NUSC write up of Llambias attendance at the Supporters Panel meeting

[ikri]

You're in the minority at the moment.

 

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/

 

 

asked ‘What circumstances would you consider Ashley staying as acceptable?’ only 27% said there were no circumstances under which they would accept him remaining at the helm.

[oldtype]

It'll also be funny if they expect to be invited to the next meeting after this writeup

[Happy Face]

You're in the minority at the moment.

 

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/

 

 

asked ‘What circumstances would you consider Ashley staying as acceptable?’ only 27% said there were no circumstances under which they would accept him remaining at the helm.

 

So once again, NUSC agree with the majority...

 

"we want what we’ve always wanted...

 

“Change”

 

That’s what we want most of all Derek, a positive change for the better at this football club.

 

If you and Mike can’t or won’t deliver that, then as we’ve stated previously we’d rather you were on your way. If you feel you can, then great."

[ikri]

You're in the minority at the moment.

 

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/

 

 

asked ‘What circumstances would you consider Ashley staying as acceptable?’ only 27% said there were no circumstances under which they would accept him remaining at the helm.

 

So once again, NUSC agree with the majority...

 

"we want what we’ve always wanted...

 

“Change”

 

That’s what we want most of all Derek, a positive change for the better at this football club.

 

If you and Mike can’t or won’t deliver that, then as we’ve stated previously we’d rather you were on your way. If you feel you can, then great."

 

27% is not a majority (unless you're actually George W Bush)

[Happy Face]

You're in the minority at the moment.

 

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/

 

 

asked ‘What circumstances would you consider Ashley staying as acceptable?’ only 27% said there were no circumstances under which they would accept him remaining at the helm.

 

So once again, NUSC agree with the majority...

 

"we want what we’ve always wanted...

 

“Change”

 

That’s what we want most of all Derek, a positive change for the better at this football club.

 

If you and Mike can’t or won’t deliver that, then as we’ve stated previously we’d rather you were on your way. If you feel you can, then great."

 

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. 

[Happy Face]

By the way.  Someone on Toontastic just quoted one of my posts from September last year....

 

I've been as bitter at the owner(s) as anyone over the last few days, but I think that's been a knee-jerk reaction.

 

It's been like when your dad walks out on your mam and you blame her for it. What she's done to drive him away? He's the one that played all the best games, kept you entertained and was stronger than your mates dad. She's just a boring old witch that does the cooking and cleaning and sends you to bed early. She's all about discipline and he's all about fun.

 

I love Keegan, but is no-one angry at HIM? How deluded did we have to be to convince ourselves he wouldn't do what he ALWAYS does? EVERYBODY told us so. This club has now gone through 5 managers in 4 years, and each one (before Keegan) was given carte blanche to spend what they wanted on who they wanted. It was an expensive system that brought no success and year upon year knocked us back to square one, as managers insisted they needed to undo the previous managers failures and start again with a clean cheque book.

 

Freddy Shepherd didn't learn from it, he was doomed to repeat the mistakes of his past over and over, the new boys however were bitten once by Allardyce and they aren't going to let that happen again no matter how many dole scum turn up to drink Lambrusco outside the ticket office.

 

They've set in place a long term vision to ensure we secure the best young talent from around the globe, irrespective of the man in charge. Clearly the manager does have input otherwise Keegan wouldn't have been here for 8 months, but it's a give and take process. Even if he is having players forced upon him, he can let them rot in the reserves if he doesn't like them, can't he?

 

Keegan was only commited to the club for two and a half more years. Should the entire structure of the club, agreed by him, have been torn down to suit his short term demands, given that it was a structure he'd agreed to and worked within happily so far.

 

Keegan is an intelligent man, and brilliant manager for this club, but has Mr Newcastle been to watch a game at St James in his whole life if he wasn't being paid? He's a man that understands the Geordie passion and has used it to his full advantage in the past, he's a man who's banked on it saving his skin again this time, but he's come up against more strong willed, ruthless businessmen who will not be dictated to by their employee if it jeopardises the long term success of their business model.

 

Now we are left with our lone parent on the lookout for a new boyfriend we can live with. We'll throw our toys out of the pram when he arrives, and make life difficult for all concerned. When he get's hoyed out we'll be pleased that we were right all along, even though we're only dragging out the hurt for all concerned, and one day we'll grow up and hope for the best for our mam, and accept another good man to take our dad's place.

 

Right, that's the end of my analogies, tin hat on.

 

Goes to show, they've alienated people who were willing to give them the benefit of the doubt even after Keegan went.

[ikri]

You're in the minority at the moment.

 

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/

 

 

asked ‘What circumstances would you consider Ashley staying as acceptable?’ only 27% said there were no circumstances under which they would accept him remaining at the helm.

 

So once again, NUSC agree with the majority...

 

"we want what we’ve always wanted...

 

“Change”

 

That’s what we want most of all Derek, a positive change for the better at this football club.

 

If you and Mike can’t or won’t deliver that, then as we’ve stated previously we’d rather you were on your way. If you feel you can, then great."

 

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. 

 

That's completely the opposite to what you originally posted though

 

 

 

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/

 

 

I was trying to point out that according to that Journal survey, there are only 27% of fans who feel that way.

 

I agree that there are dozens of things that Ashley could do to fix things up here, and I agree in principle that there's a need for a supporter's voice at board level, or at least one that can speak directly to board level.  Given what happened when Keegan left if there had been a strong supporter's voice to tell Llambias & Ashley that they needed to take action a hell of a lot faster both in appointing a replacement manager & telling us all what the fuck was going on then much of what's happened this season simply wouldn't have happened.

 

But I do not think that NUSC, in their current incarnation, are that voice.  They are far too adversarial in their approach to the club, one of their stated aims is to get rid of Llambias, does anyone really think that he's going to be that receptive to a group who want him out of a job?

[Heron]

Are these Supporters Panel meetings very formal, i.e. like suits, etc? Or just a sit around in a club board room and a casual chat?

 

Also, I think the TU should have a member on there for now  ...

[indi]

Oh look, it's yet more of the same bollocks from NUSC, who sound like they went to this meeting and made arses of themselves. I hope you didn't write that piece Happy, because it's awful, a genuine transcript of that meeting would have been actually quite interesting, but that's just an embarrassingly inept attempt at spin. In common with everything they do it's much more about self promotion than anything else and is full of the usual levels of self-importance, pettiness, ignorance and downright hypocrisy we've come to expect from NUSC. Why couldn't they just transcribe what was said and let the fans decide for themselves about what to think about it, surely their members are intelligent enough to be given the option of doing that? What are they scared of? That people might not think what they want them to think!?!

 

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

 

Dear Chris

 

Derek Llambias is not a fan of the NUSC.

 

That much was clear at the end of an always interesting, sometimes petty, but often surprisingly candid exchange of views between NUFC’s Managing Director and a Supporter’s Club (with a membership of 1000+ strong and growing) who remain critical of his regime and who were once more dismissed by Llambias as “the breakaway group”.

 

Let’s set our cards on the table from the outset. We are not a “breakaway” anything. We do not, will not, nor have we ever advocated anything but unswerving loyalty towards the black and white shirt of NUFC. Forged, as we were however, in the fury and anger that surrounded the events of September 2008, it’s an easy stereotype to portray us as a one trick pony.

 

Llambias would fall prey to that trick towards the end of a charged meeting that ended up being far from the simplistic “meet the fans” he perhaps expected it to be when he arrived, early and flanked by local journalists, at around 5:45pm in the director’s suite of St James Park on 24th February 2009.

 

His quiet introduction of “Hello, I’m Derek” was met with handshakes from some members of the Newcastle United Supporters Panel and with reserved stares and mild suspicion from others (including the four representatives of NUSC who were present).

 

It’s perhaps important at this point to pop the bubble on another rumour. NUSC was never initially invited to be a part of the Supporter’s Panel by the club. We made that happen for ourselves when it became clear that issues involving the behaviour of match-day stewards were growing increasingly unacceptable to fans in the Leazes Corner. As a result of this proactive attitude to fan issues we were invited back on a permanent basis but in limited numbers to attend the monthly Supporters Panel meeting held by Simon Esland, The club’s Head of Customer Operations.

 

It was left to Simon, a fundamentally decent man doing a thankless job under difficult circumstances, to begin the meeting with an introduction and agenda. Derek was here to answer any questions however there was to be no mention of Keegan (something that would be stuck to neither by the people in attendance nor the Managing Director himself as the evening wore on) due to the ongoing legal issues involving our former manager.

 

Llambias began by apologising for not coming to the last meeting but revealed he would be “More than happy in future to come to these meetings and that as you come to know me you will find you can ask me a question and I’ll give you a very truthful answer...we want to be transparent”

On the silence that has engulfed the club since September last year he ventured the following:

“We kept our heads below the parapet so that nobody would shoot us...we weren’t prepared for the force of Kevin leaving. The backlash was so huge we thought we’d just back off and let everybody calm down...although it didn’t really happen”

 

One word that Llambias was keen to stress was “inherited”, there was no culpability or admission of wrongdoing in the Keegan saga; these were all referred to interestingly as “problems we inherited”.

Sticking with the theme of inheritance Derek moved on to discuss the debt inherited from the previous regime: “buying the club for £134M then £110M (To pay off the debt, which the club now owes to Ashley instead of a bank) which Mike doesn’t take any interest off...if in 6 or 7 years Mike sells the club it becomes capital...part of the price of the club”.

 

The subject of that debt was something that would later cause Derek to become increasingly annoyed with those asking about it.

Llambias then went on to confirm the clubs Academy budget as being £10M per year with £5M spent so far.

Derek explained the hierarchy’s unhappiness with the business model they inherited which meant players were signed on credit and paid for over a period of several years. “Were still paying for some of them now” he complained, referring to players who had long since left the club.

Interestingly he then claimed “We (Ashley) won’t clear the debt for those players as it will take us until 2011”. So there is debt still uncleared then?

The club’s new policy, apparently, is to buy the players outright so that “we own them”. Unfortunately, when questioned further on this by NUSC Derek admitted that it didn’t reciprocate to a policy with outgoing players. Our question was this: "While we were giving clubs our money up front, would we be asking them for their money up front if they purchased one of our players?"

“No” was the answer.

For anyone wondering what happened to the James Milner money herein lies your answer:

Villa havn’t given it to us yet.

 

Further probing brought out that “they (Villa) are paying us in bits” and as Ashley will only spend money as and when it arrives this seems to suggest we would never have been able to reinvest it in the way KK talked of to begin with.

A cautious approach to debt is all well and good, but the complete refusal to partake in it seems to be a peculiar eccentricity that has no proven model of success within football and left us wondering what the point in selling someone to raise transfer funds is if you’re unable to spend the money straight away on a replacement.

 

We continued to probe asking how it made sense to shell out all of our money upfront and let other clubs pay us in instalments. At this point Llambias changed his tune and said that while we try to buy all our players up front it’s not always possible.

 

Sticking with the club’s unusual reluctance to have any debt we asked why it was necessary to pay off the club’s mortgage and debt completely. The analogy was presented of a person who uses all his money to wipe off his mortgage but then has nothing left for food and essentials. That person has no debt, but he also has no money to spend on anything else either (in our case, players).

Llambias’ response was that by paying off the mortgage (or rather transferring the debt the club owed from the bank to Mike Ashley) they have saved £7m in interest over the next 8 years which could be used for transfers. This seemed to be the main justification, saving a little under £1M a year on interest but severely restricting your owners spending power on players instead of having manageable debt with increased cashflow available for player purchases.

However, it seemed “manageable debt” was the issue. “We couldn’t make the repayments” confirmed Llambias “We lost £30M and £20M in the last two years” This year they are hoping to lose £5-10M “which Mike is quite happy to put in each year”.

“The club makes £100M a year in revenue of which 76% goes on salaries” he added.

 

Onto the famed “five year plan” then and once again it was reassertions of the “Arsenal plan”. Yes you heard that correctly, Arsenal not Aston Villa.

“That was a misquote” argued Derek and demanded the journalists present confirm this, which they begrudgingly did. He stated that he simply admired the progress Aston Villa had made this season and under Martin O’Neil’s stewardship. That was what they wanted to emulate.

We pointed out to Derek that Aston Villa have spent £30M this season and around £80M under O’Neil whereas his club have spent £6M in the recent transfer window and made a profit in every transfer window under Mike Ashley’s stewardship. How would we hope to emulate them with such different strategies towards spending? After all it is easy enough for a West Brom fan to say they want to be like Man Utd, but without matching them financially isn’t it just a pipe dream?

“I didn’t say about being Aston Villa” Llambias retorted, looking flustered.

 

Okay so what about Arsenal then? Mike Ashley asserts that “Arsenal is the shining example in England of a sustainable business model”, the problem being that their manager, Arsene Wenger along with a certain Sir Alex Ferguson were both quoted following Keegan’s exit as saying they would “not accept” working under a director of football.

Was it fair to say that they were two “top class” manager’s who wouldn’t be in danger of damaging the woodwork on the door to Derek’s office?

Llambias looked ruffled “That’s the first I’ve heard of that one” he sighed.

Not a problem Derek, we have the quote from Wenger right here it goes like this:

"If I go into a job and someone says to me that you have a director of football who buys and sells the players, I accept or dont accept it. If I accept it, I cannot complain. I would personally not accept that"

 

It was left for Simon Esland to jump in with the save. The Arsenal model simply referred to the football plan (i.e being a self sufficient club only spending what they make in player sales and/or internal revenue) not the internal structure of the club. However as Derek confirms NUFC intend to run at a loss of £5-10M (covered by our benefactor Michael Ashley) it looks like player sales will be the only source of future transfer funds.

 

This led onto a discussion about the role of Dennis Wise which, itself, led to one of the most interesting answers to a question we expected to be “off topic”:

Who signed Xisco and Gonzales?

“Xisco was Kevin, don’t believe everything you read in the press, Gonzales was a...well, I won’t go into that because we’ve still got legal issues there” stumbled Derek.

Suffice to say jaws dropped on that one, not just for the remarkably candid nature of the revelation, but for the insinuation that we are supposed to now believe that Kevin Keegan walked out on Newcastle, not because he was unhappy with £6M being blown on an unwanted striker, (all his own work apparently) but that he was so fundamentally opposed to the club bringing in a player on a short term loan to help an injury hit squad that he walked out on a multi-million pound contract!

Apologies that we didn’t probe that one further, we were too busy dusting away the fairy’s from our eyes.

 

Wise was then described by a supporter’s panel member as being “as popular as the plague” and discussion was raised over the PR battle the club has with fan feeling towards the diminutive Director of Football. Would he attend such a meeting as tonight, we asked? The answer said a lot about the fear factor the regime seem to have about football fans and angered pretty much all within the room.

“If you bring Dennis Wise into this room what are you going to get?” asked Llambias rhetorically; the implication clearly being a lynch mob. “I just mean he’s not very popular” he wailed. It was pointed out to Derek that neither is he...but that at least he had made the effort to face his critics.

 

We thought this might be a good time to try and get the club to own up to precisely which players Wise was responsible for unearthing and signing.

“Who’s been your top player?” came the reply. This time it was David Williamson (NUFC Executive Director of Operations), previously silent by Derek’s right hand side, who was speaking.

“Bassong” came the universal reply “He was Dennis’ ” confirmed Williamson. Jonas was next to be named as a Wise buy. “Pick your top five players this season and you’ll see that they were Dennis’ players”

Our suggestion of Shay Given as a contender for that role was met coolly by the officials and with black humour by the attendees.

 

Llambias chimed in “All those players are Dennis’, they’ve been picked...sorry, Dennis has brought them in...with the knowledge of the manager” he belatedly added. Phew, good job you confirmed that bit Derek!

 

There was then some discussion of Joe Kinnear. Llambias confirmed that Joe was still very much part of the future at NUFC, they have pleaded guilty to his latest disciplinary hearing and hope to just get a “slap on the wrist”.

If Joe is unable to return then Derek isn’t worried. He brushed any such concern aside (seemingly forgetting the problems we had replacing the previous manager) saying, “If I could tell you the number of top class manager’s banging on my door right now...Top, top”.

Of course, legal requirements meant that he couldn’t but we are confident Alex and Arsene won’t be among them.

 

Speaking of top managers, what about the situation with top players and the likes of Shay Given leaving?

“We never wanted to lose Shay, we made that clear from January” sighed Derek “whatever the price they offered. They came in with £3M and we politely told them to go away. Somehow Shay got it into his head that he wanted to move on because he wanted to win trophies. City then came in with a £5M bid that we rejected but then ...when a player decides they want to go it’s very, very difficult. We offered Shay a new contract that would take him to the age of 39 but that wasn’t good enough”

So what in Derek’s opinion was the “could have done more” Shay insisted the club could have done in his post transfer interview?

“Maybe we could have matched the contract with City, which we just couldn’t afford”. We then heard that Ashley flew in to make a last minute pitch about the club’s direction but “it wasn’t successful”. No kidding, Derek.

Llambias did however promise to answer the question of whether Shay would get a testimonial “at the next meeting”.

 

We thought this might be a good time to ask the question “considering NUFC had the man MCFC desperately wanted, how were they unable to get the player they wanted (Michael Johnson) in return via a swap or some similar arrangement”.

Llambias’ answer inadvertently revealed just how little we got for Shay in the end.

“Once they came in with a £5M bid we then looked at their team. We tried for their right back, Michael Johnson, Elano on loan to get the deal that suited NUFC. Unfortunately it was difficult”.

Alarm bells started ringing here. £5M? Was that all we got for the league’s top goalkeeper? Again the reply surprised us in its candour:

“No, we got £5.9M plus add-ons, not paid until 1st of July” In effect this would have denied us the money to spend in the window under Ashley’s “wait till it comes in” policy.

“We asked Man city for £15M,” continued Derek “thinking they would just go away but they got away cheaply, was it good business on our part? Not really ‘cos we never wanted to lose the player cheaply”

In our minds there’s a problem with this logic. If City were unable to pay upfront, couldn’t we have used that as an excuse to hang on to Shay until the end of the season?

 

If we’re not getting cash up front but paying out to others that way then what’s the long term plan to make sustainable revenue available for the manager? Llambias offered the following:

“Our commercial side is important, we’ll be out there from March trying to bring in better sources of revenue. Our revenue on retail is down because the economy is suffering, our revenue on food and beverage, we’re quite happy with that. We’d like to expand our brand and we’ve taken on commercial directors”

Translation: Sell more pies and chips and hope for the best. At least he spared us “blue sky thinking” Apologies if we’re out of touch but it came across as first class management waffle designed to mask substance.

 

Does the club have a contingency plan for relegation then?

“Yes” came the simple reply followed by an actual show of humour in asking yours truly whether I was any good at football!

The answer to that is no, but I am somewhat passable at maths which meant that when Derek moved on to mention player wages of £59M it gave me an rough idea that from his earlier quote that “The club makes £100M a year in revenue of which 76% goes on salaries” that must leave a good £17M on non-player salaries. It would be interesting to see how much of that is spent on Directors of Football and the like.

 

One person no longer drawing a salary was (former chairman) Chris Mort and his name was next to be raised as a subject, with unfavourable comparisons drawn between himself and Llambias.

“Chris was a good guy,” said Derek “he came in as a lawyer as all of our computers were confiscated in the second week (we’re presuming this was during the police enquiry into corruption in football) so we thought we should bring a lawyer in to settle things down. I’m more of an operator so it’s a different type of approach. Chris was fine, he was out there in the media, maybe he did too much as sometimes you can do too much. We decided to be more generic, it was pretty faceless. We’ll try and get Mike himself more involved”

 

On this note we asked why Ashley comes out with statements such as “we are going to be in Europe by the end of the season” and “what price to finish in the top six?”

Llambias questioned where these quotes were coming from and we duly informed him of the source: His own club’s programme on the day NUFC were comprehensively taken apart 5-1 by Liverpool.

The guy in charge of the programme defended this as “an attempt to pick up on the feel good factor”.

Let’s get one thing straight, these quotes were made with NUFC 3 points from the foot of the table. The only “feel good factor” generated that day was by NUSC and the £3000 it raised for the Sir Bobby Robson Foundation before kickoff!

We tried to make our feelings clear on what we felt was a patronising attitude and asked Llambias why Ashley couldn’t just be honest with the fans. Explain the club has debt, explain the limit on transfers and drop the unrealistic rhetoric about finishes to the season we know are impossible. Unfortunately the mention of the “d” word rather riled him “Just print that we paid £250 Million for the club” he snarled.

[glow=blue,2,300]We should probably express our disappointment with some of the supporters in attendance who actually seemed to welcome Ashley’s utterings as “positive” and as for the ludicrous comparison one Sunderland supporting local journalist made that [/glow]“It’s the same as Keegan saying “watch out Sir Alex we’re after your title” what utter rot. NUFC finished 3rd that season, still a record finish for a debuting Premiership side, they were not marooned deep in the relegation zone for the best part of the season.

[glow=green,2,300]What we personally want, and what we assume most sound of mind NUFC fans want from the owner is truthful, realistic statements to go with his optimistic outlook. What we don’t want are any more patronising, glib soundbites.[/glow]

As it stands we’re unconvinced Llambias and co got the message.

 

A similar stubborn attitude was shown on the question of season tickets. The VAT will not be returned “as it would cost more than £12 (per person) in administration to do so”. Blimey, stamps must be canny expensive these days.

What about those who signed up for three years thinking they were getting a better deal but are now (thanks to the reduction in next year’s ticket prices) no better off for their loyalty? Would they get something extra, a free cup ticket perhaps?

Again, the answer appears to be no as “All they (those who signed for 3 years) were doing was guaranteeing a frozen price”. However, they will get a letter from Derek thanking them for their loyalty, so that’s alright then.

There were no plans to reduce matchday tickets in line with season tickets although the club would “consider” having one off games where they would lower the price. Whether “We’ll consider it” turns out to be the footballing equivalent of “we’ll see” remains to be seen.

 

The failings of the club to properly communicate the season ticket price reduction and how it impacted onto those who had already signed up for three years led to a suggestion that the club hire a permanent PR guru. This was dismissed by Llambias who said “Do we need to spend £200k a year on PR”. One member of the supporter’s panel thought so, drawing the excellent analogy of needing to buy a striker if you couldn’t score any goals.

We asked Derek if having decent PR in place might have prevented the exodus of 5000 fans this season, a figure he vehemently contested. “Let’s make a comparison with the rest of the league,” he argued “everywhere is down other than the big boys”. This assertion that NUFC is not a big boy went down like a ton of bricks and led to much backtracking and fawning over the “great atmosphere” at St James.

Llambias concluded his point by saying that “We did have a PR agency” before adding (jokingly or not we’re not sure) “they’ve just been fired”.

 

Llambias went on to state that “If we are short 3,500 seats (his estimate not ours) that is reflected everywhere in the North East. "People are struggling to pay for tickets”

It seemed evident here that Derek was missing the woods for the trees and attributing a handy credit crunch excuse to what in reality is a deep underlying dissatisfaction with the running of the club. As for comparing us with downturns in the half empty Stadium of Light and Riverside...oh dear, better get that PR team back on the phone and tell them they’re rehired.

 

As the topic returned to summer transfer activity, Derek was unable to let us know precisely how much the club’s budget would extend to (although presumably the Given money will have cleared by then at least) and remarked that he expects big outlays in the coming months on “KK and Jonas”. This suggests he isn’t hopeful of winning the case against Keegan and that our bargain Argentinian may end up costing us an arm and a leg after all.

Owen’s replacement was speculated on and when we jokingly suggested another Ashley “Wow signing” was on the cards Llambias confirmed that Collicini at £12.5M was the “Wow signing” previously spoken of by Ashley.

 

At this point one of our members raised the issue of problematic stewarding, discussed at the last Supporter’s Panel, and in doing so mentioned that representatives from the NUSC were here.

“The new breakaway?” queried Llambias and then seemed to fit the pieces together over the level of some of the questioning he had received throughout the evening. “Oh, you’re from the supporters club?” he asked. Clearly he either hadn’t been briefed or was feigning ignorance of our presence.

Discussions were held about the leaflet distributed recently about standing at the match and comparing it with the one issued by Boro. The point being not the ludicrous wording of the Boro leaflet’s final paragraph but the overall manner in which they individually contacted season ticket holders explaining the council’s objections rather than the aggressive “sit down or else” of the NUFC’s leaflet.

We spoke to David and Simon after the meeting and were invited to work with the club on future fan communications. An offer we are more than happy to accept on our mandate to work constructively with the club on important fan issues. Privately we have been assured that the steward who was causing the problems at the Tottenham game and others has since been removed from matchday duty. This is a positive result for NUSC and those who contacted us about this issue.

 

As the meeting drew to a close discussions turned more and more to playing staff with the Managing Director perhaps getting a little too drawn on his opinions on certain players. However, this report not being a stitch up, we won’t embarrass him by making those comments public.

Discussion continued to focus on how the club could involve the fans which seemed like as good a time as any to reminds Derek that there exists a supporter’s club with 1000 members only too happy to get involved and give their opinons.

Derek’s response to this left a lot to be desired and revealed a pent up frustration with the NUSC that had first surfaced in his initial press interview.

“Why do they pay for membership?” he queried.

“Why do you ask people to pay up to £30 for a club membership” we countered “What administration costs do you have? Where does the money go?” he snapped back, not answering the question.

We told him: "the money goes into a paypal account which immediately costs 59p per deposit, members then receive a car sticker, pin badge, membership card and keyring all of which have to be paid for. Leaflets are printed at a cost as are newsletters. We have a website which has running costs but that nobody on the committee makes a penny"...and so it went on.

 

Changing the subject from an issue that clearly hadn’t worked out for him, Llambias preceded to tell us what we were (despite our numerous valid objections).

“Your ethos is boycott our stores, boycott our stadium...yes it is, yes it was and yes it is! Your statement was ‘Ashley Out’, it’s still on your website (it isn’t actually Derek) it’s negative, you’ve been very negative. I’ve read your letter (we’ve actually sent him 3, the last 2 perfectly pleasant) and it was absolutely disgraceful and that’s why I didn’t acknowledge you”

One of our number then gave a lengthy explanation to Mr Llambias, busting a few myths about NUSC and the rally at the weekend in the process, unfortunately all Derek could reply with was yet another petty dig asking whether NUSC will “issue books at the end of it”. Yes Derek, that’s what we have an accountant for.

 

And with that the meeting drew to a close, there was still time for Derek to issue a few more bizarre comments to one of our number in a private chat. We won’t bother giving them credence here. Suffice to say they were all a bit James Bond villain-esque.

 

So then, dialogue at last but clearly still a long way to go.

Some credit is due to Llambias for finally showing up, we hope he honours his promise to attend these meetings regularly.

 

He clearly remains deeply suspicious of the NUSC, although he really has no need to be. Our cards remain on the table, we want what we’ve always wanted; a small slogan that Derek apparently missed among all the “Ashley out” and “sell up and go” campaigning of last year. It was reflected by the only banner NUSC actually brought to the Sunday’s rally.

For those that didn’t make it to that event let us tell you that it didn’t say “Cockney Mafia out” (that one was never ours anyway) nor did it say “Ashley Out”, “Keegan In” or anything so blatant and specific.

The banner had one simple word. The word we’ve been fighting for since all this began.

 

“Change”

 

That’s what we want most of all Derek, a positive change for the better at this football club.

 

If you and Mike can’t or won’t deliver that, then as we’ve stated previously we’d rather you were on your way. If you feel you can, then great, but be aware that we’ll be watching your progress like a hawk and we won’t stop asking questions when we think there’s something wrong.

 

That’s not being negative Derek, that’s striving for positive change.

 

That is what NUSC is really all about.

[Heron]

:lol:

 

Like I say, get an Ultra on the panel

 

We can be "self promoting" and "ignorant" too....

[indi]

 

I thought it was quite funny the way they demand openness from Llambias about quite detailed matters such as transfers, but when it comes to their own standpoint, they're completely evasive. All they stand for is 'change' - could that be any more vague? They also demand truthfulness from Llambias, but their declaration that they're not an Anti-Ashley organisation is more than a bit dishonest.

 

 

The way I see it NUSC are a pressure group.  If the people running the club aren't satisfying the fan base, then it's the place of the NUSC to apply pressure to them. The NUSC don't have to have a viable alternative, money to pay the bills or any magic solution.

 

In the same way as Greenpeace aren't in the game of providing fuel alternatives.

 

At last, a supporter of NUSC who's honest enough to admit what they really are and not try to pretend that they're a genuine supporters' club!! Well done Happy, I admire your honesty.

 

I disagree with you, but at least you're honest about it.

 

You're wrong about Greenpeace and all by the way.

 

They're a genuine supporters club in that they represent the views of Newcastle supporters.

 

Do you think a supporters club should show unswerving support to the people in charge of the club they love rather than the club itself?

 

They represent one particular view, of some of the supporters, on one issue. A genuine supporters' club represents many (or all) of the views, of many (or all) of the supporters, on many (or all) of the issues. Notice the difference?

 

No I think a supporters' club should think about and discuss with the supporters what's best for the club that they love rather than simply forming an opinion without knowing the facts, refusing to acknowledge any other opinions amongst those they claim to represent, demanding something that is impossible, having absolutely no idea about what to do if their demands are met and be prepared to rip the club that that they "love" apart in the process.

[OzzieMandias]

You're in the minority at the moment.

 

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/

 

 

Not only do you misrepresent the poll, you also ignore the fact that the trend it expresses is moving away from the position you take.

 

NEWCASTLE United supporters have made an astonishing u-turn about Mike Ashley.

 

The Journal’s second major fan survey has shown nearly half of all supporters are now willing to back him as the club’s owner as the protracted sale attempts drag on.

 

More than 1,000 supporters responded to our online poll. And a surprising 45% said that given the current world financial situation they were prepared for Ashley to stay at United.

 

Answering the question ‘Given the credit crunch, would it be acceptable for Mike Ashley to stay at the club?’ more than 44% of respondents said they would. And asked ‘What circumstances would you consider Ashley staying as acceptable?’ only 27% said there were no circumstances under which they would accept him remaining at the helm.

 

That compares with our last survey which found that 68% of fans blamed the man they once welcomed with open arms for the situation at the club. Just 15% said he had a chance to redeem himself.

[Guest Edd]

:lol:

 

Like I say, get an Ultra on the panel

 

We can be "self promoting" and "ignorant" too....

Aye but could you tell us exactly what was said at the meeting without trying to twist or wilfully misinterpret everything?

 

 

Actually if you ignore the sarcastic comments and just read the direct quotes from Llambias, there's a lot of pretty interesting snippets in there that clear up a few long-standing questions.  It wont be a popular opinion, but he comes out of it quite well IMO.

[Heron]

:lol:

 

Like I say, get an Ultra on the panel

 

We can be "self promoting" and "ignorant" too....

Aye but could you tell us exactly what was said at the meeting without trying to twist or wilfully misinterpret everything?

 

 

Actually if you ignore the sarcastic comments and just read the direct quotes from Llambias, there's a lot of pretty interesting snippets in there that clear up a few long-standing questions.   It wont be a popular opinion, but he comes out of it quite well IMO.

 

Obviously....

[Guest Edd]

:lol:

 

Like I say, get an Ultra on the panel

 

We can be "self promoting" and "ignorant" too....

Aye but could you tell us exactly what was said at the meeting without trying to twist or wilfully misinterpret everything?

 

 

Actually if you ignore the sarcastic comments and just read the direct quotes from Llambias, there's a lot of pretty interesting snippets in there that clear up a few long-standing questions.   It wont be a popular opinion, but he comes out of it quite well IMO.

 

Obviously....

 

I never doubted it lol.  But you're young.  The cynicism and mistrust that infects NUSC will kick in as you get older.

[Heron]

:lol:

 

Like I say, get an Ultra on the panel

 

We can be "self promoting" and "ignorant" too....

Aye but could you tell us exactly what was said at the meeting without trying to twist or wilfully misinterpret everything?

 

 

Actually if you ignore the sarcastic comments and just read the direct quotes from Llambias, there's a lot of pretty interesting snippets in there that clear up a few long-standing questions.   It wont be a popular opinion, but he comes out of it quite well IMO.

 

Obviously....

 

I never doubted it lol.  But you're young.  The cynicism and mistrust that infects NUSC will kick in as you get older.

 

Aye, more than likely.

 

I couldn't be arsed to read any of the thread I just felt like questioning it. A supporters panel is supposed to be representative of the support, and not just those aged 30+, so I guess having a Toon Ultra on would only be right in a way...but I completely understand where you're coming from.

 

Anyways, i'll let everyone bicker about the NUSC again....

[Stu]

:lol:

 

Like I say, get an Ultra on the panel

 

We can be "self promoting" and "ignorant" too....

Aye but could you tell us exactly what was said at the meeting without trying to twist or wilfully misinterpret everything?

 

 

Actually if you ignore the sarcastic comments and just read the direct quotes from Llambias, there's a lot of pretty interesting snippets in there that clear up a few long-standing questions.   It wont be a popular opinion, but he comes out of it quite well IMO.

 

maybe there's a hint of artistic license at times...

[Stu]

HappyFace - you might be able to answer this one:

 

With NUSC claiming to have been set up as a Supporter's Club first and foremost, what happened during those first few meetings/gatherings that led to the original backers (.com, the mag, etc) walking away?

 

surely having the most fan-accessible website and fanzines onboard would have been priority numero uno for any wanna-be Supporters Club?

 

They all still have a link on the NUSC site....

 

http://www.newcastle-united-supporters-club.co.uk/

 

I don't have a clue what their thoughts are on the NUSC.

 

Out of them all I only read .com, and they never backed the NUSC in the strictest sense in the first place iirc.  They have reported on NUSC activities from the get go and publicised what events they've planned.

 

The Robson one seemed to embarrass them from what they said after, but they still publicised the rally.

 

 

"As for the output of the NUSC (and to be frank, their whole approach), it makes no sense to us at all - hence our withdrawal at a very early stage from meetings etc.

 

"I honestly think the whole thing [the NUSC] is dead in the water and people have voted with their feet already." - Biffa of nufc.com, Feb 2009

 

Binnsy, Brummiemag, cp40, tom_nufc, happy face....can anyone shed some light on this?

[binnsy]

HappyFace - you might be able to answer this one:

 

With NUSC claiming to have been set up as a Supporter's Club first and foremost, what happened during those first few meetings/gatherings that led to the original backers (.com, the mag, etc) walking away?

 

surely having the most fan-accessible website and fanzines onboard would have been priority numero uno for any wanna-be Supporters Club?

 

They all still have a link on the NUSC site....

 

http://www.newcastle-united-supporters-club.co.uk/

 

I don't have a clue what their thoughts are on the NUSC.

 

Out of them all I only read .com, and they never backed the NUSC in the strictest sense in the first place iirc.  They have reported on NUSC activities from the get go and publicised what events they've planned.

 

The Robson one seemed to embarrass them from what they said after, but they still publicised the rally.

 

 

"As for the output of the NUSC (and to be frank, their whole approach), it makes no sense to us at all - hence our withdrawal at a very early stage from meetings etc.

 

"I honestly think the whole thing [the NUSC] is dead in the water and people have voted with their feet already." - Biffa of nufc.com, Feb 2009

 

Binnsy, Brummiemag, cp40, tom_nufc, happy face....can anyone shed some light on this?

 

no fraid not,  first i've seen that,  all i knew was that biffa helped, along with the mag and true faith with some financial support in helping NUSC get off the ground.  I'll ask him when i see him at the next reserve game, As far as i know i don't think Biffa ever signed up to join at the first meeting but think Mark Jensen from the Mag is a member, he was signing people up for it on the night of the first meeting, but like myself is just a card holding member as far as i know, pretty sure he's not on the committee,  i think the only person who is on the committee who is involved in the fanzine scene is Colin Whittle who writes in True Faith and sometimes in the Mag.  Again without knowing for definate i don't think Mark or Michael Martin from true faith wanted to be on the committee as already have there hands full with the fanzines and felt better to keep them separate from NUSC, i maybe wrong but think that was the story.

[Big Geordie]

Binnsy - I read .com several times a day and I don't remember Biffa writing something like that (might be wrong though) Someone muck raking perhaps?

[Jayson]

Explains why Xisco's barely been given a chance then, hes prob a good player.

[mrmojorisin75]

NUSC = robin hood

DL & MA = sheriff of nottingham

 

tbh

 

or something

 

not a bad read, heavily biased of course - strikes me as the NE5/Mandias/Mick exchanges, no-one can or will give ground and that only leads one way in life doesn't it?

 

imagine the same read above if NUSC had started by announcing themselves, stating clearly they're not an ashley-out vehicle and don't advocate the boycoutting of club merchandise, rather they want "change" as they say

[Stu]

Binnsy - I read .com several times a day and I don't remember Biffa writing something like that (might be wrong though) Someone muck raking perhaps?

 

Not at all, did anyone claim that the quote was taken from something published on the website?

[Guest Phil K]

Happy face - thanks for the time you spent on that. Interesting reading.

 

I hate the fact we've turned our focus on criticising each other, one of the worst aspects of this whole thing.

 

You clearly don't visit this forum too often mate.

For some on here, it's ALL they do.

You should have seen the ridiculous over-reaction of not one or two but half a dozen or so of the more peabrained to a post I made pointing out the rugby team had turned the corner, and it would be nice if we did the same - or the constant attacking of NE5 (by the same mouthpieces) We have quite a number of utter dickheads amongst us, but I daresay every club can say that too.

 

NUSC = robin hood

DL & MA = sheriff of nottingham

 

LOL - what a smashing idea ! Like that.

I vote Dave as Will Scarlett

[Stu]

Phil - as Happy Face (Chris) has mentioned before, he didn't write it...he received it as an email 'update' from NUSC yesterday.

 

Despite him being a self-styled 'card-carrying member' of the NUSC - I don't think he deserves the criticism that this piece has drawn.

 

Binnsy - if you're not aware of any specific event or dispute involving the 'key' backers of the original NUSC idea, would you be able to hazard a guess at why they may have shied away? (serious question)