Mankover Planning application submitted

Brent be like [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Dingle wrote:

What makes Mr Ian White from Swindon think that people are opposing the plans are not true Argyle fans and have a personal vendetta against the owner of the club.  IF the plans for HHP were going to benefit the football club in any shape or form then I would give them wholehearted support.  My concern is that they will have a very negative effect on the club, not just in the short term either.

Swindon!!!!! his opinion certainly cant count.

alannotivvy wrote:

Dingle wrote:

What makes Mr Ian White from Swindon think that people are opposing the plans are not true Argyle fans and have a personal vendetta against the owner of the club.  IF the plans for HHP were going to benefit the football club in any shape or form then I would give them wholehearted support.  My concern is that they will have a very negative effect on the club, not just in the short term either.

Swindon!!!!!   his opinion certainly cant count.

Why you think I didn't object living in dorset and all.

It makes no difference where you live you can object or support even if you live in John O Groats.

Jethro wrote:

alannotivvy wrote:

Dingle wrote:

What makes Mr Ian White from Swindon think that people are opposing the plans are not true Argyle fans and have a personal vendetta against the owner of the club.  IF the plans for HHP were going to benefit the football club in any shape or form then I would give them wholehearted support.  My concern is that they will have a very negative effect on the club, not just in the short term either.

Swindon!!!!!   his opinion certainly cant count.

Why you think I didn't object living in dorset and all.

Get your objection in

All people who care about Argyle and/or the city and its environment should write in. I don't need to live in Brazil to campaign against the destruction of the rainforests.

It's a shame that the club didn't set up some sort of fans group where all of these issues could have been discussed beforehand.

they did, but for real, proper fans, and you weren't invited :-)

PatDunne wrote:

they did, but for real, proper fans, and you weren't invited :-)

I am a bit of a twat

I think it was they knew you might not get behind their 'vision'

Frank Bullitt wrote:

PatDunne wrote:

they did, but for real, proper fans, and you weren't invited :-)

I am a bit of a twat

I to am a twat.
I didn't get selected for the GAGWG or whatever it was called

yes, sorry, in your case it was twatishness - rock n roll dude.

Twattery is the new fuckwittery.

The group was called GAG and it was no Freudian slip.

Earwegoagain wrote:

The group was called GAG and it was no Freudian slip.

Is that what Nool does on a part of Brents anatomy,

Couldn't help myself with the cheap shot.

Instead of asset stripping the club, Brent would have made far more money if he had got the team into the EPL.

Just like all of our historical contemporaries have managed to do.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Instead of asset stripping the club, Brent would have made far more money if he had got the team into the EPL.

Just like all of our historical contemporaries have managed to do.

Even establish us in the championship would have got him back double his invstment. obviously he have too sell up to people who know what they are doing and actually have real money so mistakes of the past arent repeated

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Instead of asset stripping the club, Brent would have made far more money if he had got the team into the EPL.

Just like all of our historical contemporaries have managed to do.

Good point. If PAFC can return a few hundred grand profit to brent in L2, imagine what it could do in a relatively successful season in the championship. Or even L1.

It says alot about the man that he would rather stitch the club up and risk the planning application failing to wring every single last dollar and dime out of the opportunity.

Swansea were sold for £100M and Forest for £50M. Even Argyle in the Championship must be £20M.

Nool simply still not getting it is he reference the ACV......somebody tell the thick twat that it doesn't matter if ONLY 1 person or a 1000 people want it upheld it cannot alter the fact that its already in place.

Brent if he wants to ride roughshod over it will need to involve litigation to do so. Because of his continued attitude of screw everyone he can expect the same response from those who wish to see the fella stopped in his tracks

He didn't get it last time when the FoCP objected to Brent's original crap shack. His disgusting attacks on them resulted in him getting kicked out of a public meeting at the Cherry Tree and Brent having to apologise for his behaviour. IIRC he was even on Twitter mocking the looks of the FoCP barrister at the council meeting.

Got it wrong again shorely not? He says that the Trust will get embroiled in litigation, not true the planners have to regard the ACV as part of the process, the trust wont even need to be at the planning meeting let alone hire a legal team.
Yet again it is being twisted that of you oppose the plans, any of the plans you are anti Brent, how many on here would object to a wide plaza behind the grandstand with a supporters bar owned by the club and say another 3 or 4 food units alongside running across where the offices are now? I wouldn't.

The other bit that really sticks in my craw is why shouldn't Brent asset strip the car park for his own gain? What if every owner we had asset stripped another bit of land? Like the corners of the ground are they next? Without any clear indication of DETAILS maybe they already are?

He tried to asset strip the corners of the stadium so he could build a school and a dentist for his own personal profit. Now he is building an office block on the car park.

How long before he just demolishes the stadium and turns it into houses? Unlikely maybe, but not that far fetched considering what he has come up with so far.

Earwegoagain wrote:

how many on here would object to a wide plaza behind the grandstand with a supporters bar owned by the club and say another 3 or 4 food units alongside running across where the offices are now? I wouldn't.

I would, if the bar wasn't a members bar, only open to guests on matchdays. I would also have a problem with so many "food units". There just isn't a call for them on non match days and will create litter issues as these sort of places always do. It's the thin end of a large wedge ending in a business/retail park further down the line, and will certainly encourage the sale of the stadium corners.

Since when did a sport, health and leisure script, that the park is there for, run to a town centre use burgers and chips every 20 yards ? What's the point of having a strategic plan for a park, if a coach and horses is driven through it at the first smell of a national fast food outlet. There will be a new small cafe in the park as it is with the new funding, alongside the outlets in the life centre, whatever the ice arena offers, and an improved cafe at the golf course.
And why should these units take much of the business from the club on match days, leaving out the issue of the expensive mank the club dish up. Their food won't be any better or less expensive.