I do know that's why I knew it was a non starter at the time. Did our new owners let them have % no because no owners would want them involved.... same for any other buyers they thought they could attract. They could run a fund raiser without an option for their personal objectives btw.
If they asked people for charity straight up it would've been no different. I'm delighted they got the funds for people in need I just knew their objectives were primarily for their own personal objectives with charity a fall back which I personally didn't like. The idea was a non starter anyway.
You don't have to but the club have chosen it as a vehicle for obtaining supporters opinion that, from the clubs point of view, they have nothing to do to achieve that but it'll cost you a quid to voice your opinion. Nust has been around ages and has tens of thousands of members - it's a good way of the club getting a snap shot of the general fan views, again, without having to do it themselves (and therefore no pushback if there is ever an issue), it's a win win in their eyes... The club could easily do it themselves with all members, ST holders etc but that takes resources to do so and they clearly feel it's better if there is an outside body that while affiliated with the club aren't actually the club itself to be "independent".
Can we agree the money raised is fantastic and disagree about their idea surrounding a % in the club ?
It shouldn't cost you a quid to voice you're opinion though should it, i think we pay enough as it is. The club have dropped a bollock listening to NUST. Most of the real fans don't like them.
