The future of TUST

Isn't the feeling in Hull that it was set up to divide and rule fans? No wonder 'Official' gets an overkill namecheck. An acquaintance of Pete Masters, eh.

I'm surprised that Chris wants anything to do with it, tbh, but if there are more socials for fans or whatever is perceived to have been missing, then so be it.

I'm bewildered by the anti-TUST stance. I've supported them from day one - the ethos and the aims. Where is the militancy Alpine refers to? Have I missed something or is it mis-interpretation? Genuinely interested. Scott.

I think there is a lot of suspicion about community ownership and importantly about the ability to consistently find the necessary funds to finance the club, hence the anti sentiment. I don't think anyone would disagree that this option comes a poor second to a type of Bristow backed takeover that occurred in 2007. However, it does provide an alternative to a Gaming International style of takeover whose motives are development led which may ultimately conflict with the well being of the club. So therefore it does set a bar for the owners to get over when deciding on transfer of ownership.

Hopefully, therefore, TUOSC will complement TUST as opposed to weaken it and the distinction between the two will be made clear. Of course TUST operates on a one share one vote members basis and therefore should reflect the majority view of its members. It does not seem at present that this new organization will be run on similar lines which to be fair it doesn't need to be but hopefully we will not end up with a bunch of "useful idiots" at loggerheads with the critical friends of TUST as at the end of the day all fans want the same thing.

Phew, TFF is just too busy these days .  I logged in planning to respond to midlandstufc or hector, and find I'm already being distracted by newer posts courtesy of 'The Laird' and The Farmer.

Floridagull's suggestion is an interesting one, and also one that already serves the purpose up in Scotland. Of course, all the younger TFF members, not having a clue what a 'yard' might be, may not have stuck with it, but the idea isn't without merit. It immediately brought to mind the Chelsea Pitch Owners, who have such power than they can, and do, thwart Roman Abramovic's plans when they want to

<sub>The Chelsea owner, Roman Abramovich, suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of the club's fans after shareholders in the Chelsea Pitch Owners company rejected a proposal to buy back the land upon which Stamford Bridge is built.

link - Pitch Owners 1 Abramovic 0</sub>





thefarmersfriend  

No matter that to everyone but him Chris Roberts was blatantly a delusional fraudster, the main thing was that Roberts had read some books about being an entrepreneur and was fired up with the thrusting spirit of the free market. That was enough to get Joe's backing to the very end

Dear old Merse still gets it in the neck on a fairly regular basis, for having been one of the later ones to see through Chris Roberts less than honourable motives.
In comparison I'm relatively lucky. I only have one accuser - the farmersfriend, although he can be relied upon to pop up about once every 5 years to trot out the same old line. It always dies a death because I ignore him (yes, i know I should have this time as well), while everyone else scratches their head and rightfully concludes they can't recall me ever saying a word in Roberts defence. FF knows his case falls down badly because there isn't, or ever has been a shred of evidence to back up his claim.

But for all that, I'm glad he's still posting, and look forward to again being accused of being Chris Roberts old pal in about 2021   

No matter that to everyone but him Chris Roberts was blatantly a delusional fraudster, the main thing was that Roberts had read some books about being an entrepreneur and was fired up with the thrusting spirit of the free market. That was enough to get Joe's backing to the very end

Dear old Merse still gets it in the neck on a fairly regular basis, for having been one of the later ones to see through Chris Roberts less than honourable motives.
In comparison I'm relatively lucky. I only have one accuser - the farmersfriend, although he can be relied upon to pop up about once every 5 years to trot out the same old line. It always dies a death because I ignore him (yes, i know I should have this time as well), while everyone else scratches their head and rightfully concludes they can't recall me ever saying a word in Roberts defence. FF knows his case falls down badly because there isn't, or ever has been a shred of evidence to back up his claim.

But for all that, I'm glad he's still posting, and look forward to again being accused of being Chris Roberts old pal in about 2021   


Speaking of Dear Old Merse and that era, once he did see the light I recall that he speculated that your true identity could be that of Joe Giordano, Roberts financial backer. Now why would he think that? Glad that you've finally decided to backtrack, though.

Nice to finally put a face to the name the other week, by the way.

The current board has consistently championed the view that private ownership means a lavishly-funded club which will bounce back into the Football League shortly, whilst community ownership means an inevitable hurtle down to The Western League.

With that message from on high, it is hardly surprising that some fans dislike those who are trying to force such unnecessary poverty on the club.

What I want is for our club to be as well-funded and as well-run as is possible.

I am quite happy to sit back and watch private owners fund the club as long as they do actually fund the club - that is put in money by way of gift or share capital to cover losses.

There are people out there who run clubs on borrowed money and end up losing the club's ground when the debt is called in.

It is surprising that some are happy to be grateful to owners who behave in that way.