NUST meltdown

[ewerk 26118]

They've sent out a survey to members/former members.

 

It concerns the running of the club, the fan ownership plan and the performance of NUST.

 

 

Hopefully worth replying to if you want to get your point across.

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

Aye, I saw that in my inbox this morning. Initial thought was too little too late, but I might go back and look at it.

[Mac-Toon 1]

Aye, I saw that in my inbox this morning. Initial thought was too little too late, but I might go back and look at it.

I've completed it. Takes about 10-15 minutes and I think non members can complete it aswell.

[Guest alex]

I saw it as well but didn't bother as I thought it was just about how the club is being run. I will revisit it.

[Monkeys Fist 38517]

Done.

[MichaelNUFC 0]

Just did the survey and relayed my feeings.

 

I thought aspects of it were the closest we are going to get to an admission of the things that the Trust has let unfortunately let slide this past year...but at the very least it shows that they have heard enough compaints over these things to now realise that they actually might constitute something like a consensus and not just be the opinion of one or two muck rakers (whose existence shouldn't cloud the fact that sometimes they are close to the truth). That's good I suppose and thankfully there were multiple opportunities for expression of views and not just multiple choice stuff.

 

Main points I raised were the need to return to prominence in the media after practically disappearing since the elections were held. (much) Better communication with the membership and a more critical voice in relation to the various attrocities the club has seen fit to hand us this past year.

Clarity of vision and direction were also noted as essential for improvement.

 

PR was also mentioned and I think that's a must for them, they've made so many daft face-palm errors such as running their comedy night advert above their own opinion piece on the day Hughton was terminated, that its obvious something is awry in that department and its good to see them actively recruiting in that department.

Edited December 22, 2010 by MichaelNUFC

[Mac-Toon 1]

It definitely allows to input opinions which I wasn't expecting. Some questions regarding figures I'd be able to release to the trustweren't particularly clear in their wording. It's actually abit more specific than many questionnaires/surveys which are distributed so here's hoping the findings are acted upon in a mannar which befits the aims and opinions of their membership base without kingpins running things.

[Tom_NUFC 0]

Done.

 

Said they need to hold regular meetings and that I thought the 3 month option for members meetings seemed about right + getting roadshows restarted and address issues brought up by resignation of committee members and why an elected member is currently suspended.

[peasepud 59]

I have to disagree, after reading this thread I was expecting a survey which talked about the recent problems and ways the Trust could change for the better.

 

None of the statistically valid questions ie those that you pick from a selection of options allowed anything negative to be said. We can all add comments into the free text fields but these will never be collated into meaningful stats. Its a shame because I had hoped this was the first rung on the ladder. The inclusion of a single question "Are you happy with what we're doing?" Yes or No would have meant a whole lot more.

 

I am also very wary that this is nothing more than a fact finding mission before requesting cash from people in the belief that a stake in the club was being purchased. There is no way on this earth that Ashley will sell anything less than 100%, allowing anyone (never mind the people he hates the most) to take a role in the running is a non-starter. (Also I note it had an asterisk next to the bit about buying a stake but I couldnt see any note to accompany it). Why therefore we're looking to start taking £500's in from fans with no possibility of it being used in the immediate future is a major question and should they take it further I'd recommend everyone stay well clear at least until you've seen the accounts in January.

[Phil 6]

While they have no clear goals they will remain pointless.

[Problem Child 0]

I have to disagree, after reading this thread I was expecting a survey which talked about the recent problems and ways the Trust could change for the better.

 

None of the statistically valid questions ie those that you pick from a selection of options allowed anything negative to be said. We can all add comments into the free text fields but these will never be collated into meaningful stats. Its a shame because I had hoped this was the first rung on the ladder. The inclusion of a single question "Are you happy with what we're doing?" Yes or No would have meant a whole lot more.

 

I am also very wary that this is nothing more than a fact finding mission before requesting cash from people in the belief that a stake in the club was being purchased. There is no way on this earth that Ashley will sell anything less than 100%, allowing anyone (never mind the people he hates the most) to take a role in the running is a non-starter. (Also I note it had an asterisk next to the bit about buying a stake but I couldnt see any note to accompany it). Why therefore we're looking to start taking £500's in from fans with no possibility of it being used in the immediate future is a major question and should they take it further I'd recommend everyone stay well clear at least until you've seen the accounts in January.

That’s the way it is questionnaires. I share your concerns about this being a PR exercise not the first step to sorting the current mess out, but you never know.

 

My view has always been that building up some funds over the long term so when the club does change hands the trust had something to bring to the table was the way to go. There is no way supporters could ever raise enough money to force the issue. Better to play the long game and have a chance of getting some kind of board level representation than chase pipe dreams.

 

The problem is nobody trusts the trust. The sceptics have had a field day and the members are disillusioned. They really need to work out a long term strategy and come up with a short term project(s) that demonstrates supporters can make a difference if they get organised.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Cant really see why you all dont just let it die off.

 

Did anyone find how many paying members there are now?

What percentage decrease that is?

 

Bearing in mind a canny percentage will be oot's, you probably looking at a few hundred locals.

 

Is it really worth trying to fight over and re-vive something that is so tarnished.

 

The brand is as fucked as Ratners? and the best thing you should do is bide your time and start a proper club without all this trust shit.

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

The brand is as fucked as Ratners and the best thing you should do is bide your time and start a proper club without all this trust shit.

[ewerk 26118]

While they have no clear goals they will remain pointless.

 

I think their aim is very clear. Not like you to miss the obvious.

[Phil 6]

While they have no clear goals they will remain pointless.

 

I think their aim is very clear. Not like you to miss the obvious.

 

 

Sure their aims are clear;

• yes we can
  
• To strengthen the bonds and dialogue between Newcastle United and its supporters;
  
• To encourage Newcastle United to take proper account of the interests of its supporters and the community it serves in its decisions and to honour the contribution made to the club by the community;
  
• Ultimately, to promote the full, accountable democratic and constructive involvement of supporters in the running and direction of Newcastle United including the principle of supporter representation on the board of Newcastle United.
  

 

But how are they performing on them?

 

Do they have any official communication with the club?

How often do they poll their members opinions?

Are the polls relevant, collated and presented to the club?

Why is nufc.com still the official supporter site and thus gets all the benefits?

 

 

Can't really call them aims if they aren't actually doing them. Their website has lots of articles on it, but none of them have anything to do with their aims.

[ewerk 26118]

Their main aim over the past year or so has been fan ownership, it's also the reason that I didn't renew.

[Matt 0]

This has all the hallmarks of NUISA. That Gilmour fella was being quoted in the press for years after it shut down.

[Ugly Mackems 133]

Who the fuck wants the fans running the Club?

I couldn't imagine a worse scenario than these self serving pricks thinking (as elected by members) that they could ever even dream they are capable of running and financially maintaining a Premiership outfit.

 

Cloud fucking cuckoo land.

Edited December 23, 2010 by Ugly Mackems

[Happy Face 29]

Who the fuck wants the fans running the Club?

I couldn't imagine a worse scenario than these self serving pricks thinking (as elected by members) that they could ever even dream they are capable of running and financially maintaining a Premiership outfit.

 

Cloud fucking cuckoo land.

 

Unfortunately, while saying no to that on the questionaire, I assumed I'd be in the minority.

[MichaelNUFC 0]

This has all the hallmarks of NUISA. That Gilmour fella was being quoted in the press for years after it shut down.

 

Honestly it doesn't, because INUSA (to my knowledge) never had 1500 paying members plus tens of thousands of email subscribers, 11'000 + people following it on various social network sites. It never had the level of infrastructure and local governmental support that the Trust has (including an MP on the board). it was, to be frank (no pun intended) one man and his son trying to do something when nobody else seemed bothered.

 

Unfortunately due to it lacking all of the above INUSA was never in a position to do anything other than be a convenient mouthpiece for the press which, to be fair to Frank Gilmour, is as much down to the inherent laziness of certain journalists as it was to him. Once the press have your number its very difficult to dissuade them that you don't want to be bothered by them anymore. The Trust on the other hand is in a great position to do everything that INUSA couldn't. It just needs to start doing them or at the very least telling people what its doing. It's in no way dead, it just hasn't progressed at face value in any meaningful, explainable way over the past year...and that's the dissapointing thing.

 

I'm not going to criticise or attempt to analyse what project the questions in the survey are ultimately leading towards. I'll look at the finished offering and see what I think. I'm just glad that they appear to be finally listening to concerns and are finally doing something to engage with the membership. In all honesty this is one of the least cynical looking surveys I've seen from an organisation. There are clear opportunities to note the strength of our beliefs on several of the things we've complained about and clear opportunities to show what we think they should and shouldn't be focussing on. It's an improvement in my view but it should only be the beginning of that improvement.

Edited December 23, 2010 by MichaelNUFC

[Phil 6]

This has all the hallmarks of NUISA. That Gilmour fella was being quoted in the press for years after it shut down.

 

Honestly it doesn't, because INUSA (to my knowledge) never had 1500 paying members plus tens of thousands of email subscribers, 11'000 + people following it on various social network sites. It never had the level of infrastructure and local governmental support that the Trust has (including an MP on the board). it was, to be frank (no pun intended) one man and his son trying to do something when nobody else seemed bothered.

 

Unfortunately due to it lacking all of the above INUSA was never in a position to do anything other than be a convenient mouthpiece for the press which, to be fair to Frank Gilmour, is as much down to the inherent laziness of certain journalists as it was to him. Once the press have your number its very difficult to dissuade them that you don't want to be bothered by them anymore. The Trust on the other hand is in a great position to do everything that INUSA couldn't. It just needs to start doing them or at the very least telling people what its doing. It's in no way dead, it just hasn't progressed at face value in any meaningful, explainable way over the past year...and that's the dissapointing thing.

 

I'm not going to criticise or attempt to analyse what project the questions in the survey are ultimately leading towards. I'll look at the finished offering and see what I think. I'm just glad that they appear to be finally listening to concerns and are finally doing something to engage with the membership. In all honesty this is one of the least cynical looking surveys I've seen from an organisation. There are clear opportunities to note the strength of our beliefs on several of the things we've complained about and clear opportunities to show what we think they should and shouldn't be focussing on. It's an improvement in my view but it should only be the beginning of that improvement.

 

Does the club recognise the Trust as being valid? and if not why after a year are they asking for renewals?

[peasepud 59]

Does the club recognise the Trust as being valid? and if not why after a year are they asking for renewals?

Many clubs dont recognise their trusts, its not a reason to stop exisiting. If anything it should be a rallying call to non-members to join up.

[ewerk 26118]

This has all the hallmarks of NUISA. That Gilmour fella was being quoted in the press for years after it shut down.

 

Honestly it doesn't, because INUSA (to my knowledge) never had 1500 paying members plus tens of thousands of email subscribers, 11'000 + people following it on various social network sites. It never had the level of infrastructure and local governmental support that the Trust has (including an MP on the board). it was, to be frank (no pun intended) one man and his son trying to do something when nobody else seemed bothered.

 

Unfortunately due to it lacking all of the above INUSA was never in a position to do anything other than be a convenient mouthpiece for the press which, to be fair to Frank Gilmour, is as much down to the inherent laziness of certain journalists as it was to him. Once the press have your number its very difficult to dissuade them that you don't want to be bothered by them anymore. The Trust on the other hand is in a great position to do everything that INUSA couldn't. It just needs to start doing them or at the very least telling people what its doing. It's in no way dead, it just hasn't progressed at face value in any meaningful, explainable way over the past year...and that's the dissapointing thing.

 

I'm not going to criticise or attempt to analyse what project the questions in the survey are ultimately leading towards. I'll look at the finished offering and see what I think. I'm just glad that they appear to be finally listening to concerns and are finally doing something to engage with the membership. In all honesty this is one of the least cynical looking surveys I've seen from an organisation. There are clear opportunities to note the strength of our beliefs on several of the things we've complained about and clear opportunities to show what we think they should and shouldn't be focussing on. It's an improvement in my view but it should only be the beginning of that improvement.

 

Does the club recognise the Trust as being valid? and if not why after a year are they asking for renewals?

 

What the fuck are you talking about now?

[Phil 6]

This has all the hallmarks of NUISA. That Gilmour fella was being quoted in the press for years after it shut down.

 

Honestly it doesn't, because INUSA (to my knowledge) never had 1500 paying members plus tens of thousands of email subscribers, 11'000 + people following it on various social network sites. It never had the level of infrastructure and local governmental support that the Trust has (including an MP on the board). it was, to be frank (no pun intended) one man and his son trying to do something when nobody else seemed bothered.

 

Unfortunately due to it lacking all of the above INUSA was never in a position to do anything other than be a convenient mouthpiece for the press which, to be fair to Frank Gilmour, is as much down to the inherent laziness of certain journalists as it was to him. Once the press have your number its very difficult to dissuade them that you don't want to be bothered by them anymore. The Trust on the other hand is in a great position to do everything that INUSA couldn't. It just needs to start doing them or at the very least telling people what its doing. It's in no way dead, it just hasn't progressed at face value in any meaningful, explainable way over the past year...and that's the dissapointing thing.

 

I'm not going to criticise or attempt to analyse what project the questions in the survey are ultimately leading towards. I'll look at the finished offering and see what I think. I'm just glad that they appear to be finally listening to concerns and are finally doing something to engage with the membership. In all honesty this is one of the least cynical looking surveys I've seen from an organisation. There are clear opportunities to note the strength of our beliefs on several of the things we've complained about and clear opportunities to show what we think they should and shouldn't be focussing on. It's an improvement in my view but it should only be the beginning of that improvement.

 

Does the club recognise the Trust as being valid? and if not why after a year are they asking for renewals?

 

What the fuck are you talking about now?

 

They have no contact with the club, media or anyone anything to do with Newcastle United.

 

I don't expect you to understand why this is relevant. But just take a look at their latest news letter;

 

http://www.nust.org.uk/fan-mail-the-fsf-ne...h-december-2010

 

Not relevant to Newcastle or Newcastle United. It could be for any club. It's no wonder they have achieved nothing in a year.

[mrkikiet 0]

This has all the hallmarks of NUISA. That Gilmour fella was being quoted in the press for years after it shut down.

 

Honestly it doesn't, because INUSA (to my knowledge) never had 1500 paying members plus tens of thousands of email subscribers, 11'000 + people following it on various social network sites. It never had the level of infrastructure and local governmental support that the Trust has (including an MP on the board). it was, to be frank (no pun intended) one man and his son trying to do something when nobody else seemed bothered.

 

Unfortunately due to it lacking all of the above INUSA was never in a position to do anything other than be a convenient mouthpiece for the press which, to be fair to Frank Gilmour, is as much down to the inherent laziness of certain journalists as it was to him. Once the press have your number its very difficult to dissuade them that you don't want to be bothered by them anymore. The Trust on the other hand is in a great position to do everything that INUSA couldn't. It just needs to start doing them or at the very least telling people what its doing. It's in no way dead, it just hasn't progressed at face value in any meaningful, explainable way over the past year...and that's the dissapointing thing.

 

I'm not going to criticise or attempt to analyse what project the questions in the survey are ultimately leading towards. I'll look at the finished offering and see what I think. I'm just glad that they appear to be finally listening to concerns and are finally doing something to engage with the membership. In all honesty this is one of the least cynical looking surveys I've seen from an organisation. There are clear opportunities to note the strength of our beliefs on several of the things we've complained about and clear opportunities to show what we think they should and shouldn't be focussing on. It's an improvement in my view but it should only be the beginning of that improvement.

 

Does the club recognise the Trust as being valid? and if not why after a year are they asking for renewals?

 

What the fuck are you talking about now?

 

They have no contact with the club, media or anyone anything to do with Newcastle United.

 

I don't expect you to understand why this is relevant. But just take a look at their latest news letter;

 

http://www.nust.org.uk/fan-mail-the-fsf-ne...h-december-2010

 

Not relevant to Newcastle or Newcastle United. It could be for any club. It's no wonder they have achieved nothing in a year.

 

but that is because that is the NUST forwarding on the Football Supporters Federation email: so it should be generic and catch all.