Stan A. Einstein wrote:£30 added so far today. Still shy of £30,000 and but for directors, the supporters club and a mystery £5,000, we are well shy of £20,000.

Sligo Rovers a provincial team in a town of 20,000 in the northwest of Ireland, meanwhile used crowd funding for the same purpose. Now despite being far smaller than Newport and despite only running this last six days as opposed to three weeks this club, also run by a supporter trust has raised €71,460.

In stark terms, on a per capita basis the Sligo total is in the region of £500,000.

Or put another way, a trust that has the confidence of the fans, doesn't treat the supporters as idiots, is open and transparent had been sixteen times more successful that our trust.

Is it too much to ask? Is it too late to ask? Please Gavin et all, stop behaving as though your shite smells of roses, and start listening.

It really is pathetic.
Sorry but this board and any Commercial dept are totally clueless and clearly have not get any idea how to motivate our fan base.
Way less than 300 supporters have chipped in so far.
Ivory Towers.

weownourclub wrote:https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/ncafc/backers#start

Sligo Rovers a club owned by a supporters trust v Newport County a club owned by a supporters trust.

Latest score in the crowd funding derby.

County £29,437
Rovers 72,439 Eu.

Would the directors of Newport County care to apologise for this embarrassing fiasco?

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

weownourclub wrote:https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/ncafc/backers#start

Sligo Rovers a club owned by a supporters trust v Newport County a club owned by a supporters trust.

Latest score in the crowd funding derby.

County £29,437
Rovers 72,439 Eu.

Would the directors of Newport County care to apologise for this embarrassing fiasco?

I haven't read the background fully but isn't the Sligo fund a plea for survival not simply to sponsor a shirt?

If so, not at all an apples for apples comparison. Surely you should be analyzing the time the club asked for funds for that purpose if - as seems to be the case - you want an accurate comparison between the two clubs?

Also, a quick look on the Sligo site shows fair few of the donations to be 'anonymous'. You seem top be casting some doubt on the anonymous donations on the County campaign but less so on the Sligo one.

9 grand left to hit the target! Shout out to the smile council, brilliant blokes as well!

I'm more interested in the actual shirt design. Couldn't care less about which charity gets on the shirt, wouldn't be a huge disaster if it was an actual company instead (long as it isn't another betting firm).

IMB wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

weownourclub wrote:https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/ncafc/backers#start

Sligo Rovers a club owned by a supporters trust v Newport County a club owned by a supporters trust.

Latest score in the crowd funding derby.

County £29,437
Rovers 72,439 Eu.

Would the directors of Newport County care to apologise for this embarrassing fiasco?

I haven't read the background fully but isn't the Sligo fund a plea for survival not simply to sponsor a shirt?

If so, not at all an apples for apples comparison. Surely you should be analyzing the time the club asked for funds for that purpose if - as seems to be the case - you want an accurate comparison between the two clubs?

Also, a quick look on the Sligo site shows fair few of the donations to be 'anonymous'. You seem top be casting some doubt on the anonymous donations on the County campaign but less so on the Sligo one.

You’re absolutely right mate. They’re raising money to save their club, when we did it we raised around 250K. But, anyway, don’t let the facts get in the way of Brendans argument

In the last hour £1000 donated from the Subscription draw. I just don't get it - this and many other donations are from sources that would have put the same funds into the club anyway - not new money, which is what shirt sponsorship is supposed to be all about!

County Exile wrote:In the last hour £1000 donated from the Subscription draw. I just don't get it - this and many other donations are from sources that would have put the same funds into the club anyway - not new money, which is what shirt sponsorship is supposed to be all about!

Evening mate
Its just nuts moving money around to make the plea seem successful which it clearly isn't.
How daft to they think us supporters are?

weownourclub wrote:

IMB wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

weownourclub wrote:https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/ncafc/backers#start

Sligo Rovers a club owned by a supporters trust v Newport County a club owned by a supporters trust.

Latest score in the crowd funding derby.

County £29,437
Rovers 72,439 Eu.

Would the directors of Newport County care to apologise for this embarrassing fiasco?

I haven't read the background fully but isn't the Sligo fund a plea for survival not simply to sponsor a shirt?

If so, not at all an apples for apples comparison. Surely you should be analyzing the time the club asked for funds for that purpose if - as seems to be the case - you want an accurate comparison between the two clubs?

Also, a quick look on the Sligo site shows fair few of the donations to be 'anonymous'. You seem top be casting some doubt on the anonymous donations on the County campaign but less so on the Sligo one.

You’re absolutely right mate. They’re raising money to save their club, when we did it we raised around 250K. But, anyway, don’t let the facts get in the way of Brendans argument

Best laugh today is your Username.

I'm part of the smile Council, our donation is in addition to what we will donate this season so is new money, established source but definitely an extra donation of funds.

Sorry but there's no other show in town at the moment, don't want to to contribute fine your choice.

supporter wrote:I'm part of the smile Council, our donation is in addition to what we will donate this season so is new money, established source but definitely an extra donation of funds.

Sorry but there's no other show in town at the moment, don't want to to contribute fine your choice.

No point reasoning with these people mate! Credit to you and all involved.

Frank Nouble 3 wrote:

weownourclub wrote:

IMB wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

weownourclub wrote:https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/ncafc/backers#start

Sligo Rovers a club owned by a supporters trust v Newport County a club owned by a supporters trust.

Latest score in the crowd funding derby.

County £29,437
Rovers 72,439 Eu.

Would the directors of Newport County care to apologise for this embarrassing fiasco?

I haven't read the background fully but isn't the Sligo fund a plea for survival not simply to sponsor a shirt?

If so, not at all an apples for apples comparison. Surely you should be analyzing the time the club asked for funds for that purpose if - as seems to be the case - you want an accurate comparison between the two clubs?

Also, a quick look on the Sligo site shows fair few of the donations to be 'anonymous'. You seem top be casting some doubt on the anonymous donations on the County campaign but less so on the Sligo one.

You’re absolutely right mate. They’re raising money to save their club, when we did it we raised around 250K. But, anyway, don’t let the facts get in the way of Brendans argument

Best laugh today is your Username.

Yep, as a shareholder and member of the supporters trust, weownourclub is a stupid name in hindsight. Apologies Frank Nouble 3.

weownourclub wrote:-

No point reasoning with these people mate! Credit to you and all involved.

By "These people" do you mean supporters who buy season tickets, shares, monthly trust membership, lottery subscriptions and contribute to virtually all other fundraising activities - but have genuine and reasonable questions to ask about this initiative? Or are we just supposed to pay up without questioning anything?

Maybe it is a reasonable scheme and the only possible option but we weren't given any information to make a judgement on that from the outset. We weren't told why it was decided to go down this route or whether or not we had tried traditional sponsorship options and failed to secure any. It wasn't totally clear from the start that separate deals were being considered for the home shirt sponsorship, away kit and 3rd kit. As usual it was the lack of clarity or information supplied to us so-called "owners"

County Exile wrote:weownourclub wrote:-

No point reasoning with these people mate! Credit to you and all involved.

By "These people" do you mean supporters who buy season tickets, shares, monthly trust membership, lottery subscriptions and contribute to virtually all other fundraising activities - but have genuine and reasonable questions to ask about this initiative? Or are we just supposed to pay up without questioning anything?

Maybe it is a reasonable scheme and the only possible option but we weren't given any information to make a judgement on that from the outset. We weren't told why it was decided to go down this route or whether or not we had tried traditional sponsorship options and failed to secure any. It wasn't totally clear from the start that separate deals were being considered for the home shirt sponsorship, away kit and 3rd kit. As usual it was the lack of clarity or information supplied to us so-called "owners"

Nope. And no offense to you at all pal. By these people I’m talking about 1 or 2 (maybe the same people) individuals who constantly spread negative s***.
I’m a positive guy and maybe I shouldn’t be. But sometimes I just can’t hack this negative nonsense.
Anyway UTC

weownourclub wrote:

County Exile wrote:weownourclub wrote:-

No point reasoning with these people mate! Credit to you and all involved.

By "These people" do you mean supporters who buy season tickets, shares, monthly trust membership, lottery subscriptions and contribute to virtually all other fundraising activities - but have genuine and reasonable questions to ask about this initiative? Or are we just supposed to pay up without questioning anything?

Maybe it is a reasonable scheme and the only possible option but we weren't given any information to make a judgement on that from the outset. We weren't told why it was decided to go down this route or whether or not we had tried traditional sponsorship options and failed to secure any. It wasn't totally clear from the start that separate deals were being considered for the home shirt sponsorship, away kit and 3rd kit. As usual it was the lack of clarity or information supplied to us so-called "owners"

Nope. And no offense to you at all pal. By these people I’m talking about 1 or 2 (maybe the same people) individuals who constantly spread negative s***.
I’m a positive guy and maybe I shouldn’t be. But sometimes I just can’t hack this negative nonsense.
Anyway UTC

In fairness you’re a member of The Board though.