Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST)

[AyeDubbleYoo]

2 hours ago, Joey Linton said:

Would the proposed model have allowed the Trust to veto our involvement in this? Not that we'd ever get there under Ashley obviously. 

Of course not, but the Trust's proposal isn't the significant fan ownership and control that we really need. It's just something they think is achievable. 

[Rafalove]

I hope in the long run it is, tbh. Obviously baby steps have to be taken so it is absolutely right to target 1% initially.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Yeah, I was answering that this alone wouldn't allow us to prevent something like super league membership happening. 

[Joey Linton]

3 hours ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Of course not, but the Trust's proposal isn't the significant fan ownership and control that we really need. It's just something they think is achievable. 

Assumed not obviously, but wasn't sure of the point being made in that case. Cheers for clarifying. 

[Gallowgate Toon]

Super League stuff is potentially great timing for NUST to piggy back on fan negativity towards it and get some more traction with the pledge scheme.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

It could just switch people off football altogether. 

[GWN]

3 hours ago, Gallowgate Toon said:

Super League stuff is potentially great timing for NUST to piggy back on fan negativity towards it and get some more traction with the pledge scheme.

Don’t think so, it will turn a lot off football altogether , a lot of folk will be lost to COVID and habits changing .This will have an effect on money received imho I’m afraid . 

[Rafalove]

Help anyone? Trying to pledge. Clicking on *other amount* and then typing in£20:00 and then clicking on “pledge now”, a message comes up telling me to “enter amount”. Even though as stated previously I have. What is it I’m doing wrong?

[manorpark]

2 hours ago, Rafalove said:

Help anyone? Trying to pledge. Clicking on *other amount* and then typing in£20:00 and then clicking on “pledge now”, a message comes up telling me to “enter amount”. Even though as stated previously I have. What is it I’m doing wrong?

I think you have to leave out the £ sign.

 

[Rafalove]

1 hour ago, manorpark said:

I think you have to leave out the £ sign.

 

 I’m so dense. Sorted now thanks

[Rafalove]

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/early-success-1892-pledge-revealed-20472311.amp?__twitter_impression=true
 

 

Newcastle United fans have made a successful start to their battle to raise money for 1% of the club
 

It was billed as the week when supporters won as the European Super League was brought down by the rage of football's estabished forces. 

But on Tyneside the reality of fans taking control is playing out - and its one that should fill Newcastle fans with pride. 

Street protests and Government threats might have downed the foolhardy ESL but the battles to change the game will be harder to win, as Newcastle fans reflecting on a decade of trying to influence United under Mike Ashley will testify. 

After years toying with boycotts and direct action, it feels like the fanbase - or most of it - has coalesced around the brilliant 1892 Pledge. With £62,000 raised in just over a fortnight - mostly small, monthly donations from fans, with the the global fanbase really coming through - there is a feeling that momentum is being maintained

 

For Greg Tomlinson, the NUST's chair, the theme of sticking with it when the headlines have moved elsewhere is the one to take from last week's ESL controversy. 

"It was great to mobilise in one way - the plan was abhorrent," he said.
 

But it's not just this - we've had the 39th game, Project Big Picture. If these guys aren't punished, what comes next?

 

It's not the end, if anything this is the beginning of what should be fundamental reform of how how football is governed in the UK. The work, in that regard, has been going on behind-the-scenes with a fan-led review of the game but it's been brought forward. 

There have been reviews of football before of course but we need to make this one count.                  
 

 

Yes, this power grab has been stopped but it doesn't fix everything." 

The Pledge scheme continues to be the headline work of the NUST - and there have been expressions of interest in it. 

A meeting with the shadow cabinet last week was "positive" as the Labour party asked for details of what it would entail. 

"How do you get fans having ownership and equity in your club?" Greg says. 

"Bear in mind the first thing a lot of these owners want is to be compensated for it. If you can build a fund to buy it - if it was set in law that X percentage has to be given to fans but they're given six months, a year or whatever to raise the money - that would be magnificent. 

"The 50 + 1 German model would be everyone's dream but there
 

The fan-led review of football must be fan-led. It's going to be led by a politician so how does that work? We need to make it sure it is properly fan-led." 

On the pledge itself, a surge of donations last week took the initial pot past £60,000. 

The key will be how many are monthly direct debits which will eat away at their one per cent target. 

"It has been a magnificent response with over £60,000 and the key to it all is going to be the direct debits and how they help us. It's a very long term project," he said. 

"Everyone is talking about the 1% but it's a minimum. There's been a great take up on that but we've been overwhelmed by it. There's been a phenomenal take up from all over the world - New Zealand, America and loads and loads locally.

 

The key here is collectively we can have the power."

To make your own pledge, go to 1892pledge.co.uk

 

 

 

[Minhosa]

Good old Ronny Gill. Typo by the end of the second line.

Takes some talent to be that shit at your job.

[54]

My math may be wrong, but at the current rate, the 1892 pledge will have raised £1M in a years time.

[number9shirt]

6 hours ago, 54 said:

My math may be wrong, but at the current rate, the 1892 pledge will have raised £1M in a years time.

At that rate by the time they have enough money to buy 1% it will be the value the club was 3 years ago.

[Joey Linton]

8 hours ago, 54 said:

My math may be wrong, but at the current rate, the 1892 pledge will have raised £1M in a years time.

Will probably get a better idea of recurring donations (rather than one offs) in around a month's time? 

[Fantail Breeze]

8 hours ago, 54 said:

My math may be wrong, but at the current rate, the 1892 pledge will have raised £1M in a years time.

£760,356 isn’t it? If all donations are reoccurring at the same rate and nobody loses interest.

Just over 4.5 years to get 1% of the club, to do an unspecified thing with. Again, assuming all donations are reoccurring at the same rate and nobody loses interest. Also assuming the owner at the time will be willing to sell the 1%.

[InspectorCoarse]

2 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

£760,356 isn’t it? If all donations are reoccurring at the same rate and nobody loses interest.

Just over 4.5 years to get 1% of the club, to do an unspecified thing with. Again, assuming all donations are reoccurring at the same rate and nobody loses interest. Also assuming the owner at the time will be willing to sell the 1%.

Thats a lot of ifs ?

[Joey Linton]

6 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

£760,356 isn’t it? If all donations are reoccurring at the same rate and nobody loses interest.

Just over 4.5 years to get 1% of the club, to do an unspecified thing with. Again, assuming all donations are reoccurring at the same rate and nobody loses interest. Also assuming the owner at the time will be willing to sell the 1%.

I think ultimately this is a good charity fundraiser, isn't it? 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

4.5 years doesn’t seem too long, if they could manage to get a percentage. 

[Rafalove]

Hope the events of the day bring home the message to many fans the necessity of clubs being fan owned.

[Rod]

6 hours ago, Rafalove said:

Hope the events of the day bring home the message to many fans the necessity of clubs being fan owned.

I get your point absolutely.  However, there are too many brain dead fans (sheep) to grasp what you are referring to.

[Whitley mag]

Interesting that we are always told that the trust isn’t a protest movement. Seems like MUST think differently and organised yesterday’s protest. We’ve had no bigger issue in our clubs recent history than the blocked PCP takeover. People would be naive to think that MUFC supporters protesting yesterday all want 50+1, they just want rid of the Glazers and would be ecstatic at the Saudis coming in for them.

As the largest supporters trust in the country surely NUST could muster a similar protest at St Jame’s, after all 97% of the membership backs this takeover. 50+1 is idealistic and a pipe dream in my opinion, we should be fighting tooth and nail to get this takeover through.

Yesterday wasn’t an example of how we should all be fighting for fan ownership, it was that we should demand good and responsible ownership such as Leicester City. It also shows us that the likes of Liverpool and Man U fans would not have accepted the PL blocking a transformative takeover of them. The NUST made a great start in demanding answers, however they accepted the PL’s version of events, and have simply moved on to other projects. The takeover of our club should still be at the forefront of their thinking. 
 

The likes of Arsenal, Man U and other fans would bite your arm off for the Saudis. We should be ramping up the pressure on the PL at every opportunity. The return of fans in coming weeks should be used by us to vocally and visually leave the PL in no doubt about what we think of this blocked takeover. The eyes of the trust should still be on a realistic, attainable and transformative takeover of our club.

https://www.imust.org.uk/Blog/Entry/protest-at-2pm-outside-old-trafford-before-liverpool-match

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2021 by Whitley mag

[James]

When viewed in isolation NUST appears admirable in what it’s doing in terms of trying to give fans a voice and working to try to get better football governance and for those things they are doing they should be applauded.

However, they have repeatedly time and time again refused to confirm to its members that its current objectives are not compatible with protest organisation or more militant tactics. If they admitted this, it would clear space for other more militant fan groups to be set up to deliver the protest side of things.

So really despite the good things they are doing, that single failure is really demonstrating a lack of full integrity and is therefore a hindrance to the club.

[Guest HTT II]

21 minutes ago, James said:

When viewed in isolation NUST appears admirable in what it’s doing in terms of trying to give fans a voice and working to try to get better football governance and for those things they are doing they should be applauded.

However, they have repeatedly time and time again refused to confirm to its members that its current objectives are not compatible with protest organisation or more militant tactics. If they admitted this, it would clear space for other more militant fan groups to be set up to deliver the protest side of things.

So really despite the good things they are doing, that single failure is really demonstrating a lack of full integrity and is therefore a hindrance to the club.

Nah, like!

[Fantail Breeze]

I mean they literally built most of their membership on the back of false promises regarding protests when Rafa left.

They can’t protest though, that’ll affect Alex’s chances of getting to sit in a posh box at a match.

Why worry about the current state of affairs? What has happened in the last couple of years to get upset about?

It’s much better to build a friendship with some chap in the fan engagement team who has no authority to do anything. Also great to buy 1% of the club in 6 years to do absolutely nothing with. Pissing in the wind that project, when we’ve been screaming for action for years.