pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:38 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

Your analysis is in my opinion correct. But there are two points I would add.

Firstly in my view it is incumbent on the board to be straight, open and transparent with the shareholders, whether or not they are asked.

Secondly I would suggest that if the supporters of Newport County don't have an appetite for getting involved, why has that changed since we all turned up at the Riverside? Is it possible that supporters lost enthusiasm because of the secrecy surrounding our club?

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:47 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:38 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

Your analysis is in my opinion correct. But there are two points I would add.

Firstly in my view it is incumbent on the board to be straight, open and transparent with the shareholders, whether or not they are asked.

Secondly I would suggest that if the supporters of Newport County don't have an appetite for getting involved, why has that changed since we all turned up at the Riverside? Is it possible that supporters lost enthusiasm because of the secrecy surrounding our club?

No, I just don't think that many supporters beyond this site and the Facebook Group ( perhaps 200 opinions in total?) see any issue significant to want to actively change things.

Regardless of this ex-pat interest (I googled US based Newport County fan interested in investing and nothing relevant returned,not even a name!) there must be a significant number of former club bods, volunteers, board/trust/supporters club committee members etc could easily step up and challenge for election to every seat on the Trust Board if they were so inclined, these are the people who sponsor the match ball, kits etc on a regular basis and know/knew the club inside out.

Surely they would have mobilised in numbers by now?

Stan A. Einstein wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:51 pm You may be right. That said if the club were more transparent we would know. As things stand we are both guessing.

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:57 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:47 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:38 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

Your analysis is in my opinion correct. But there are two points I would add.

Firstly in my view it is incumbent on the board to be straight, open and transparent with the shareholders, whether or not they are asked.

Secondly I would suggest that if the supporters of Newport County don't have an appetite for getting involved, why has that changed since we all turned up at the Riverside? Is it possible that supporters lost enthusiasm because of the secrecy surrounding our club?

No, I just don't think that many supporters beyond this site and the Facebook Group ( perhaps 200 opinions in total?) see any issue significant to want to actively change things.

Regardless of this ex-pat interest (I googled US based Newport County fan interested in investing and nothing relevant returned,not even a name!) there must be a significant number of former club bods, volunteers, board/trust/supporters club committee members etc could easily step up and challenge for election to every seat on the Trust Board if they were so inclined, these are the people who sponsor the match ball, kits etc on a regular basis and know/knew the club inside out.

Surely they would have mobilised in numbers by now?

One such person did, Rob Santwris, only to promptly resign with the reason for his sudden departure not forthcoming.

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 2:10 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

I think there are a few of us that are concerned and care about the governance of the club. As you know, about a year ago I was trying to find out how the Supporters Trust and the football club work ‘in reality’. It took a long time to get an answer. I was concerned that Directors of both committees appear to work on both. I wasn’t sure if that was correct. I spoke with Two Directors and I can say that I was given reassurance (which I wanted) that the way the club is run is in accordance with guidelines.

That said, I wouldn’t want to do their job, a thankless task. Good luck to them.

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 2:08 pm

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:57 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:47 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:38 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

Your analysis is in my opinion correct. But there are two points I would add.

Firstly in my view it is incumbent on the board to be straight, open and transparent with the shareholders, whether or not they are asked.

Secondly I would suggest that if the supporters of Newport County don't have an appetite for getting involved, why has that changed since we all turned up at the Riverside? Is it possible that supporters lost enthusiasm because of the secrecy surrounding our club?

No, I just don't think that many supporters beyond this site and the Facebook Group ( perhaps 200 opinions in total?) see any issue significant to want to actively change things.

Regardless of this ex-pat interest (I googled US based Newport County fan interested in investing and nothing relevant returned,not even a name!) there must be a significant number of former club bods, volunteers, board/trust/supporters club committee members etc could easily step up and challenge for election to every seat on the Trust Board if they were so inclined, these are the people who sponsor the match ball, kits etc on a regular basis and know/knew the club inside out.

Surely they would have mobilised in numbers by now?

One such person did, Rob Santwris, only to promptly resign with the reason for his sudden departure not forthcoming.

Yes, I remember that, but why didn't that prompt the many other Rob's who have done massive things for the club over the years to mobilise and gain seats on the Trust Board?

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: January 31st, 2023, 2:18 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 2:08 pm

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:57 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:47 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:38 pm

whoareya wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:29 pm

pembsexile wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:01 pm
Don’t think that’s true mate. The Supporters Trust own 63% (approx) of the club. The rest (I believe) is owned by previous shareholders or others. If you do some research you can get accurate info’ on this.

That possibly includes Messrs Greenhauff and Southall, who, IIRC, were to gift their shares to the Trust once the fundraising was successfully completed?

I posted about this several years ago but no clear answer was forthcoming.

The conundrum here is that, only a dozen or so posters on here raise issues at will, expecting answers back on here.

Even fewer actually make an effort to find out and even fewer persist until they get answers.

However unpalatable, the truth is that not enough supporters care, are interested enough, or even see any problem with how things are currently run.

Equally unpalatable is the fact that, to make things change, you have to be part of the change.

Having Board members re-elected unopposed several times confirms there is no appetite for change.

Your analysis is in my opinion correct. But there are two points I would add.

Firstly in my view it is incumbent on the board to be straight, open and transparent with the shareholders, whether or not they are asked.

Secondly I would suggest that if the supporters of Newport County don't have an appetite for getting involved, why has that changed since we all turned up at the Riverside? Is it possible that supporters lost enthusiasm because of the secrecy surrounding our club?

No, I just don't think that many supporters beyond this site and the Facebook Group ( perhaps 200 opinions in total?) see any issue significant to want to actively change things.

Regardless of this ex-pat interest (I googled US based Newport County fan interested in investing and nothing relevant returned,not even a name!) there must be a significant number of former club bods, volunteers, board/trust/supporters club committee members etc could easily step up and challenge for election to every seat on the Trust Board if they were so inclined, these are the people who sponsor the match ball, kits etc on a regular basis and know/knew the club inside out.

Surely they would have mobilised in numbers by now?

One such person did, Rob Santwris, only to promptly resign with the reason for his sudden departure not forthcoming.

Yes, I remember that, but why didn't that prompt the many other Rob's who have done massive things for the club over the years to mobilise and gain seats on the Trust Board?

It seems to me that Rob Santwris is quite influential amongst the business community, whatever occurred I’m sure will have dampened the enthusiasm of potential candidates such as Matt Southall.
In addition to that, why do suitable business candidates have to go through the election process when it seems that if you are a mate of Gavin’s you can get co opted straight onto the football board, and not even via the Trust route?

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: January 31st, 2023, 2:18 pm

It seems to me that Rob Santwris is quite influential amongst the business community, whatever occurred I’m sure will have dampened the enthusiasm of potential candidates such as Matt Southall.
In addition to that, why do suitable business candidates have to go through the election process when it seems that if you are a mate of Gavin’s you can get co opted straight onto the football board, and not even via the Trust route?

Stan A. Einstein wrote: January 31st, 2023, 1:07 pm I remember the night I bought shares in the Trust. The only person I spoke to was Shaun Johnson. Clearly I was under the impression that he was the only who knew how many shares I bought or the amount of the small monetary contribution was Mr Johnson. Little did I know that Banginternet was eavesdropping our conversation.

Bangitintrnet wrote: January 31st, 2023, 3:12 pm

As you know I was stood behind you in the queue having purchased a beach towel which was of simular expenditure to yours. Yet despite not buying a season ticket or any financial input you still demand things of others on the basis that you own the club and need to know more. You don't bother coming to any AGM to ask, you don't read the information supplied by the Trust but they need to follow your every command.
It's like the character on the fast show that spends everyone else's money for them. "You don't want to do it like that, do you"