Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST)

[Teasy]

It doesn't add any evidence.  The transfer window isn't even open, so if we want a player for a problem position now then its a free or an emergency loan, there are no other options.

 

By the way, Sheffield United passed up the chance to sign him because his agent wanted a £75k fee to for them to sign the player on a loan for 6 months.  Clearly by there managers words they did actually want to sign him on a free.

 

They would not have handed him a contract if there were plans to sign a winger in January, would they? Right wing was the last remaining first team spot.

 

Do you honestly believe they will invest money in signings without selling first? When was the last time we did that?

 

We need players now, rejecting a player the manager wants (especially one on such a favourable contract) in order to wait until January would be a terrible idea, unless the player they were after was pretty special.

 

I didn't say they'd invest any money in January by the way, I've always doubted we would.  What I didn't expect is for us to bring in a player in a position we needed to fill as soon as possible, which is a very positive move IMO.

[TRon]

It doesn't add any evidence.  The transfer window isn't even open, so if we want a player for a problem position now then its a free or an emergency loan, there are no other options.

 

By the way, Sheffield United passed up the chance to sign him because his agent wanted a £75k fee to for them to sign the player on a loan for 6 months.  Clearly by there managers words they did actually want to sign him on a free.

 

They would not have handed him a contract if there were plans to sign a winger in January, would they? Right wing was the last remaining first team spot.

 

Do you honestly believe they will invest money in signings without selling first? When was the last time we did that?

 

We need players now, rejecting a player the manager wants (especially one on such a favourable contract) in order to wait until January would be a terrible idea, unless the player they were after was pretty special.

 

I didn't say they'd invest any money in January by the way, I've always doubted we would.  What I didn't expect is for us to bring in a player in a position we needed to fill as soon as possible, which is a very positive move IMO.

 

That's my take on it as well. If Pancrate turns out to be a lemon then I would ask questions of Hughton rather than Ashley. We already know that this regime won't invest money in players, but unfortunately neither will anyone else so we are stuck with it. I am actually surprised that Ashley gave his approval to this one, say what you will but plenty of Championship clubs couldn't afford these sort of wages.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I'll ask another question in an attempt to get this thread back on track............

 

 

Suppose I'm interested in this and have say £15k that I'd be willing to invest, ie. not enough for the pension option, but 10 times the minimum investment.

 

If I invest the £15k and then a few years down I want/need to sell my investment (or part of it), will it not just be worth the same as someone who has invested only a £1,500 investment? What I mean is by buying my £15k investment would someone not just be entitled to one vote, which is exactly the same as if they bought a £1,500 investment from someone else? Would this mean I am immediately writing of £13,500 of my initial investment as soon as I make it?

 

Or if I invest £15,000 would it give me ten potential votes that I'd be able to sell at a future date, even though obviously I'd only be entitled to one vote whilst I owned £15,000 worth of "stock"?

 

Apologies if this has been answered elsewhere.

[ToonTastic]

I'll ask another question in an attempt to get this thread back on track............

 

 

Suppose I'm interested in this and have say £15k that I'd be willing to invest, ie. not enough for the pension option, but 10 times the minimum investment.

 

If I invest the £15k and then a few years down I want/need to sell my investment (or part of it), will it not just be worth the same as someone who has invested only a £1,500 investment?  What I mean is by buying my £15k investment would someone not just be entitled to one vote, which is exactly the same as if they bought a £1,500 investment from someone else?  Would this mean I am immediately writing of £13,500 of my initial investment as soon as I make it?

 

Or if I invest £15,000 would it give me ten potential votes that I'd be able to sell at a future date, even though obviously I'd only be entitled to one vote whilst I owned £15,000 worth of "stock"?

 

Apologies if this has been answered elsewhere.

 

You'd have 1 vote and be earning 2% interest on your 15k.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

 

You'd have 1 vote and be earning 2% interest on your 15k.

 

Yeah I appreciate that, what I'm wondering is does it place me at a massive disadvantage if I want to cash in my investment, given that people are unlikely to pay a premium just to secure a 2% return.

[Guest]

Why not just put the £1,500 in several different names if you wanted to invest £15,000 and get 10 votes anyway?

[tgarve]

This whole thing really annoys me, it will never ever happen in a million years, people will invest alot of time and money into this to no avail and it will create a set of supporters who believe they are above the rest because they have invested. I know people will shoot down me for saying this but it will probally be true in the end. I feel as big a supporter as anyone else and i like the way people are so passionate they will do this but people need to have a reality check. Il hold my hands up if wrong.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

 

You'd have 1 vote and be earning 2% interest on your 15k.

 

Yeah I appreciate that, what I'm wondering is does it place me at a massive disadvantage if I want to cash in my investment, given that people are unlikely to pay a premium just to secure a 2% return.

 

Surprised you didn't get the answer I got on a similar question - why would you want to cash it in if you are a true fan???

[Guest Roger Kint]

Is this still going on? Heard nothing since the first day other than peasepubs own help and news of the wrong adverts being printed.

 

Now over 2 weeks in and no sign of an update

[Elliottman]

Is this still going on? Heard nothing since the first day other than peasepubs own help and news of the wrong adverts being printed.

 

Now over 2 weeks in and no sign of an update

 

its certainly went pretty quiet, especially after all the talk of names of investors coming out??

[binnsy]

its a 6 week campaign,  they are about 12 days into it,  they've launched it, held a roadshow in Gosforth last week,  holding another on at the Strawberry in town this week,  going to Swalwell next week,  there not exactly twiddling there thumbs.  i also think they are planning something for Saturday as its the first home game since the launch.

[Guest Roger Kint]

its a 6 week campaign,  they are about 12 days into it,  they've launched it, held a roadshow in Gosforth last week,  holding another on at the Strawberry in town this week,  going to Swalwell next week,  there not exactly twiddling there thumbs.  i also think they are planning something for Saturday as its the first home game since the launch.

 

I know they have, but not everyone can make them or knows about all of them. It just seems strange that they would let over a week go by when theres no football without keeping the idea in the public as much as possible

[peasepud]

Apologies, Im chasing this today as I also agree there needs to be more info coming out now. I know it appears to have gone quiet but believe me in the background things are moving at quite a pace, the problem is the financial institutions are still putting those final touches to the documentation (the final touches I said a week ago would be done in a few days  ). Once thats out then things will really start to step up a gear.

 

Its frustrating though, I agree.

 

Liam, I've taken your question away, I can definitely see the logic in what you're saying, if you bought a single £1500 investment then thats got to be easier to sell on than a £15,000 one, personally I dont see any reason (other than potential admin costs) as to why you wouldnt be able to sell it off in blocks ie sell 3 "shares" to reduce your investment to £10,500 and three new investors come into play with 3 lots of £1500 from yours.

 

I'll get back to you on that.

[Guest Roger Kint]

Cheers for that. As you know the lifespam of a NUFC story is about 7 days(stadium names anyone?) so was wondering why the hold up. Its not a thing to let go stale in the public eye if that makes any sense.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Apologies, Im chasing this today as I also agree there needs to be more info coming out now. I know it appears to have gone quiet but believe me in the background things are moving at quite a pace, the problem is the financial institutions are still putting those final touches to the documentation (the final touches I said a week ago would be done in a few days  ). Once thats out then things will really start to step up a gear.

 

Its frustrating though, I agree.

 

Liam, I've taken your question away, I can definitely see the logic in what you're saying, if you bought a single £1500 investment then thats got to be easier to sell on than a £15,000 one, personally I dont see any reason (other than potential admin costs) as to why you wouldnt be able to sell it off in blocks ie sell 3 "shares" to reduce your investment to £10,500 and three new investors come into play with 3 lots of £1500 from yours.

 

I'll get back to you on that.

 

Cheers

[Colos Short and Curlies]

If each investment accrues 2% return then the £80million will cost the club £1,600,000.

 

Is this 2% per year? or a flat return regardless of the lenght of time the investment is held?

 

If the latter, are people happy with near enough £2,000,000 going out of the club each year?

[Guest Roger Kint]

If each investment accrues 2% return then the £80million will cost the club £1,600,000.

 

Is this 2% per year? or a flat return regardless of the lenght of time the investment is held?

 

If the latter, are people happy with near enough £2,000,000 going out of the club each year?

 

Theres an explanation earlier, am not doing the work for you( ) but is the interest currently £4m for whatever we pay out or something? Sure peasepud answered it though

[peasepud]

I did, it's somewhere in the depths of the thread. Basically we currently pay 12% interest on our overdraft, so £40m was costing £4.8m per year in interest. £200m through this scheme wil cost us £4m so basically if nothing else the football club would save £800k in interest payments but have had a cash injection of £100m+.

[Teasy]

If each investment accrues 2% return then the £80million will cost the club £1,600,000.

 

Is this 2% per year? or a flat return regardless of the lenght of time the investment is held?

 

If the latter, are people happy with near enough £2,000,000 going out of the club each year?

 

Its nothing to be worried about IMO, its certainly a very generous rate of interest (for the club).  For instance before Ashley paid off the debt the club were paying out £8m a year on debts of around £80m.  Even after that was paid off we were still paying more then £1.6m a year just for the overdraft facility (between £2m to £4m depending how much of it we used).  At first it looks like a hindrance as the club has to pay out £1.6m a year just to be owned by the fans.  However as more people buy a share the club gains cash to spend while only having to pay a fraction of the interest they'd have to pay to any other investor.

 

Though I did mention having the option to opt out of interest payments in order to keep the money in the club.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

If each investment accrues 2% return then the £80million will cost the club £1,600,000.

 

Is this 2% per year? or a flat return regardless of the lenght of time the investment is held?

 

If the latter, are people happy with near enough £2,000,000 going out of the club each year?

 

Before Ashley paid off the debt the club were paying out £8m a year on debts of around £80m.  Even after that was paid off we were still paying more then £1.6m a year just for the overdraft facility (between £2m to £4m depending how much of it we used).  So I don't see £1.6m as anything to be worried about.  Though I did mention having the option to opt out of interest payments in order to keep the money in the club.

 

If its £1.6million total outflow then fine, my worry is that it is £1.6million to the members, then another trench to service a loan and another trench to service an overdraft etc.

 

I know I'm a negative bod when it comes to the NUST and this intiative but believe me I'm willing to be converted and if its the best way forward then I'll support them 100%. However, I can't see how we as supporters can generate enough income to get the club back to challenging for Europe without looking for outside assistance, which will come at a cost. We've all seen what happens when you borrow against banking on Europe (Luque/Owen etc) and then you don't get there. I just hope that when the plans are unveiled in their totality that a sustainable path (maybe a 5 year plan or such like) with achievable and sustained improvement are detailed along with how much in full it is likely to cost the club. We should be able to generate more income than Everton purely due to the size of the stadium, the question is though is there a plan on how to use it effectively?

[Teasy]

If each investment accrues 2% return then the £80million will cost the club £1,600,000.

 

Is this 2% per year? or a flat return regardless of the lenght of time the investment is held?

 

If the latter, are people happy with near enough £2,000,000 going out of the club each year?

 

Before Ashley paid off the debt the club were paying out £8m a year on debts of around £80m.  Even after that was paid off we were still paying more then £1.6m a year just for the overdraft facility (between £2m to £4m depending how much of it we used).  So I don't see £1.6m as anything to be worried about.  Though I did mention having the option to opt out of interest payments in order to keep the money in the club.

 

If its £1.6million total outflow then fine, my worry is that it is £1.6million to the members, then another trench to service a loan and another trench to service an overdraft etc.

 

I know I'm a negative bod when it comes to the NUST and this intiative but believe me I'm willing to be converted and if its the best way forward then I'll support them 100%. However, I can't see how we as supporters can generate enough income to get the club back to challenging for Europe without looking for outside assistance, which will come at a cost. We've all seen what happens when you borrow against banking on Europe (Luque/Owen etc) and then you don't get there. I just hope that when the plans are unveiled in their totality that a sustainable path (maybe a 5 year plan or such like) with achievable and sustained improvement are detailed along with how much in full it is likely to cost the club. We should be able to generate more income than Everton purely due to the size of the stadium, the question is though is there a plan on how to use it effectively?

 

It all comes down to how much money the fans put in really, and also how we're run if/when we get back into the Premiership of course.  For instance if we really could raise £200m (which is a major doubt) we'd then be paying out £4m a year to members but we'd have £120m in the clubs bank account.  Not only would that actually generate millions in interest from the bank but it would also mean we'd have no need for an expensive overdraft and no need for outside loans.  Then again if we raise £100m we'll have £20m in the bank (initially of course as shares will still be available to buy) which is still healthier then having nowt in the bank and using a large overdraft as usual.  Of course we may raise £60m and all this will mean nowt.

[Guest Roger Kint]

The price will not be £80m but the rest sounds about right.

[binnsy]

is anyone from here going to the Roadshow at the Strawberry 2moro night?

[ToonTastic]

If each investment accrues 2% return then the £80million will cost the club £1,600,000.

 

Is this 2% per year? or a flat return regardless of the lenght of time the investment is held?

 

If the latter, are people happy with near enough £2,000,000 going out of the club each year?

 

Before Ashley paid off the debt the club were paying out £8m a year on debts of around £80m.  Even after that was paid off we were still paying more then £1.6m a year just for the overdraft facility (between £2m to £4m depending how much of it we used).  So I don't see £1.6m as anything to be worried about.  Though I did mention having the option to opt out of interest payments in order to keep the money in the club.

 

If its £1.6million total outflow then fine, my worry is that it is £1.6million to the members, then another trench to service a loan and another trench to service an overdraft etc.

 

I know I'm a negative bod when it comes to the NUST and this intiative but believe me I'm willing to be converted and if its the best way forward then I'll support them 100%. However, I can't see how we as supporters can generate enough income to get the club back to challenging for Europe without looking for outside assistance, which will come at a cost. We've all seen what happens when you borrow against banking on Europe (Luque/Owen etc) and then you don't get there. I just hope that when the plans are unveiled in their totality that a sustainable path (maybe a 5 year plan or such like) with achievable and sustained improvement are detailed along with how much in full it is likely to cost the club. We should be able to generate more income than Everton purely due to the size of the stadium, the question is though is there a plan on how to use it effectively?

 

It all comes down to how much money the fans put in really, and also how we're run if/when we get back into the Premiership of course.  For instance if we really could raise £200m (which is a major doubt) we'd then be paying out £4m a year to members but we'd have £120m in the clubs bank account.  Not only would that actually generate millions in interest from the bank but it would also mean we'd have no need for an expensive overdraft and no need for outside loans.  Then again if we raise £100m we'll have £20m in the bank (initially of course as shares will still be available to buy) which is still healthier then having nowt in the bank and using a large overdraft as usual.  Of course we may raise £60m and all this will mean nowt.

 

Would't have to pay out £4m a year to members either as many members will say the club can have their interest so that number could come down.

[Teasy]

If each investment accrues 2% return then the £80million will cost the club £1,600,000.

 

Is this 2% per year? or a flat return regardless of the lenght of time the investment is held?

 

If the latter, are people happy with near enough £2,000,000 going out of the club each year?

 

Before Ashley paid off the debt the club were paying out £8m a year on debts of around £80m.  Even after that was paid off we were still paying more then £1.6m a year just for the overdraft facility (between £2m to £4m depending how much of it we used).  So I don't see £1.6m as anything to be worried about.  Though I did mention having the option to opt out of interest payments in order to keep the money in the club.

 

If its £1.6million total outflow then fine, my worry is that it is £1.6million to the members, then another trench to service a loan and another trench to service an overdraft etc.

 

I know I'm a negative bod when it comes to the NUST and this intiative but believe me I'm willing to be converted and if its the best way forward then I'll support them 100%. However, I can't see how we as supporters can generate enough income to get the club back to challenging for Europe without looking for outside assistance, which will come at a cost. We've all seen what happens when you borrow against banking on Europe (Luque/Owen etc) and then you don't get there. I just hope that when the plans are unveiled in their totality that a sustainable path (maybe a 5 year plan or such like) with achievable and sustained improvement are detailed along with how much in full it is likely to cost the club. We should be able to generate more income than Everton purely due to the size of the stadium, the question is though is there a plan on how to use it effectively?

 

It all comes down to how much money the fans put in really, and also how we're run if/when we get back into the Premiership of course.  For instance if we really could raise £200m (which is a major doubt) we'd then be paying out £4m a year to members but we'd have £120m in the clubs bank account.  Not only would that actually generate millions in interest from the bank but it would also mean we'd have no need for an expensive overdraft and no need for outside loans.  Then again if we raise £100m we'll have £20m in the bank (initially of course as shares will still be available to buy) which is still healthier then having nowt in the bank and using a large overdraft as usual.  Of course we may raise £60m and all this will mean nowt.

 

Would't have to pay out £4m a year to members either as many members will say the club can have their interest so that number could come down.

 

Hopefully they'll include that option when they finally announce the start of the scheme.