Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST)

[quayside]

In that case, I'd suggest that the people who do know what they're doing, start talking, and fast.

 

If this is supposed to be a new era of openness and accountability, it doesn't look good that so much information is apparently being held back at this point. If you have all this financial backing and / or professional expertise on board with you at this point, then let's hear about it. The more detail you can give, the more confident people can be that this is a viable plan and not a dream. You say that you are 'merely the group that has put this in place', but you're the only people that are talking at the moment.

 

No offence here but you're trying to find fault with this and using the lack of in depth information on day 1 to beat us with. As I said earlier, weve issued the important information to let people see what is involved and what sort of figures we're talking about. Nobody is asking anyone to part with cash at this stage all we've asked for is the name, email and Date of Birth of those that are interested, you dont even have to commit that much at this stage. In return we've stated that we'll send additional information out to those interested so they can see whats what.

 

No doubt we'll be putting that info into the public domain as well but frankly coming across with the whole "this is meant to be a new era of openness and accountability" is a bit crap tbh.

 

We're the only people talking because its day 1, lets see what happens in days 2, 3, 4....14...30..etc before ripping us apart eh?

 

Why don't you publish the 'additional information' now? What is it that's so secret?

 

Give the man a chance. They've got to put together a business plan for this that will persuade people to part with proper money and commit pensions, that takes time. And whats the rush anyway - Ashley isn't going to piss away the club's cash resources in January is he?

[peasepud]

Theres nothing secret, theres just a simple tried and tested method for running campaigns of this size and that is not to pile in with too much info in one go. Look at any public share issue thats been carried out for instance, they never issue a big pile of documentation in one go, the British Gas one ran for months with a simple strapline on radio, television and in newspapers. Everyone knew what it was for but it never gave any more than that away. They all do exactly as we have done, put out the basic overview and give people a day or so to take that in then move into the more in depth information.

 

Today was about giving the press and fans the overview, this is who we are, this is what we plan and this is basically how we do it. Theres no secret conspiracy because the pension experts havent come out and said their piece or the bankers theirs. They will do so when the time is right but rest assured it will be before we expect people to commit anything. Theres six weeks of this campaign to come, dont blow it all on one momentous day.

 

 

[Benwell Lad]

The elected board member structure is clear, it's the "managing" directors bit that interests me.

If as you say there are already "names in the frame" then it sounds like people already involved fancy the posts, which doesn't sound too good unless they already have considerable experience of running football clubs.

 

When I talked about names in the frame though I made it clear that these were experienced business people, I honestly dont know any of the names because Im not involved in the discussions at that level. What I do know though is that these would be people that we would be happy to see running the club. As I also said, these are names that have been sounded out as to whether they were interested, more will appear as candidates Im sure as time goes on. Hell if you know someone suitable then make sure their name is in the frame.

 

None of the current committee have the experience to do this and would not be in there. I can safely say I wouldnt personally vote for them if they were. We need big business brains and a football knowledge. Thats not to say the President would have the football knowledge but you'd expect at least one of the people who surround him to have that.

 

At the end of the day, its the voters that decide the President. 5,6,10,15k Newcastle fans arent going to vote for some daft arsed shop assistant or civil servant over some self made business genius.

 

As I said earlier, this is not a stitch up to get ourselves in there and make a shed load of money. If you want that then give Moat a call and offer him your cash. As far as Im concerned, the day this happens and everything is in place then I will be moving back into working on the Supporters Club side of things and have nothing to do with the football club stuff. Theres many better qualified to sit on the board than the likes of me.

 

 

Thanks but it doesn't really address the bit I wrote below the bit you highlighted which was :-

 

I assume if you say the 2% is guaranteed for 2 years it will be placed on deposit during that time ?

As most pensions funds have gained 25%+ in the last 9 months and lost 40% in the year before that it may or may not seem attractive to a potential investor, but as you say "after that it's dependant on how the club is doing"  which I assume means our investments will be more of a a market driven PLC type arrangement.

 

Also I've asked the following twice :-

 

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Sorry if these questions are difficult, but I would have thought that on the day a multi-million pound  buyout plan is rolled out to the press and the public, you'd have been able to give potential investors this information.

 

I don't really understand why you said  to me "As I said earlier, this is not a stitch up to get ourselves in there and make a shed load of money. If you want that then give Moat a call and offer him your cash "  Is there something we should know about him ?

 

[Benwell Lad]

PP your post above has explained some of the issues I raised in mine.

[Cronky]

Theres nothing secret, theres just a simple tried and tested method for running campaigns of this size and that is not to pile in with too much info in one go. Look at any public share issue thats been carried out for instance, they never issue a big pile of documentation in one go, the British Gas one ran for months with a simple strapline on radio, television and in newspapers. Everyone knew what it was for but it never gave any more than that away. They all do exactly as we have done, put out the basic overview and give people a day or so to take that in then move into the more in depth information.

 

Today was about giving the press and fans the overview, this is who we are, this is what we plan and this is basically how we do it. Theres no secret conspiracy because the pension experts havent come out and said their piece or the bankers theirs. They will do so when the time is right but rest assured it will be before we expect people to commit anything. Theres six weeks of this campaign to come, dont blow it all on one momentous day.

 

 

 

Well, seeing as you revealed in a previous post that you didn't actually know who these backers are, you'll forgive me if I remain a little sceptical.

[peasepud]

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club.

 

if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved.

[Dave]

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club.

 

if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved.

 

How?

[geordie_b]

peasepud, where were all of the email addresses used today gathered from? I have never given my email address to NUSC or NUST and recieved 2 emails. I have emailed NUST and recieved no response

 

I can honestly say that I dont know, as far as I was aware these were email addresses that we had collected over a number of different campaigns, the petitions, signups, facebook, twitter that sort of thing. However Im not responsible for the website these days so I will check to confirm.

 

What I can safely say is that N-O have not passed on email addresses thats for sure, I and the other admins on TT would never do that and Im 110% sure that Dave, Phil and those responsible for this place wouldnt either.

 

I have now had an email from NUST explaining how they got my email address. Whilst im not over the moon about it the intentions were good

[Benwell Lad]

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club.

 

if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved.

 

 

If that's what an acceptable bid would require, then I don't think you are going to see any acceptable bids.

We need businessmen running the show not lunatics.  By lunatic I mean the benevolent businessman not the fans - just to be clear.

[Guest michaelfoster]

I have now had an email from NUST explaining how they got my email address. Whilst im not over the moon about it the intentions were good

 

What did it say?

[Benwell Lad]

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club.

 

if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved.

 

How?

 

Does smack slightly of naive arrogance.

I'm absolutely certain they do and it may well be, but this is the time for convincing potential subscribers/investors not themselves.

[Jayson]

I like the idea, not sure how realistic a prospect it is but its something id be behind. The only issue as a few others have mentioned is i dont see Ashley selling anytime this season with the chance of promotion atall now. I think hes made his choice. Also the fact that you're basically on a deadline to raise this massive amount of money, before anyone else comes in to buy the club. Doesnt give you the biggest amount of time really, i dont see Ashley sticking around after the end of this season regardless of the outcome.

[midds]

First off, I've not got a spare £2500 (or anywhere near it tbh) to invest so I'm ruled out straight away. Secondly, it sounds like an excellent idea in theory. I've got some doubts as to whether or not enough cash can be raised to take over and keep things ticking along until the club begins to generate enough money to run itself properly though.

 

The other query (my apologies if it's already been answered elsewhere) is that I can't really see the incentive to more affluent people investing more money if they still only get one vote. I've read that the 'one share=one vote' thing is fundamental to it going ahead but why should a rich bloke put in, say, £50k if it only gets him the same voting power as someone who only chips in £2500?

 

I'm not trying to be negative and I hope things take off but I've got my doubts as to whether it'll actually come off. Credit to them for getting off their arses and attempting to do something positive to force some change. 

[binnsy]

Looks like i will invest but not on my own, having got one or two grand spare but after talking to a few people tonight am putting a little consortium of 10 and we'll put £250 in each,  initialy deposit is only £25 each.

 

Also would recommend that people who haven't joined NUST previously, for whatever reason, sign up and pay there tenner,  just think of the cash boost that say an extra 10000 people joining up this week adds to the pot, even better if 20000 join! The NUST are also linked to easy fundraising by signing up for that doing your xmas shopping online at places like amazon also puts money in the NUST's coffers.  Also saw today on Facebook that the ASHLEY OUT - UNITED FRONT protest group are selling ashley out t-shirts and all the money made from those t shirts are going to NUST as well.

[OzzieMandias]

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club.

 

if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved.

 

How?

 

I don't want to put words into Peasepud's mouth, but reading between his lines upthread he seems to be implying that Moat's plan would have meant that the cost of purchasing the club would be met out of the club's future income. The club would basically be acquiring more debt as the result of the change of ownership. Wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.

[Decky]

This happened in Football Manager, and it worked. So that means its gonna happen and work in real life. Im convinced.

[Dave]

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club.

 

if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved.

 

How?

 

I don't want to put words into Peasepud's mouth, but reading between his lines upthread he seems to be implying that Moat's plan would have meant that the cost of purchasing the club would be met out of the club's future income. The club would basically be acquiring more debt as the result of the change of ownership. Wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.

 

Does that make it worse for the club by default?

 

I'm certainly not in a position to say anyone is wrong, but I don't know how anyone can know which is better for the club without having complete knowledge of what the other parties are planning and willing to do.

[madras]

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club.

 

if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved.

 

How?

 

I don't want to put words into Peasepud's mouth, but reading between his lines upthread he seems to be implying that Moat's plan would have meant that the cost of purchasing the club would be met out of the club's future income. The club would basically be acquiring more debt as the result of the change of ownership. Wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.

 

Does that make it worse for the club by default?

 

I'm certainly not in a position to say anyone is wrong, but I don't know how anyone can know which is better for the club without having complete knowledge of what the other parties are planning and willing to do.

and thats something we'll never know even after any takeover has happened.

[alpal78]

First off, I've not got a spare £2500 (or anywhere near it tbh) to invest so I'm ruled out straight away. Secondly, it sounds like an excellent idea in theory. I've got some doubts as to whether or not enough cash can be raised to take over and keep things ticking along until the club begins to generate enough money to run itself properly though.

 

The other query (my apologies if it's already been answered elsewhere) is that I can't really see the incentive to more affluent people investing more money if they still only get one vote. I've read that the 'one share=one vote' thing is fundamental to it going ahead but why should a rich bloke put in, say, £50k if it only gets him the same voting power as someone who only chips in £2500?

 

I'm not trying to be negative and I hope things take off but I've got my doubts as to whether it'll actually come off. Credit to them for getting off their arses and attempting to do something positive to force some change. 

 

I'm with Midds on this. I don't see how you can have it both ways. You either go for the equal vote feel good factor or you focus on getting the big fish. As it is, there is no incentive to invest more than the minimum. I read a few pages back that the incentive to invest more would be that 2% of 20,000K is more than 2% of 1,500K. I'm sorry but that's a silly point. Whilst it is true that if you invest 20,000K you get more returns on absolute level than if you invested just 1,500K, but from an investment standpoint, people (certainly the big fish) look at return of investment (ROI). And given that most savings account would give you more than 2% interest and most mutual funds would give you anywhere between 5-20%, the opportunity cost for investing 20,000K is actually worse than 1,500K.

 

Sure we could say that the contribution is to save the club and not really an 'investment', whilst I can see some people doing that out of love for the club, I can't see any serious money coming in purely based on emotions.

 

For the record, I appreciate the effort (credit where it is due) but I can't see how this will work unles this fundamental issue is addressed.   

[peasepud]

If this campaign gathers momentum, would NUST view any subsequent offer to buy the club from Ashley as a rival bid ?

In the future would they be sympathetic to a serious bid from serious investors or do they now see themselves as the only way forward ?

 

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club.

 

if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved.

 

 

If that's what an acceptable bid would require, then I don't think you are going to see any acceptable bids.

We need businessmen running the show not lunatics.  By lunatic I mean the benevolent businessman not the fans - just to be clear.

 

You knew exactly what I meant by that, every bid that comes in is obviously a rival bid, thats not arrogance or anything else you want to portray it as. If the fans have raised x million and are in discussions with the owner then we're not going to say "oh forget it then, someone else has come in, lets stop and hope they're going to do things right".

 

Anyone (and that includes us) who buys this club has the potential to be the best thing to happen or the worst ever and frankly we will not know the answer until years after they've completed the purchase. For us to just stop our bid when some multibillionaire appears would be more foolish than not bothering with the bid at all. I used the "give 50% to the fans for free" as an example, something that would be such an amazing offer that we'd have to look at it. not just blindly continue down the path.

 

I don't want to put words into Peasepud's mouth, but reading between his lines upthread he seems to be implying that Moat's plan would have meant that the cost of purchasing the club would be met out of the club's future income. The club would basically be acquiring more debt as the result of the change of ownership. Wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.

Does that make it worse for the club by default?

 

I'm certainly not in a position to say anyone is wrong, but I don't know how anyone can know which is better for the club without having complete knowledge of what the other parties are planning and willing to do.

I would say it does, heres a "hypothetical" scenario, man pays 30% of purchase price then takes the other 70% out of club over next two years to pay balance, all money during that time is channeled into repaying this, no purchases, more redundancies etc. Club finally repays debt and man owns club outright, man then sells club on for profit on his original stake.

 

Apart from our bid, any potential purchaser does not need to say what their motives are or what they plan long term. Anyone with the cash can come in and do what they like. This bid is obviously different, the fans know what the plan is, the fans own the club, the fans elect who will run it, the fans have their peers on the board and can ensure things are done properly inside.

 

If things arent going right and we, the fans can see that the current President is not competent then there are methods in place to remove them through the correct channels. Thats the difference, if it goes wrong at the moment all we can do is moan about it, make a banner or go on SSN and shout for the heads. Under fan ownership we can simply muster the required number of voters and call for them to be replaced. For obvious reasons that in itself isnt a simple process but its there to ensure that the fans keep control and can remove anyone thats abusing their power or acting incorrectly.

 

First off, I've not got a spare £2500 (or anywhere near it tbh) to invest so I'm ruled out straight away. Secondly, it sounds like an excellent idea in theory. I've got some doubts as to whether or not enough cash can be raised to take over and keep things ticking along until the club begins to generate enough money to run itself properly though.

 

The other query (my apologies if it's already been answered elsewhere) is that I can't really see the incentive to more affluent people investing more money if they still only get one vote. I've read that the 'one share=one vote' thing is fundamental to it going ahead but why should a rich bloke put in, say, £50k if it only gets him the same voting power as someone who only chips in £2500?

 

I'm not trying to be negative and I hope things take off but I've got my doubts as to whether it'll actually come off. Credit to them for getting off their arses and attempting to do something positive to force some change. 

 

Firstly, Id say you need to reread everything and see what other options are given over the coming days / weeks, the minimum investment is £1500 not £2500 although I agree finding £1500 is only a little easier than £2500. The pension option may be something you'd consider or grouping with a couple of family members to get one between you, 5 family members and its £300 each. At the end of the day though theres no problem if those that cant invest dont, as said earlier this isnt meant to be a "go out and sell your car, your club needs the cash" scenario. Those that dont invest are no different to those that dont, we're all fans, all passionate that will never change. You never know, maybe in a year or two's time you will have some spare and think "ok I'll go for it now".

 

The point about why would people invest more than the minimum if its one member one vote? I too was sceptical of this however its true that they do, no doubt over the next few weeks you will see examples of it as celebrity and business fans do just that. Its happened already and will no doubt keep happening. Its pride in the club, its wanting to be part of something and feeling that they can make a difference. At the same time they still get a return on their money so its not even like they're handing it over in a donation. Maybe we need to look at it like a charity, when theres an appeal we'll put our hand in our pockets and pull out some cash. If that appeal is for someone you know or something close to your heart you'll pull out more or sit in a bath of beans to raise more again.

 

A couple of people have asked if theres the facility to pay via Credit Card as the view would be to take out a 0% interest one and pay it using that, I dont know the answer to that yet but will update when I find out.

[Delima]

Peasepud - you are doing a very fine job as the spokeperson of NUST.

 

At this moment I am not financially able to contribute to this, but in the near future (half a year) I would.

 

I just have 1 concern in my mind - it has been raised by others.

 

I think the 1 member 1 vote policy regardless of investment size is fundamentally unfair - and would eventually put wealthier fans off.

[peasepud]

Peasepud - you are doing a very fine job as the spokeperson of NUST.

 

At this moment I am not financially able to contribute to this, but in the near future (half a year) I would.

 

I just have 1 concern in my mind - it has been raised by others.

 

I think the 1 member 1 vote policy regardless of investment size is fundamentally unfair - and would eventually put wealthier fans off.

 

Like I said in the post above, I too had concerns about that however one member one vote is fundamental to the way this works. If it doesnt work then that just means we have to find more investors or it ultimately fails however from my understanding it isnt failing so far. Most people are just happy to have their vote, those that think £1500 is spare change for buying a drink with dont have a problem in sticking in ten times that.

 

If you base it on the amount you put in then its simply a share issue and the likes of Shepherd etc will walk in pay in £10m and take control of the club again, overriding the fans descisions. If say it was one vote per £1500 then Shepherd would only need to put in £1.5m to have 1000 votes, you me and the rest of us on here wouldnt stand a chance, every vote raised would go the way he wanted. The board would end up being Shepherd, Shepherd Jr, Shepherds brother etc. Even the 6 others on the board would end up being the next 6 that had paid the most.

 

True fans ownership means making all equal, changing that to try and ensure we get the money would (in my opinion) be counter productive and not result in fans having the say they required or the future we see for the club.

[TRon]

peasepud,

 

assuming that this catches the imagination of the local public and everything goes to plan and we raise £300m, what makes you think that Ashley won't see all this available cash and move the goalposts by raising the price? Has negotiating a buyout price been factored in or are we just going to pay whatever it takes once the funds are in place?

 

 

[ToonTastic]

peasepud,

 

assuming that this catches the imagination of the local public and everything goes to plan and we raise £300m, what makes you think that Ashley won't see all this available cash and move the goalposts by raising the price? Has negotiating a buyout price been factored in or are we just going to pay whatever it takes once the funds are in place?

 

 

 

Think thats why they weren't saying the amount they were raising, were only collecting deposits for now and I'm guessing they simply wouldn't accept the deal and so Ashley would get more hell and no cash.

[TRon]

peasepud,

 

assuming that this catches the imagination of the local public and everything goes to plan and we raise £300m, what makes you think that Ashley won't see all this available cash and move the goalposts by raising the price? Has negotiating a buyout price been factored in or are we just going to pay whatever it takes once the funds are in place?

 

 

 

Think thats why they weren't saying the amount they were raising, were only collecting deposits for now and I'm guessing they simply wouldn't accept the deal and so Ashley would get more hell and no cash.

 

I don't think Ashley will give a flying fuck about getting hell, it will come down to cold hard cash at the end of the day.