Natasha Brent

Admittedly I tend to steer clear of Ad-ridden sites like the Herald and Pasoti, but has there been any meat on the bones as to exactly why she's been added to the Board?

It was stated that the move was specifically at the request of James Brent. But why? For what reason? She obviously doesn't bring anything by way of experience or Dollar. Initial thoughts were that she may be there to oversee the 'family interest' if Brent made all our days and sailed off into the sunset. That hope seems to be wavering though.

Has there been any other development concerning her reasons for being in situ?

Czarcasm wrote:

Admittedly I tend to steer clear of Ad-ridden sites like the Herald and Pasoti, but has there been any meat on the bones as to exactly why she's been added to the Board?

It was stated that the move was specifically at the request of James Brent. But why? For what reason? She obviously doesn't bring anything by way of experience or Dollar. Initial thoughts were that she may be there to oversee the 'family interest' if Brent made all our days and sailed off into the sunset. That hope seems to be wavering though.

Has there been any other development concerning her reasons for being in situ?

i think its been mention by a few already why she is there n another thread,imo its to be daddies extra vote in the board room. Shes virtually nothing to offer the club certainly not when it comes to buisness, money and football matters. Less said about that clusterfuck the better which i believe as someone mentioned on here she is co project manager on..

unless we start doing horse jumping events then she is best placed to be of some use other than that there is no reason at all why she should be there as we have 8 directors who do nothing as it is.

It may be to do with gifting and inheritance stuff, it maybe work experience as a company director, as she won't have burger flipping as her fate. Or maybe she's the "ladies" team new centre forward.

Is there another club in the football league with soooo many females on the board, and all the pick of Brent ? It all does seem a little contrived and there must be a reason. Maybe something to do with this women's international Brent and Hallett are fixated with for 2020, and Hallett's "most popular team in the USA" routine.

I'm going to change into a twenty nine year old female next week, I'll get my name down quick.

I assumed she was appointed to get some impressive early content on her CV.

Obviously that and another vote for Brent in the boardroom.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Obviously that and another vote for Brent in the boardroom.

All thee more reason why its vital he sells his 30% asap so we can get him the feck out.

Probably transfer his 30% to her ...then step down ?

zyph wrote:

Probably transfer his 30% to her ...then step down ?

Well yeah maybe. It’s just odd there’s been no attempt by the club to publicly justify the Directors seat spot. You’d have thought there’d have been an official party line story that would be trotted out. Every other non-entity we have sat around the table have at least started off with an article or two about them and what they potentially bring to the table.

But with Tash there doesn’t appear to have been any attempt whatsoever to justify it.

zyph wrote:

Probably transfer his 30% to her ...then step down ?

Something on those lines would be my guess Zippo. This whole charade has been about pension pots and the like. And I'm sorry to keep saying it, but Hallett smells of the same thing. His original story that he later retracted was he didn't expect his money back. There was a reason he said that, and it wasn't a football reason. Look up the rules on inheritance in this country and how the wealthy pass it on avoiding taxes. No idea what the US rules are and under what national system he is, but, as he himself has said, this is first and foremost about keeping his money safe for his family, and, it would appear, it's advantageous to put these millions into this country. Clearly, his day job would indicate he knows exactly what he's doing.

beesrus wrote:

Is there another club in the football league with soooo many females on the board, and all the pick of Brent ? It all does seem a little contrived and there must be a reason. Maybe something to do with this women's international  Brent and Hallett are fixated with for 2020, and Hallett's "most popular team in the USA" routine.

Forget their sex, I'd be surprised if there's that many other EFL clubs with as many individuals on the board.

Greenlander wrote:

beesrus wrote:

Is there another club in the football league with soooo many females on the board, and all the pick of Brent ? It all does seem a little contrived and there must be a reason. Maybe something to do with this women's international  Brent and Hallett are fixated with for 2020, and Hallett's "most popular team in the USA" routine.

Forget their sex, I'd be surprised if there's that many other EFL clubs with as many individuals on the board.

Yeah, they'll all need the Black Pasty for their next away day. No wonder they're so desperate to create so many dinning covers in the refurb grandstand .. so many, that there's no room for the players !! What's that all about !!??

Czarcasm wrote:

zyph wrote:

Probably transfer his 30% to her ...then step down ?

Well yeah maybe. It’s just odd there’s been no attempt by the club to publicly justify the Directors seat spot. You’d have thought there’d have been an official party line story that would be trotted out. Every other non-entity we have sat around the table have at least started off with an article or two about them and what they potentially bring to the table.

But with Tash there doesn’t appear to have been any attempt whatsoever  to justify it.

We'll know why after Colin Murray uses it for one of the closers on Saturday morning's Fighting Talk.

As I posted elsewhere, I expect there's a bit of tax avoidance (legal) about this appointment.

I've also been wondering what Hallett's motivation is?

In the old days, local businessmen (P Daniel, P Bloom Stapes etc,) had a genuine interest in the Club as they were already ST holders before stepping up. The non locals-Kagami, Sir Roy Gardner- were just in it for the money (Kagami never even saw the team play) I think we all agree that JB was just the same, although like Dan MacAuley, he was wanted to make himself more "popular" in the area for business reasons.

But what is Hallett after? Pure philanthropy, tax benefits of overseas write-offs/investments, love of soccer?

If he wants the team to be successful, he MUST know that he'll need to put his hand in his pocket, so why doesn't he say so? If it's a love of soccer, why hasn't he ever been involved in a US franchise?

I can only think that he's another Kagami/Gardner & intends to see through the mankover and then sell on at a profit, which is what JB would have done had he not run out of dosh.

I see Oxford have just appointed an ex Inter Milan director to their board, at least you can see why he's involved and what he'll bring to the Club.

The old family retainer reckons Miss Tash, has been argo mad since pater saved us, what could go wrong ?

The difference between Hallett and the others you name is that he a) Plymothian and b) a lifelong supporter.

You can't say either of those things for Brent, Kagami or SRG.

I've never known a Plymouth college kid yet who was a footy fan. They never even played the game. Too many after school appointments with the scrum machine.

I wonder if we have any of their alumni on here?

In fact I am sure we do but I'm not going to out anybody.

There used to be a few on Pasoti so they certainly do exist.

She'll challenge everything - didn't you hear? LOL

BRENTS OUT NOW

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I wonder if we have any of their alumni on here?

In fact I am sure we do but I'm not going to out anybody.

There used to be a few on Pasoti so they certainly do exist.

Well I went to Plymouth College and there were/are a few of us that supported Argyle. In my time, there were around 90 in a school year - 20 of us who were oiks but clever who were awarded scholarships from the council to go there (and we were the most likely to follow Argyle) - plus 70 mostly thick toffs. I suspect Simon Hallett was a scholarship boy too although 2 or 3 years above me.

beesrus wrote:

zyph wrote:

Probably transfer his 30% to her ...then step down ?

Something on those lines would be my guess Zippo. This whole charade has been about pension pots and the like. And I'm sorry to keep saying it, but Hallett smells of the same thing. His original story that he later retracted was he didn't expect his money back. There was a reason he said that, and it wasn't a football reason. Look up the rules on inheritance in this country and how the wealthy pass it on avoiding taxes. No idea what the US rules are and under what national system he is, but, as he himself has said, this is first and foremost about keeping his money safe for his family, and, it would appear, it's advantageous to put these millions into this country. Clearly, his day job would indicate he knows exactly what he's doing.

LOL. "Sorry to keep saying it". What a lie. You love slagging him off. You revel in it. Nothing makes you happier.

Anyway... If you did know what the US rules for inheritance taxes were, you'd realise how stupid and illogical your argument is. Nobody in their right mind in Halletts position would be putting their money into a third tier English football club to keep their money safe for their children. As has been proven to you before, SH could get a better rate from a US treasury bond (which have never defaulted) than he has gotten from PAFC, not only that, but the tax position would be so much better (SH and his wife can give close to 11 million dollars without the kids paying a penny). Try doing that in the UK

Finally. The reason he said he doesn't expect to get his money back is that statistically he expects to be dead as he would be over ninety when the final payment is made. Can you say whoosh...

will the loan repayments cease when he dies?

PatDunne wrote:

will the loan repayments cease when he dies?

Probably going to his children if the club is still solvent - who will pay a lot more tax on them than they ever would an investment in the USA.

If it's such a good safe deal as Beezy claims... Why isn't everyone coming out of the woodwork trying to lend their money to PAFC?

Freathy wrote:

BRENTS OUT NOW

Durnovaria wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I wonder if we have any of their alumni on here?

In fact I am sure we do but I'm not going to out anybody.

There used to be a few on Pasoti so they certainly do exist.

Well I went to Plymouth College and there were/are a few of us that supported Argyle. In my time, there were around 90 in a school year - 20 of us who were oiks but clever who were awarded scholarships from the council to go there (and we were the most likely to follow Argyle) - plus 70 mostly thick toffs. I suspect Simon Hallett was a scholarship boy too although 2 or 3 years above me.

Went to Widey Tech, does that count ?