knows. That's fine too. I gave our understanding 3 posts up from your query

When you think that the interest on the £40m overdraft was running at around £4m per year then yes, £200m raised would mean the club would be bought + investment in the team and running costs yet still paying out the same amount as we were for the overdraft alone. If Ashley wants £100m plus £130m repaid for his loans you then have £20m or so for the overdraft and the NUST will have to be looking a fair bit higher than £300m in truth. Obviously this depends on what Ashley wants and most importantly if he wants to sell it to the very people who hate him. He doesnt though, I always thought that was the case but the deal he was looking at before he took it off was £80m lock stock n barrel, no debts. Whether thats changed because of his last £20m investment who knows. As for selling to us, the fact they were on the phone an hour after we launched looking to talk to us answers that I think.

I know what you mean, but if you're not expecting a return then it isn't an investment... it's a charity donation. And I don't think that's what NUST are asking for, is it? its a combination of both tbh, we're not expecting people to just hand over their money and say "there you go, have it" (of course if you want to then great ) but rather, "heres an investment opportunity, invest in the club you love and gain a little bit of interest while you're on". The big difference of course is you can get your original money back from an investment not from a donation. I see what you're saying, I know there will be a big emotional and/or charitable aspect to most of the investment. What I meant was more that it was a bit flippant to suggest that nobody will need or expect anything back at any time. I agree, for me its an emotional thing, I wouldnt hand over £1500 as a donation but when I know its an investment and I'll get it back then Im happy to do it, even if its not increased by much, the fact it has increased at all would just be a little (tiny) bonus.

I know what you mean, but if you're not expecting a return then it isn't an investment... it's a charity donation. And I don't think that's what NUST are asking for, is it? its a combination of both tbh, we're not expecting people to just hand over their money and say "there you go, have it" (of course if you want to then great ) but rather, "heres an investment opportunity, invest in the club you love and gain a little bit of interest while you're on". The big difference of course is you can get your original money back from an investment not from a donation. I suppose the way to look at it is, if you have a spare £1500 sitting that you know you're not going to miss then stick it in here instead of the bank, in ten years time you're not going to be rich off either option, using just the basic maths and not all that compound interest malarky.... Good savings account is what 5-6%? so in ten years you'd have got interest of £900. With this (if it stayed at 2%) then you'd get 200. What it would mean however is that you've technically paid £70 per year to have a say in the club and be part of something of this magnitude. Thats working on the logic you'd have left the cash sitting there. Others are looking at bunging it on a 0% credit card therefore they would be being paid £20 per year to have their say! how good is that? the club paying you for your views! (Im not advocating that people go into debt for this btw)

When you think that the interest on the £40m overdraft was running at around £4m per year then yes, £200m raised would mean the club would be bought + investment in the team and running costs yet still paying out the same amount as we were for the overdraft alone.

Dividends could go back into the club for me And it's not really dividends is it, it's the 2% interest that your earning from your investment. Thats right and I dont think anyone should be imagining riches coming from that 2%, each investment will basically be worth £30 each year. By the time you share that among 30,40, 50 members its peanuts. Im not even 100% sure that it will be actually paid out each year rather than increasing the persons investment by that amount so when they decide to withdraw it in ten years they get £1800 back and not £1500 (thats an example assuming a 2% per year after the initial 2 that are guaranteed). That would be the ideal scenario for the club, the returns stay there gaining interest in its bank account rather than giving people a little beer money once a year and incurring the admin costs on top. I'll get that bit clarified though to be sure.

Then if thats the case he'll no doubt come on SSN and say that, saving us all time in having a meeting. After all hes got a football club to run and we've got a campaign to manage. In seriousness he doesnt have the time to meet up with a group of people who think they can pull the cash together, under his own rules, you need to prove you have the funds before they'll talk to you. We respect that and want to see this all done properly. We've dealt with DL a number of times, he knows where we are and who we are. He knows we're serious and he has access to the same info the rest of you do. I dont believe he will take this as a snub, if anything I reckon this was a test. If we'd accepted then I reckon he would have viewed us as less serious about this.

And that is proof if any was needed that some people will put in more because they can, even though it gets them the same say as someone whos put in less.

on the other hand wheres the harm in a preliminary hearing, the main obstacle i view for the nust is I can't see Ashley wanting to sell to them, they're negotiating position is weak to begin with and possibly offending the current regime by not meeting them isn't a good way to start. No offending has taken place, we've politely declined his offer under the logic of we dont want to waste their time if we cant raise the funds. I think the fact Llambias called an hour after we launched tells you that hes happy to sell.

This is one for the financial experts but I agree with your logic, we are looking to keep it open and allow people to invest at any time which would go towards the clubs running costs but somewhere there has to be a limit otherwise the amount you're paying out in interest becomes unworkable. These are answers that I would want the financial bods attached to this to come out with but the basic answer is that at this point in time we've not set any time limit on the 2nd phase of the campaign so its envisaged that people will still be able to invest a year or two down the line.

Thats a difficult one to answer because we have a few different ways of investing and differing amounts. Theres the £1500+ cash one, £25000+ pension investment, donations etc. On top of that its the bigger investments from big names and businesses which confuses the mix. We have figures in mind, how thats reached is dependant on which ways people want to join it. Technically though the way the scheme runs, its no different to the running of the club if we have 5,000 or 50,000 people involved, each get one vote, each get the same level of return.

And thats understandable, I would be fully in that camp if we were coming on and saying "sign up, pay us your money" but we're not, at this point in time we've given the overview and allowing it to sink in with people. I know many are now thinking its bollocks because we havent supplied more info yet, thats the PR peoples way of doing things and when it comes down to that then they know a lot more about these things than you and I (unless you are a PR person that is!, Im not though so I go with what they say). Ive raised the concern with the relevant people so maybe they'll speed things up a little. As an aside, to keep you all in the loop we have had contact with Ashley & co via a third party, for now we've politely declined the offer of discussions because we dont want to raise any false hopes with this. It would be daft to go in and start talking takeovers and amounts without being sure of our position. Too many have already done that (Sheard, Moat, etc) we would prefer to sit down only when we can prove that we're serious and that wont be until you've all seen the full details, know who is involved and then been able to give a proper indication of your views. Edit: Just seen Binnsy's post since putting this on, thats the bit I was talking about above.

If I remember correctly the wording on the site is you can donate from £10 upwards so by that phrasing it suggests you don't get a vote unless you put in £1500 min. Unless you do it through a group like has been mentioned for on here. Yeah, and the £10 upwards is the bit thats causing me a little confusion, if its merely a donation (as I believe it is and we both agree it reads like) then why put a minimum amount on it? might just be poor wording or confusion on my behalf. Maybe we're thinking of sending them a certificate or something and the tenner ensures that the costs of that are covered in the donation. prehaps your website could make people aware that there are some syndicates being proposed for buying shares like on here,.( maybe with our Admins permission some links? i know toontastic are doing something similar with a £30 pledge each) tbh I dont think that helps either side out though. At the end of the day we want as many of these "shares" to be sold. If we direct people to here or TT then it could just mean that the price per share on here drops to a quid say and you still only purchase one or two. Having them create their own with friends, family, workmates etc would result in more shares being bought. At the same time for here, you should want to keep it among the regulars and not open it up to thousands that will pop in once, hand over a quid and then disappear only to jump back up once in a blue moon and ask for their cash back. I do agree the website needs a little more clarity on that side of things though.

If I remember correctly the wording on the site is you can donate from £10 upwards so by that phrasing it suggests you don't get a vote unless you put in £1500 min. Unless you do it through a group like has been mentioned for on here. Yeah, and the £10 upwards is the bit thats causing me a little confusion, if its merely a donation (as I believe it is and we both agree it reads like) then why put a minimum amount on it? might just be poor wording or confusion on my behalf. Maybe we're thinking of sending them a certificate or something and the tenner ensures that the costs of that are covered in the donation.

I dont imagine there'd be a problem, like someone else has said, the 2nd share would be a 10th, 20th or even 150th of a vote. You're unlikely to be able to take over the club from that.

I remember him, I heard the crack from his face hitting the concrete and Im in row P and two sections along! Whole place went silent while we waited to see if he was alive. He took some help from the Medics then went back to his seat, half an hour later he didnt look too well at all.

I think this has been mentioned here once or twice and Im going to get proper confirmation but where we say on the website that people can donate any amount and we'll bundle them up into totals of £1500 to buy a share then I dont believe we are offering voting rights to those that contributed. I believe that these are plainly and simply a way to let those donate that want to help but are unable to invest themselves. I'll get proper full confirmation on that but its worth remembering for those that are wondering whether to go down that route or through somewhere such as here.

Why not have two voices, your own and a joint one

What position, if any, do you occupy within NUST? Are you some kind of designated spokesman? What I'm getting at is whether the various bits of advice and information that you're giving carries any kind of official weight, or whether you're an ordinary member of NUST just giving your own personal perspective. Im an original member of the committee, as is Shellshock and Tom_NUFC, both members on here. So can I take it that you're still on the committee, and your statements therefore represent the current views and aims of that committee? Yes I am still on the committee and the details Im giving here are those of the scheme, personal views however are my own not those of the committee.

Do you not even have any constructive reasons as to why you think it is 'never going to happen'? What you've done there is an absolute piece of piss, to just say it's bollocks and not give any opinion as to why. Oh come on surely you must know it will never happen. We will never gather enough support or funds for anything meaningful to be achieved. Not with that attitude, no. I'm glad there are people willing to try rather than sit and moan like you do. Well said. Cant afford it, dont believe its a safe place for your funds, have a kid on the way, been made redundant, your lass says she wants to spend the money on shoes or just plain dont want to do it. All of those are good enough reasons not to invest and nobody should ever be looked at any differently because of it but dont just sit back and say "it'll never work because we wont get enough funds" while all the time sitting on your funds, because thats exactly how it wouldnt work.