Happy Face

Are you kidding? You reckon this is anything other than market research? Aye, but what do you with the results of market research when you get them? Target the people who gave their details to sell them stuff. Sometimes, I'll give you that. But when you ask about things like customer service and website usability it's usually because you're planning to improve them. The club already have the contact details of 1000s of supporters anyway I imagine. Certainly of everyone who's registered at the website, which includes the likes of me even though I only ever look at it once in a blue moon as it's crap. As people have noted, it's a ridiculous survey and looks very badly designed. Questions about the media are undoubtedly aimed to find out who reads/watches what and why, for the purposes of more efficiently targeting advertising, press relations initiatives and so on. Questions related to merchandising and retail are obviously aimed at improving merchandising and retail. Not particularly inspiring but hardly some kind of sinister conspiracy to defraud the hapless supporter. But ill advised given our current plight, yeah? I suppose that's why they've just hoyed it up on the website rather than email or post it out to us. Can you imagine, you're at a restaurant and you've complained about the food but the manager says, "OK, but apart from the food, how could we go about getting you to spend more on wine?" Get to fuck!

Are you kidding? You reckon this is anything other than market research? Aye, but what do you with the results of market research when you get them? Target the people who gave their details to sell them stuff.

Are you kidding? You reckon this is anything other than market research?

Remember those halcyon days when the bars, cafes, website, club shop, hospitality and ticket office were secondary to how they performed on the pitch. Relegated, but at least the wifey in the ticket office had a smile on her robbing bastard face when she took the cash for 3 years in advance. Jaysus.

"Lee Ryder was an American porn star who performed in gay pornography films from 1981 to 1986. With his bad-boy good looks and slim body, Lee Ryder became one of the first gay porn superstar during a period when the pornography industry was making its transition from film to video in the early 1980s." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Ryder

FYP It's been mentioned earlier in the thread, and it's not just NUSC membership that categorises the people calling each other morons and mongs and that.

But the chronicle did write an equally biased report before the NUSC released theirs. All the quotes from Lee Ryders original report... http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-...72703-23007850/ Quotes omitted and only reported later thanks to NUSC... There's an incredibly clear delineation there between the propaganda and factual/stupid stuff.

NUSC have an agenda (not to get anyone out before anyone starts, but to strive for positive change). The Chronicle are supposed to be impartial. Whichever context they were put in, worrying comments made by Llambias that were on the whole accurate have found their way into the public domain only thanks to the voluntary work being done by the NUSC. Comments that the Chronicle has failed to report in almost a fortnight, despite having a paid presence at the same meeting. I don't see how he can call himself a journalist.

For someone so keen on reporting the truth without spin, it seems odd to say... "a report that has been ridiculed by fans on popular fan website www.newcastle-online.org." There's plenty of fans arguing with those doing the ridiculing Lee. Why don't you do a piece arguing against the points made in the report rather than a character assassination on the man who wrote it. If it's propaganda, you'll have sufficient facts in your armour to do so. It'd be a story I'd like to read.

Have to agree with Afar. I've started posting in the footy section over here a bit more because there's generally a unanimous view over on TT (where I normally post) that the board have completely fucked up and whatever NUSC can do can only improve things. I like to hear opposing views and perhaps be convinced by some of them. Calling each other childish, morons, incapable of understanding or purveyors of bunkum (while entertaining) doesn't really contribute anything to the debate. Since posting the original email I've tried to cater to those who still support Llambias by trimming out the NUSC stuff and leaving only quotes and by quoting my pro-Ashley stance from back in September. A lot of people in this thread care more about being right than about contemplating and discussing an opposing view. I might have been guilty of that myself in certain posts. Or maybe I'm just pissed. Metallica were pretty good tonight.

I think the hostility comes from the refusal of those in charge at the club to even acknowledge the dire straits the club is in, while frequently contradicting themselves in the excuse making. I think it's been clear from the last few NUSC statements that they're not an Ashley/Wise/Llambias out group.

I never realised how stupid some of their statements are, trying to get sponsors to cancel their deals, also telling supporters not to buy kits, effectively ruining NUFC financially if all this occured. We would go into administration and be relegated. Yep. That's one of their mis-steps. I said as much myself at the time it was released... That's an interesting take, but as the NUSC seems primarily concerned with Ashley leaving at all costs I doubt they will be prepared to even contemplate entering a debate with Ashley's people. Parky's attutude of "fuck the club" in the short term is a good example of this thinking. It's a recipe for relegation if you ask me. If the club isn't sold, in my view it would be constructive for the NUSC to open a sensible dialogue with the current owners. If only to air complaints. Weren't the original statements that the NUSC was being set up as a long term voice of the fans rather than a petulant knee-jerk against those in power. If those currently in power end up here long term, is the intention to tear the club apart? http://www.toontastic.net/board/index.php?showtopic=21264&st=180&p=531465&hl=NUSC&#entry531465 It's a shame it's still up there now, given the more tempered approach they've recently taken. Given that they changed their approach, I only joined last week. Are you unwilling to change your mind because of a 5 month old statement or do you still feel they are as hard line? Genuine question

It's not flip flopping mate. It's called a balanced view. Seems you have to completely back the NUSC or be dead set against it around here. Can't there be flaws in a good thing? I think it's a group that's barely 6 months old, still finding it's feet and making lots of mistakes in the process. Look past the mis-steps they've made and I see a very positive group of people putting in a hell of a lot of effort for no reward, striving to ensure the club they love is run with common sense and competence but also with ambition and vision, while accommodating (to the greatest degree possible) the thoughts of the most important people, the fans. I'm strongly opposed to critics falsifying the NUSC position but recognise that constructive criticism will only improve their ability to deliver. Criticism is something they invite as they strive to improve. Something Llambias and co patently do not.

That's on the opposite side of the monument to where the NUSC were speechifying. Seems to me anyone could have hoyed it up there. Like I said they could have took it down if some random bloke put it up. Also if you're protest is merely suggesting change you're not going to succeed, tell them what needs to be changed at least. What do we want.... Change When do we want it....Now What do we want to change...Erm...... Sorry to correct you, but they have no right to take down a banner that someone else puts up. If someone had put up a banner saying "We love Mike Ashley" they would have no right to take that down either. They would have no right but they could have said can whoever put that banner up please take it down or make it clear that NUSC did not put this up. It's obvious it was a member of NUSC who put that up anyway, if they weren.t there for the rally, I can't see some random person going for the metro had it on them and put it up. There were plenty of non-NUSC there. Some where quite voiciferous in their opposition. So who do you think put the banner up? Someone who opposes NUSC. I think it was someone who wants Wise out. Whoever it was, I doubt they oppose the NUSC. That doesn't mean the NUSC are campaigning to get Wise out. Despite refuting it. Never stating it in the first place. and not taking any action whatsoever to suggest it.

That's on the opposite side of the monument to where the NUSC were speechifying. Seems to me anyone could have hoyed it up there. Like I said they could have took it down if some random bloke put it up. Also if you're protest is merely suggesting change you're not going to succeed, tell them what needs to be changed at least. What do we want.... Change When do we want it....Now What do we want to change...Erm...... Sorry to correct you, but they have no right to take down a banner that someone else puts up. If someone had put up a banner saying "We love Mike Ashley" they would have no right to take that down either. They would have no right but they could have said can whoever put that banner up please take it down or make it clear that NUSC did not put this up. It's obvious it was a member of NUSC who put that up anyway, if they weren.t there for the rally, I can't see some random person going for the metro had it on them and put it up. There were plenty of non-NUSC there. Some where quite voiciferous in their opposition.

Truth. Not really. They're reporting what happened in the meeting. To report private views expressed afterwards would invite an unholy shitstorm of abuse from the anti-NUSC brigade on account of the amateurish point scoring it would rightly have been viewed as at the expense of a players reputation. And what they actually did, was different how? It didn't harm any players reputation.

Truth. Not really. They're reporting what happened in the meeting. To report private views expressed afterwards would invite an unholy shitstorm of abuse from the anti-NUSC brigade on account of the amateurish point scoring it would rightly have been viewed as at the expense of a players reputation.

That's on the opposite side of the monument to where the NUSC were speechifying. Seems to me anyone could have hoyed it up there. Freddy Shepherd? Richard Bevan?

That's on the opposite side of the monument to where the NUSC were speechifying. Seems to me anyone could have hoyed it up there.

One of the hundreds of people present perhaps? It was on the monument behind where they were talking, if they wanted to make it clear they didn't just want Ashley out they should have said we are going to have to take this down as it doesn't fit within our manifesto as they knew that people would see this and think it was them. Also I imagine those 'Hundreds' who attended are in fact members of the NUSC andwhy would they go to all the effort of bringing a banner if they weren't members? To tell you the truth I was in Greys pub looking over it all from behind so I couldn't see what any banners on the monument said. IUf you have those pictures I'd love to take a look. I tried Getty Images but couldn't find any.

One of the hundreds of people present perhaps?

It's the update sent to all NUSC members this morning. I'm just a member who received it. Not sure how it's self-promotion to send an update (as promised upon subscription) to your existing subscribers. Genuinely interested to hear what you think is hypocritical or ignorant about it though. Ok then: Self promotion hypocritical ignorant Cheers for taking the time to do that. There's some i agree with you on, others where I think they're spot on. But to avoid getting too tied up in specific quotes, I would just say that the people in that meeting pay Llambias' substantial salary. In my opinion it's his place to be deferential to them, and they have every right to question him. That's not to go so far as to say "the customer is always right" because clearly there are some customers who feel the club is being run well, though I can't personally grasp why. It's not his place to question their actions, lie about their approach or justify ignoring them. To be fair to him though, for the most part he does manage to stick to explaining himself. But those explanations themself insult our intelligence.

For those that have complained about the NUSC slant (which wasn't my doing), here's the quotes only version....

By the way. Someone on Toontastic just quoted one of my posts from September last year.... Goes to show, they've alienated people who were willing to give them the benefit of the doubt even after Keegan went.

Source? 55% said that even given the current world financial situation they were not prepared for Ashley to stay at United. http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-east-news/todays-news/2008/11/29/ashley-given-second-chance-in-fan-survey-61634-22365564/ So once again, NUSC agree with the majority... 27% is not a majority (unless you're actually George W Bush) erm....exactly. 73% of people agree with the NUSC that there are circumstances under which Ashley could stay.