James Brent on Spotlight Tonight

Greenman wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Greenman wrote:

There's the rub. The people who are frothing at the mouth and demanding answers to outrageous questions, like many on this website, will never be given the time of day. Ganging up never works.
However, those that seek answers in the right manner will be rewarded.

You seem certain they WILL be rewarded?

I do think that the best way is to go through the correct channels to get answers, and if those questions are evaded again then it might be time to get worried or ask more forcibly. For instance, if the full details of the 20% offer to the Trust are still not forthcoming on Saturday, when I'm sure that Wozzer will have already asked for them, then it would look like a piece of headline grabbing without any real substance.

Yes, in my opinion those that ask correctly and in the right manner will receive an answer.
I find it laughable that several users of this website who demand so much from the club are the ones who don't go to the games.

I mean, is that guy Tring actually ok?

Now that's entirely different from your original statement. And I'm sure Tring will say that in his opinion he enquired in the right manner about the previous regime and was constantly told to trust in Stapes, by the very people who are now telling us to trust in Brent. That's the baffling thing for a lot of people, the sudden u-turn by the very people who are credited with being the moaning pains in the asses who wouldn't just accept what was being trotted out by the board.

It's all about opinions though, until Brent shows his hand fully, but you have to see why people have reservations after the disasters of the past, and I'm glad that people were a pain in the ass back then, and glad that not everyone trusts in Brent yet, just because certain people have looked him in the eye.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

It's almost like the words "Trust in......" are somehow dirty and taboo. I haven't seen Brent do one thing yet that is not as he has said it would be. Just because one set of Board members shafted the club, that is the club not the supporters, then this means automatically anyone else that follows is untrustworthy and should be ridiculed? People continually talk of PAFC being a business. Well it is just like loads of other businesses that don't inform it's customers of everything they pay out for or what a tin of beans cost from the factory before they add on their profit etc. If PAFC is a business then we are only customers and actually are entitled to no more information than we would expect from any other. You may not like that and you may expect or want more but reality is there is no entitlement to it. The simple fact is that you can chose to either be a customer or not with the information you have. Numerous posters on here seem not to be a customer yet express a view about what they should be entitled to nonetheless. What actual right do you think you have to know all of Brent's financial dealings within PAFC. I would love to have some of the information people are asking for and can understand why the question is asked in the first place but I do not demand to know as a right as I don't have one.
.......

To play my stuck record again..... football IS NOT a business like any other. We may be customers but we are also fans. There is a BIG difference. If my shop of choice carried on serving up fourth rate stuff, I would go and shop elsewhere. If a performer I liked began to make consistently crap albums I'd stop listening. Football isn't quite like that - those of us sad people who still support our club at he bottom of the league are there because a local football club means more than being a customer. I always 'followed' Argyle whether that meant short-wave radio in Africa or getting to away matches when I lived in the Midlands - that also goes, for example, to anyone living in the States or Cyprus. As much as I like lots of what Mr Brent has done, I am not yet sure that he actually "gets" what that is about - I may be wrong.

The one thing for sure is that it is all about opinions at the moment because there is a lack of numerous answers to make things fact. I hold my hand up in being one who originally thought Stapleton was a true fan of the club as well as an owner and did not believe he would do anything that would harm PAFC. I was wrong and he did. I fully understand the mistrust of the new encumbant in the chair. It would not be natural given what happened if people were not sceptical. It is not unnatural for people to want answers to some questions or to see a difference being made to the playing part of the club. My acceptance is that Brent is the new owner. That is an absolute fact whether people like it or not or trust him or not. I cannot do anything to change that and I still want to go to matches so I pay my money and go. This is the choice I have made and until I see anything harmful to the club then I will continue to do that and wait to see what happens in the future. I am not an Aviva or any other title people want to make up. I am not a fool and nor am I being sucked in by "The Management". I make the choice freely and although I would love to be privvy to the inside gen of all things Argyle I am also a realist and know me getting it is unlikely no matter how loudly people shout.

I also agree that football is different than other businesses but this is mainly only in the eyes of the supporter. However, no matter how you dress it up by definition we are still only customers with the exception that we choose to put up with much more than a normal customer would do. The right to information is not part of the customer transaction in the way that people would like it to be. As a customer you need to know when matches are being played and kick off times and rules within the ground etc. Who gets paid what and when or how much something cost or didn't and how that money was obtained for the purchase or who provided it? Nope, none of that is a right anymore than in any other business.

Football is without doubt different to any other business and to say that the customers have no right to question would be extremely foolish and arrogant to say the least, in Argyle's case even more so considering that public money is involved regarding the purchase and ownership of Home Park.

As a fan I believe I have every right to expect answers, as a Council Tax payer and part owner of Home Park, I demand answers.

Then ask the owners of Home Park GOB which is not Brent. But, you still don't seem to get that it is fact that you are not ENTITLED to information regarding the running of a business irrespective of what that business is. You confuse the two. PAFC is a business in itself and the ground is owned by the Local Authority who is accountable. Your rights do not extend to both no matter how much you would like them to.

It would be nice if Mr Brent told everyone everything about the purchase and negotiations and what he intends. We would all like to have that information including me. But we are not going to get it unless he himself wants to share. Keep asking by all means but don't be surprised if the answer remains untold.

With due respect SG, I will ask who I want, when I want and where I want, and I will comment when I want as well.

Like it or lump it, there are questions being asked. If Brent does not wish to answer those questions then that is up to him, but if he takes that route then expect even more questions and an even greater deal of suspicion.

Please try to understand that in this country we are allowed to ask questions, there is no law against it. And please, no typing in caps, it frightens me.

Christ why is everyone so touchy about this right to ask questions? I have repeatedly said you are entitled and that means have a right to ask away. How many more times do I have to say that without people seemingly thinking I'm trying to stiffle them. The issue is not your right to ask. It is Brent's right not to reply. People seem to think that Brent must answer the questions because this is a football club and they are supporters. Well sorry but he doesn't have to if he doesn't want to just like any other business doesn't have to answer. If he wants to attract their custom then it might be ADVISABLE to give out some answers but it is up to him in the end. It is a business call but the one thing people will not get an answer on, in my opinion, is what money changed hands from him to acquire the club. Incidentally the information regarding the purchase of the ground is already known. Cost £1.7m. Rent being charged (forget the figure but it is out there). What happens if club gets promoted regarding rent etc etc etc. The public domain part is not a secret.

Apologise for the one set of capitals. Please do not have nightmares.

Is it really about "rights" or is it about common sense?

Would it be good for Brent to reply to questions, would it improve the business, in this case PAFC? - Brent himself has already stated that he wishes to have an open book policy so I would assume that he recognises that it would be good for business and I would strongly agree especially considering that he has invited the Trust into the negotiations.

SG, Brent has encouraged us to ask questions and from that logic would dictate that he wants to answer questions,

The questions are also important not only for Brent to gain a sense of the fans feeling, but to assist the Trust leaders to gain an understand of the fans requirements. It's a very healthy thing that nearly everyone recognises.

I'm really not sure why you feel the need to be so defensive about it.

I'm not defensive about it GOB. People should ask questions and I have no problem with that whatsoever. What is my issue is this "right" to information that people think they have. Simply they do not. I have said repeatedly that I would "like" to know some of the answers as well but I do not consider it is my "right" to get it when I know that is not true. I hope Brent will be open and transparent with the supporters. Absolutely his business might depend on it in the end. People may well go back to being a customer if they get at least some of the answers if not all. That would be good for him and good for the club. He won't tell you the ins and outs of the purchase money though I will bet and has every right not to have to.

I have used "" rather than shout and be scary just for you.

Gob - have you asked Brent directly?

And if so what response did you get?

Thanks
Shonbo

Tring
Thank you for your answer, I really appreciate it. We are not so far apart. That's prob why I've posted nearly as many time on ATD as in 10 years on P*****

I'm not as close as others, to the daily goings on, thats why I ask questions, to better understand, but always with an open mind.

Cheers all on this site

For what it's worth I've read this thread and can see both sides of this interesting debate. SG is right in most of what he says but then again Gob is also right in wanting answers to his questions. I think the interesting thing is going to be how Brent performs this balancing act of not wanting to tell fans anything of a confidential or commercially sensitive nature but at the same time trying to convince fans that as much information as possible is being released.

Guilfoyle and friends realised to their cost that determined fans with the help of the media and the power of the internet can be very difficult to deal with. People may think a body like the Trust are just a collection of ordinary football fans but we also have the help of professional experts we can call on.

A football club, may well, in some peoples eyes be just like any other business with customers or consumers and they are right; but no other business, not even banks, can expect such a vociferous backlash from it's customers if the business upsets them. Any owner of a football club that ignores it's customers can expect a very rough ride. I hope that at least one director will know enough about football and Argyle in particular,to not allow the rest to do that.

Personally I am hopeful but very watchful. There is a long way to go on Argyle's road to recovery and I'm sure there will be as many downs as ups. It wouldn't be Argyle if it was any different though,would it?

shonbo wrote:

Gob - have you asked Brent directly?

And if so what response did you get?

Thanks
Shonbo

Tring
Thank you for your answer, I really appreciate it. We are not so far apart. That's prob why I've posted nearly as many time on ATD as in 10 years on P*****

I'm not as close as others, to the daily goings on, thats why I ask questions, to better understand, but always with an open mind.

Cheers all on this site

To answer your question Shonbo, no I have not asked Brent any questions direct but I am aware that he is not prepared to answer the question that I am most curious about, with consideration to James Bret's interview with the BBC and with Damon's comment some weeks ago regarding the wage cap.

We have what appears to be a very well organised and strong Trust leadership and as a Trust member I am confident that those that represent us are more then capable to ask any questions on behalf of its members.

I would echo what Richard has said, it is in the interest of the club and the owner to ensure the contentment of its customers, us the fans. It's a football club and as such has a community spirit and an emotional attachment that goes way beyond any other type of business.

I think it's also important to remember that although questions are being raised, that such forums are merely a meeting place for discussion and without question, comment and debate a forum without such tools would be meaningless.

And cheers to you also Shonbo as well as three points on Saturday. On a bright note, I feel we maybe just starting to turn that corner, fingers crossed!

Greenman wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Greenman wrote:

There's the rub. The people who are frothing at the mouth and demanding answers to outrageous questions, like many on this website, will never be given the time of day. Ganging up never works.
However, those that seek answers in the right manner will be rewarded.

You seem certain they WILL be rewarded?

I do think that the best way is to go through the correct channels to get answers, and if those questions are evaded again then it might be time to get worried or ask more forcibly. For instance, if the full details of the 20% offer to the Trust are still not forthcoming on Saturday, when I'm sure that Wozzer will have already asked for them, then it would look like a piece of headline grabbing without any real substance.

Yes, in my opinion those that ask correctly and in the right manner will receive an answer.
I find it laughable that several users of this website who demand so much from the club are the ones who don't go to the games.

I mean, is that guy Tring actually ok?

Another of the faceless Avivas. Who are ya ? You know who I am.

ps was probably a regular before you were born. I did go to Oxford this season. It was emotional

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

Who is trying to tell you what to do????? Not me that's for sure. I repeat again anyone has the right to ask a question or if you prefer demand. I also repeat again that Brent is just as entitled not to answer it if he doesn't want to and you nor anyone else has a right to the information. You would like it as probably would I but that is a world away from having a right to it.

Incidentally I don't agree with Greenman either. Brent isn't anyone's fool. If he doesn't want to answer questions made by the dissaffected then he is sure as hell not going to tell the love in ones either. He will tell everybody in equal measure what he wants to tell them and anything he doesn't he simply will not.

In which case he can expect to be very disappointed when it comes to support for his 'vision'.

Apart from the terminally tinted, the majority won't put heart , soul and money into something, unless they are convinced that their 'loyalty' isn't being abused.

My guess is that Brent chose his working class generals on the basis that the vast majority of potential paying customers would blindly follow them.

I think he is in for a rude awakening.

It's got nothing at all to do with the 'doubters of Brent', it's to do with normal, every day etiquette.

If Groveholl goes on and on about the same subject, never changes his style or subject matter, it's bound to annoy, and obviously does.

Tring used to do it, and almost every thread used to get hijacked by the fact that people didn't like what he posted, and then the subject matter was lost, a bit like this one.

Using your logic, are we, the 'Brentish' to be kept quiet then? Should be bullied by the far more intelligent and questioning poeple (yawn)?

Of course we shouldn't, I certainly won't, nor will I suspect others.

If you don't like this site, don't use it, it's as simple as that.



More classic Newell re Grovehill's questioning of Brent. [above] He forgot to add that 'perhaps we should have listened to Tring '

It's ok because Ian has looked into Brent's eyes, just as he did with Todd and as for Stapleton, well............................

Neither Grovehill, myself or anyone else is saying we don't like Brent, what we are saying is that if he and his adoring supporters want everyone to buy into Brent's vision, he had better put a lot more meat on the bones and answer a few questions.


ps In the interest of fairness, here is the link to the thread. From page 3 onwards there are some very concise comments on both sides of the debate, apart from Newell who prefers to crack nuts in pictures.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Graham Clark actually adds some meat to he bones, he says that we owe £600k football creditors debt and the crowds need to rise by 25% to meet these payments. Now that wasn't hard was it? You would almost think that some people are worried that if we have this information that they are party to it would somehow lessen their status, by avoiding these questions they are only fuelling the fire.

Iggy wrote:

Graham Clark actually adds some meat to he bones, he says that we owe £600k football creditors debt and the crowds need to rise by 25% to meet these payments. Now that wasn't hard was it? You would almost think that some people are worried that if we have this information that they are party to it would somehow lessen their status, by avoiding these questions they are only fuelling the fire.

That £600k is per year over the 5 year payment period for the staff and players unpaid wages.

I thought the repayment of the Football Creditors debt was 17.5% upfront, 7% per year with the remaining balance paid in full after 5 years. Is this wrong then?

edit - Guess I had that wrong. Around 17% upfront with monthly repayments until 2016. Any remaining balance in the final year to be repaid in full. .

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So, for this to work we have to increase attendances by at least 25% just to tread water and in playing side funding terms, will be hard pressed to attract or retain the calibre of player/manager, capable of achieving success on the pitch ?
If, we survive and eventually clear these debts, we can then start to look upwards and one day return to higher divisions. Brent will then cash in I presume, as he has publicly stated.

Can't wait to jump on board the good ship Argyle. The future is so exciting.

The words of the dynamic duo were for once correct. Brent is not going to spend any of his own money. All funding must come from increased attendances, fan fests, auctions, cricket matches, days at the races etc etc etc.

If, the great unwashed manage to keep this going for 5 years, whilst a poorly funded football team struggles along at best in Div 2, we will have paid off these debts and Brent will be able to cash in.
Wonderful !

I can see both sides of this.

Let me put it into perspective.

Ask PAFC what they pay PCC for rent on Home Park. They might well tell you that is confidential - which they are in their rights to do.

Ask PCC what PAFC pay in rent and they might give you the same answer/stall for time/hope you go away. But eventually under the Freedom of Information Act they will be obliged to tell you what rent they received because they are a public body.

Similarly if you ask PAFC what their weekly gate receipts are, they don't have to tell you. I don't have to disclose what my weekly/monthly earnings are.

It's a pity those who knew couldn't just answer the damn question in the 1st place, it has certainly lowered my expectations over the coming years. Not sure where I got the 7% bit from but I'm sure I saw it somewhere, at least that could've been more managable.

Cerbera wrote:

I can see both sides of this.

Let me put it into perspective.

Ask PAFC what they pay PCC for rent on Home Park. They might well tell you that is confidential - which they are in their rights to do.

Ask PCC what PAFC pay in rent and they might give you the same answer/stall for time/hope you go away. But eventually under the Freedom of Information Act they will be obliged to tell you what rent they received because they are a public body.

Similarly if you ask PAFC what their weekly gate receipts are, they don't have to tell you. I don't have to disclose what my weekly/monthly earnings are.

You're right Cerbs, but as James Brent has already suggested, he would like an open book policy because in this case he believes it's good for business.

That in itself is a little strange considering he wasn't prepared to answer the question regarding the amount he has already "invested" so I guess that's the open book policy chucked out of the window by the very guy that wanted to introduce it.

He comes over as a nice bloke, do I trust him? Do I hell, it's up to him to gain our trust, it's not for us to simply provide it just because one or two have seen the white of his eyes.

Coxside_Green wrote:

It's a pity those who knew couldn't just answer the damn question in the 1st place, it has certainly lowered my expectations over the coming years. Not sure where I got the 7% bit from but I'm sure I saw it somewhere, at least that could've been more managable.

It shouldn't be forgotten that it is also James Brent's vision that the club becomes self sufficient during these times of financial turmoil. I hope the new grandstand gets built before the start of next season!

Welcome back Brendan Guilfoyle?

GOB wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

It's a pity those who knew couldn't just answer the damn question in the 1st place, it has certainly lowered my expectations over the coming years. Not sure where I got the 7% bit from but I'm sure I saw it somewhere, at least that could've been more managable.

It shouldn't be forgotten that it is also James Brent's vision that the club becomes self sufficient during these times of financial turmoil. I hope the new grandstand gets built before the start of next season!

Welcome back Brendan Guilfoyle?

Future administration is looking a dead cert IMO. If the owner wont invest neither will the Janners, they'll be leaving in their droves starting next season.