Colin Everett has stated that soon there will be a consultation exercise on the future of the Trust. In advance of this, some people have talked about and posted that they see no reason for the Trust to continue. That's far from my own view as I have expressed many times. However, although people have expressed a view on getting rid of the Trust maybe they don't see the complications and implications of seeking to do that. This post is about that as a 'contribution to the debate' that's going on in some quarters, already.

What we think of as 'the Trust' consists of four main parts. They are:

A. The SETTLORS - those that pay money into it. That is the Trust members, via their subscriptions.

B. the BENEFICIARY is the body, who benefits from the Trust. This is the Community Benefit Society (CBS) called the Newport County AFC Supporters Society Ltd (the Society).That is because that's who receives the Settlors' money for subsequent distribution to the the AFC, in this case .

C. the TRUSTEES, who look after the money and deal with it in accordance with the Settlors' wishes. These are the BOD of the Society.

D. the 'TRUST DEED' This is this is the Model Rules of the Society.

So, If I wanted to kill off the Trust in its present format, I would look at 'A' and 'B'.

Doing something with 'A' means persuading virtually all those currently paying 'Trust subscriptions' to stop doing so. If you were 100% successful, then you would have no Settlors – so no Trust. But this does mean 100% or a good way towards that so that the funds paid in were virtually an irrelevance so it was not worth the Trust continuing to exist, even though it technically could.

Looking at 'B' means the dissolution of the Society. That could either be a decision of at least three quarters of the membership or by operation of law. The first of these needs no further explanation. The second is more interesting – to me, at least. I am of the definite opinion that, in order to legally exist, a Society by law has to have an 'industry, trade or business' (ITB). The Society does not run any of these things. However, it might have met this requirement by having a majority shareholding in the AFC. But, once it loses this majority holding, it's not running any ITB and must cease to exist as a CBS. So, unless, it can quickly find an alternative ITB, by operation of law it ceases to exist. Therefore, no Trust because no Beneficiary.

For the record, I am in favour of retaining the Trust but in a way that substantially resets it and reinvigorates it.

For the trust to be healthy, in the first instance it has to fulfil a need, and supporters will willingly join. It is not the same thing to try and invent a reason for it to exist.

IMO the need was a financial and manpower need in order to run Newport County. Both are now less important, so is the need now a link between the supporters, the club and the general community?

If money is less critical, then the link with the community becomes more important. For those of us that no longer live in the community, the solution might be to mentor an individual if we have the skills, or for the trust to employ a mentor. Put simply the age group coaches are providing the link to the community for us Exiles, and at the same time putting pride in the shirt, and thus gaining younger fans. That needs to spread, to groups who are not represented at present, maybe priority for minorities by employing coaches who can bring junior players with them. Monthly subscriptions paying for future fans if you like, but it has to be directed by HJ for it to have a defined need IMO.

Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Amberexile wrote: November 1st, 2023, 11:58 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Then why do you believe that the trust should continue to exist if it is seen to be unable to step up to the plate in future?

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:16 pm

Amberexile wrote: November 1st, 2023, 11:58 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Then why do you believe that the trust should continue to exist if it is seen to be unable to step up to the plate in future?

On the basis that there is a very large 'silent majority' associated with the Trust, who virtually never involve themselves in how the Trust works or is run, I think a BOD could do almost anything they like with the Trust providing that it was seen to be supporting the AFC and a reasonable amount of transparency was shown.

Chris Davis wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:23 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:16 pm

Amberexile wrote: November 1st, 2023, 11:58 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Then why do you believe that the trust should continue to exist if it is seen to be unable to step up to the plate in future?

On the basis that there is a very large 'silent majority' associated with the Trust, who virtually never involve themselves in how the Trust works or is run, I think a BOD could do almost anything they like with the Trust providing that it was seen to be supporting the AFC and a reasonable amount of transparency was shown.

Agree with you on that assessment, but am confused about your assertion that in order to exist a Trust has to have an ITB. What ITB did our Trust have before it became the majority shareholder? Are you saying every other EFL supporters trust, that has a minority shareholding, have an ITB, or am I misunderstanding?

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 1st, 2023, 2:34 pm

Chris Davis wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:23 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:16 pm

Amberexile wrote: November 1st, 2023, 11:58 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Then why do you believe that the trust should continue to exist if it is seen to be unable to step up to the plate in future?

On the basis that there is a very large 'silent majority' associated with the Trust, who virtually never involve themselves in how the Trust works or is run, I think a BOD could do almost anything they like with the Trust providing that it was seen to be supporting the AFC and a reasonable amount of transparency was shown.

Agree with you on that assessment, but am confused about your assertion that in order to exist a Trust has to have an ITB. What ITB did our Trust have before it became the majority shareholder? Are you saying every other EFL supporters trust, that has a minority shareholding, have an ITB, or am I misunderstanding?

What I am saying is that, in my opinion, every CBS has to have an ITB. So, I am not saying that every Trust has to have an ITB. What I am saying that every Trust, including ours, that establishes itself as a CBS has to have an ITB.

Under the Co-operative and Communities Benefit Societies Act 2014, each Society has to be capable of registration. Here is the extract from that Act :

"2 Societies that may be registered
(1) A society for carrying on any industry, business or trade (including dealings of any kind with land) which meets the conditions in subsection (2) may be registered under this Act as—
(a) a co-operative society, or
(b) a community benefit society.

(2)The conditions are—
(a) that it is shown to the satisfaction of the FCA—
(i)in the case of registration as a co-operative society, that the society is a bona fide co-operative society, or
(ii)in the case of registration as a community benefit society, that the business of the society is being, or is intended to be, conducted for the benefit of the community,.."
The Registration body for the purposes of the Act is the Financial Conduct Authority. In it's document "Guidance on the FCA’s registration
function under the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Act 2014", it defines a CBS as "5.2 A community benefit society must be carrying on an ‘industry, business or trade’. That business industry or trade must be ‘being, or intended to be, conducted for the benefit of the community’. This is the condition for registration.".

I don't believe that out Trust had any ITB before it became a majority shareholder. I'm not too sureof the history but maybe it became a CBS when it acquired the majority shareholding.

I don't know the situation with every other EFL supporters trust, that has a minority shareholding. Firstly, I do not know if every other Trust is established as a CBS.They could be established as valid Trusts but not CBSs. Some may have majority sharehldings. The only one that I did look at, because that's the only one that I could immediately find information on, was Wycombe Wanderers. However, they owned the ground and that could be regarded as their business.

Thanks for that explanation Chris, you have obviously done a great deal of research into the matter, and it is clearly something you care deeply about.
I believe I have a greater understanding now.

Chris Davis wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:23 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:16 pm

Amberexile wrote: November 1st, 2023, 11:58 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Then why do you believe that the trust should continue to exist if it is seen to be unable to step up to the plate in future?

On the basis that there is a very large 'silent majority' associated with the Trust, who virtually never involve themselves in how the Trust works or is run, I think a BOD could do almost anything they like with the Trust providing that it was seen to be supporting the AFC and a reasonable amount of transparency was shown.

IMO that is different to serving a need. Hopefully HJ can clarify the need, as he has agreed with you that it is not financial in relation to the business of the actual club. If it is more community based then that would fit with the BTI that you believe is now required.

I also hope that the trust are able to pursade trust members that they haven't been unsuccessful in running the club, and could step up to the plate at some future date if required to do so. As mentioned before, IMO if HJ wants the trust to remain an almost equal partner, he must want them to be involved in choosing his successor.

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 1st, 2023, 3:48 pm Thanks for that explanation Chris, you have obviously done a great deal of research into the matter, and it is clearly something you care deeply about.
I believe I have a greater understanding now.

Thank you for your comments, which I appreciate. I do care but my real concern is that if the CBS ceases to exist by operation of law at the moment of transfer, which 'legal person' is the owner of the remaining shares in the AFC. It cannot be Newport County Supporters Trust because that CBS no longer would exist.

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 3:53 pm

Chris Davis wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:23 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:16 pm

Amberexile wrote: November 1st, 2023, 11:58 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Then why do you believe that the trust should continue to exist if it is seen to be unable to step up to the plate in future?

On the basis that there is a very large 'silent majority' associated with the Trust, who virtually never involve themselves in how the Trust works or is run, I think a BOD could do almost anything they like with the Trust providing that it was seen to be supporting the AFC and a reasonable amount of transparency was shown.

IMO that is different to serving a need. Hopefully HJ can clarify the need, as he has agreed with you that it is not financial in relation to the business of the actual club. If it is more community based then that would fit with the BTI that you believe is now required.

I also hope that the trust are able to pursade trust members that they haven't been unsuccessful in running the club, and could step up to the plate at some future date if required to do so. As mentioned before, IMO if HJ wants the trust to remain an almost equal partner, he must want them to be involved in choosing his successor.

In some form the Trust, if it wants to continue as a CBS must find some ITB, Maybe, for example, it could, with the agreement of the existing retailer take over the sportswear/merchandising retail operation. But whatever, in my opinion, it would have to find some business format. I think that it would be a big ask to convince Trust members that the performance of the Trust in managing of the AFC in recent years merits a second chance. I think that you would have to show a distinction between a Trust as a appropriate model and those who have been charged in recent years with operating it.

Chris Davis wrote: November 1st, 2023, 5:12 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 3:53 pm

Chris Davis wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:23 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:16 pm

Amberexile wrote: November 1st, 2023, 11:58 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Then why do you believe that the trust should continue to exist if it is seen to be unable to step up to the plate in future?

On the basis that there is a very large 'silent majority' associated with the Trust, who virtually never involve themselves in how the Trust works or is run, I think a BOD could do almost anything they like with the Trust providing that it was seen to be supporting the AFC and a reasonable amount of transparency was shown.

IMO that is different to serving a need. Hopefully HJ can clarify the need, as he has agreed with you that it is not financial in relation to the business of the actual club. If it is more community based then that would fit with the BTI that you believe is now required.

I also hope that the trust are able to pursade trust members that they haven't been unsuccessful in running the club, and could step up to the plate at some future date if required to do so. As mentioned before, IMO if HJ wants the trust to remain an almost equal partner, he must want them to be involved in choosing his successor.

In some form the Trust, if it wants to continue as a CBS must find some ITB, Maybe, for example, it could, with the agreement of the existing retailer take over the sportswear/merchandising retail operation. But whatever, in my opinion, it would have to find some business format. I think that it would be a big ask to convince Trust members that the performance of the Trust in managing of the AFC in recent years merits a second chance. I think that you would have to show a distinction between a Trust as a appropriate model and those who have been charged in recent years with operating it.

Obviously it's not going to be the same people, as we can assume HJ will be running things for some time.

What I am getting at is the need expressed by HJ for the trusts shareholding in NCAFC to not only be maintained, but to be increased by individual shareholders passing some of their holding to the Trust. There has to be a point in doing that, and if people don't want the trust anywhere near running the club in future, then we are back to people just finding a reason for the trust to exist again.

Personnally if that need isn't defined by HJ, then I am out, and going by the fact only two people are commenting about a future for the trust, a large number may have already left or are considering leaving...........

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 1st, 2023, 12:16 pm

Amberexile wrote: November 1st, 2023, 11:58 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 31st, 2023, 8:42 pm

Amberexile wrote: October 31st, 2023, 5:52 pm Some for of Trust will continue into the future as I see little on the way of a desire to close the Trust altogether. In my view, when considering the future role of the Trust it is important to look at the owner after next. Even if you believe that HJ is acting mainly in the better interests of the football club, he will not be the last owner and we have no idea who the next one will be and how they will behave. Whatever role the Trust takes on in the future, they will find themselves as powerless as the Sheffield Wednesday Trust is currently with regards to Chansiri's latest outburst and the potential damage to the club.

That's interesting, but what good is power, if the masses don't actually believe it will deliver anything good?

Once in power, why give a damn about the masses until you need them again? They are just a means to the end of attaining the power and funding you while there.

Then why do you believe that the trust should continue to exist if it is seen to be unable to step up to the plate in future?

Because I don't believe that a Trust will be unable to step up to the plate in the future. Especially as we have little idea of what that plate may be.