When did you all shift to becoming a sustainable League One club?

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up. But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises? Overachieving is not sustainability. The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic. It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping. We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay... What's your definition of a "substainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

i think the difference between now and then is the board are making the effort to get revenue streams into the club whether thats through sponsorship for the stands or the building projects like brickfields and the harpers park ones or hopefully when the faults are finally fixed we will start seeing income come in from the mankover's hospitality areas.

oh and not forgetting the investment from the us based investors that bought into the club last season so we are making steps to address the sustainability. More needs to be done of course and i believe that will come under this board but we are moving in the right direction its not a quick fix so we will have to play the long game to see us become sustainable.

all of the above wasnt even attempted by staplewallet while we where in the championship till 2nd to last season when it was too late to do anything hence why we hit the financial mire.

We have just been promoted, give them a chance FFS!

Angry wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

i think the difference between now and then is the board are making the effort to get revenue streams into the club whether thats through sponsorship for the stands or the building projects like brickfields and the harpers park ones or hopefully when the faults are finally fixed we will start seeing income come in from the mankover's hospitality areas.

oh and not forgetting the investment from the us based investors that bought into the club last season so we are making steps to address the sustainability. More needs to be done of course and i believe that will come under this board but we are moving in the right direction its not a quick fix so we will have to play the long game to see us become sustainable.

all of the above wasnt even attempted by staplewallet while we where in the championship till 2nd to last season when it was too late to do anything hence why we hit the financial mire.

How quickly we adopt the management speak of the Bankers.

Like 1984 (the book) it's all meant to befuddle the average football fan. Talk of "revenue" "income streams" "projects" and such like just takes our minds off what we should be talking about-signing better players to improve the team.  As for that dreadful term the club keeps using "match day experience" do they not understand the football is the matchday experience?

It's very noticeable that the Sainted Simon has all but stopped his pronouncements/speeches/verbal twaddle that he used to come out with on a regular basis. Is this because he is no longer the power  within the club that he used to be with the other investors outmuscling him financially.

I think he will be gone soon, but only time will tell whether his partners/replacements are interested in advancing the football club or Kagami like, only has interests in property speculation

Grovehill wrote:

Angry wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

i think the difference between now and then is the board are making the effort to get revenue streams into the club whether thats through sponsorship for the stands or the building projects like brickfields and the harpers park ones or hopefully when the faults are finally fixed we will start seeing income come in from the mankover's hospitality areas.

oh and not forgetting the investment from the us based investors that bought into the club last season so we are making steps to address the sustainability. More needs to be done of course and i believe that will come under this board but we are moving in the right direction its not a quick fix so we will have to play the long game to see us become sustainable.

all of the above wasnt even attempted by staplewallet while we where in the championship till 2nd to last season when it was too late to do anything hence why we hit the financial mire.

How quickly we adopt the management speak of the Bankers.

Like 1984 (the book) it's all meant to befuddle the average football fan. Talk of "revenue" "income streams" "projects" and such like just takes our minds off what we should be talking about-signing better players to improve the team.  As for that dreadful term the club keeps using "match day experience" do they not understand the football is the matchday experience?

It's very noticeable that the Sainted Simon has all but stopped his pronouncements/speeches/verbal twaddle that he used to come out with on a regular basis. Is this because he is no longer the power  within the club that he used to be with the other investors outmuscling him financially.

I think he will be gone soon, but only time will tell whether his partners/replacements are interested in advancing the football club or Kagami like, only has interests in property speculation

so what is sustainability in your eyes then? in mine its investing in projects and bringing as many sources of revenue into the club on a regular basis.

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "substainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite. Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not. Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down. You know that.

Angry wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

i think the difference between now and then is the board are making the effort to get revenue streams into the club whether thats through sponsorship for the stands or the building projects like brickfields and the harpers park ones or hopefully when the faults are finally fixed we will start seeing income come in from the mankover's hospitality areas.

oh and not forgetting the investment from the us based investors that bought into the club last season so we are making steps to address the sustainability. More needs to be done of course and i believe that will come under this board but we are moving in the right direction its not a quick fix so we will have to play the long game to see us become sustainable.

all of the above wasnt even attempted by staplewallet while we where in the championship till 2nd to last season when it was too late to do anything hence why we hit the financial mire.

I could've accepted that if there was going to be some effort to fill the corners and get more bums on seats. Instead I'm told it's not viable and I have to accept the lowest budget in the Championship, while being locked out.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "substainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a substainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done? We will find out.

Grovehill wrote:

It's very noticeable that the Sainted Simon has all but stopped his pronouncements/speeches/verbal twaddle that he used to come out with on a regular basis. Is this because he is no longer the power  within the club that he used to be with the other investors outmuscling him financially.

I think he will be gone soon, but only time will tell whether his partners/replacements are interested in advancing the football club or Kagami like, only has interests in property speculation

Oh Grovy.. You were doing so well for spell. Now you're back in the land of delusion.

'Argyle Green' are passive investors. Hallett is the brains and driving force. The last thing the investors want is SH gone.

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "substainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a substainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done?  We will find out.

So reasonable is the new sustainable, all a bit 'imminent' if you ask me.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "sustainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a sustainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done?  We will find out.

So reasonable is the new sustainable, all a bit 'imminent' if you ask me.

Do you actually know what "Sustainable" means?

Here...  Educate yourself:

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

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "substainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a substainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done?  We will find out.

So reasonable is the new sustainable, all a bit 'imminent' if you ask me.

Do you actually know what "Substainable" means?

Here...  Educate yourself:

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

Oh ffs, go educate myself, with a link to Si's version of sustainability (reasonable). Don't try rewriting the English dictionary, having a bottom budget is not going to lead to sustainability, you've been played.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "sustainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a sustainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done?  We will find out.

So reasonable is the new sustainable, all a bit 'imminent' if you ask me.

Do you actually know what "Sustainable" means?

Here...  Educate yourself:

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

Oh ffs, go educate myself, with a link to Si's version of sustainability (reasonable).  Don't try rewriting the English dictionary, having a bottom budget is not going to lead to sustainability, you've been played.

Like I said...  You obviously don't understand what 'sustainable' means.  With your level of intelligence, there really is no hope - and your're not the only one on this site.   Try listening to the podcast.  You might actually learn something and not just come across as a moaning idiot.


sus·tain·a·ble
adjective
1.
able to be maintained at a certain rate or level.

2.
able to be upheld or defended.

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "sustainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a sustainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done?  We will find out.

So reasonable is the new sustainable, all a bit 'imminent' if you ask me.

Do you actually know what "Sustainable" means?

Here...  Educate yourself:

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

Oh ffs, go educate myself, with a link to Si's version of sustainability (reasonable).  Don't try rewriting the English dictionary, having a bottom budget is not going to lead to sustainability, you've been played.

Like I said...  You obviously don't understand what 'sustainable' means.  With your level of intelligence, there really is no hope - and your're not the only one on this site.   Try listening to the podcast.  You might actually learn something and not just come across as a moaning idiot.


sus·tain·a·ble
adjective
1.
able to be maintained at a certain rate or level.

2.
able to be upheld or defended.

When you're wrong turn to abuse, I'm no idiot. Hallett's idea of sustainability will crash once Schuey moves on, you'll see.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "sustainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a sustainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done?  We will find out.

So reasonable is the new sustainable, all a bit 'imminent' if you ask me.

Do you actually know what "Sustainable" means?

Here...  Educate yourself:

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

Oh ffs, go educate myself, with a link to Si's version of sustainability (reasonable).  Don't try rewriting the English dictionary, having a bottom budget is not going to lead to sustainability, you've been played.

Like I said...  You obviously don't understand what 'sustainable' means.  With your level of intelligence, there really is no hope - and your're not the only one on this site.   Try listening to the podcast.  You might actually learn something and not just come across as a moaning idiot.


sus·tain·a·ble
adjective
1.
able to be maintained at a certain rate or level.

2.
able to be upheld or defended.

When you're wrong turn to abuse, I'm no idiot.  Hallett's idea of sustainability will crash once Schuey moves on, you'll see.

Except I'm not wrong. ..and you clearly are an idiot if you conflate sustainability and reasonable.

and you may be right, it all might crash when Schuey moves on. But that hasn't happened yet. Nothings happened yet.

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "sustainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a sustainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done?  We will find out.

So reasonable is the new sustainable, all a bit 'imminent' if you ask me.

Do you actually know what "Sustainable" means?

Here...  Educate yourself:

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

Oh ffs, go educate myself, with a link to Si's version of sustainability (reasonable).  Don't try rewriting the English dictionary, having a bottom budget is not going to lead to sustainability, you've been played.

Like I said...  You obviously don't understand what 'sustainable' means.  With your level of intelligence, there really is no hope - and your're not the only one on this site.   Try listening to the podcast.  You might actually learn something and not just come across as a moaning idiot.


sus·tain·a·ble
adjective
1.
able to be maintained at a certain rate or level.

2.
able to be upheld or defended.

When you're wrong turn to abuse, I'm no idiot.  Hallett's idea of sustainability will crash once Schuey moves on, you'll see.

Except I'm not wrong.  ..and you clearly are an idiot if you conflate sustainability and reasonable.

and you may be right, it all might crash when Schuey moves on.  But that hasn't happened yet.  Nothings happened yet.

You (and Hallett apparently) conflated sustainability and reasonable, who's the idiot here? We could go around in circles for evermore (or until Schuey leaves) but I will always be right here, we are not a sustainable Championship club, we're far from it. We're going into the Championship with a bottom placed budget, a far cry from what was promised. We might survive a season or 2 before the inevitable happens and Schuey moves on (I'm on record saying as soon as October) and then we'll see the decline back to mid table league one, that's our sustainable level, the £3.7m budget out of a £11m+ turnover, minus the pissed off flexi ticket holders.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

Okay...  What's your definition of a "sustainable championship club"?

..and then tell me what SImon Hallett's is, and where you disagree?

That refurb, which some of us disagreed with, was supposed to make us a sustainable Championship club, I can't tell you how short that is without being erm, impolite.  Now it's done I will never accept it is what it is, we're lumbered with it whether we like it or not.  Being sustainable isn't just getting there with a budget to come straight back down.  You know that.

I do know that.

Simon Hallett's definition of Argyle being a sustainable Championship club is more or less as follows.

"With the yearly budget being balanced, Argyle have a reasonable chance of remaining a Championship club".

It's that simple.

Can it be done?  We will find out.

So reasonable is the new sustainable, all a bit 'imminent' if you ask me.

Do you actually know what "Sustainable" means?

Here...  Educate yourself:

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

Oh ffs, go educate myself, with a link to Si's version of sustainability (reasonable).  Don't try rewriting the English dictionary, having a bottom budget is not going to lead to sustainability, you've been played.

Like I said...  You obviously don't understand what 'sustainable' means.  With your level of intelligence, there really is no hope - and your're not the only one on this site.   Try listening to the podcast.  You might actually learn something and not just come across as a moaning idiot.


sus·tain·a·ble
adjective
1.
able to be maintained at a certain rate or level.

2.
able to be upheld or defended.

When you're wrong turn to abuse, I'm no idiot.  Hallett's idea of sustainability will crash once Schuey moves on, you'll see.

Except I'm not wrong.  ..and you clearly are an idiot if you conflate sustainability and reasonable.

and you may be right, it all might crash when Schuey moves on.  But that hasn't happened yet.  Nothings happened yet.

You (and Hallett apparently) conflated sustainability and reasonable, who's the idiot here?  We could go around in circles for evermore (or until Schuey leaves) but I will always be right here, we are not a sustainable Championship club, we're far from it.  We're going into the Championship with a bottom placed budget, a far cry from what was promised.  We might survive a season or 2 before the inevitable happens and Schuey moves on (I'm on record saying as soon as October) and then we'll see the decline back to mid table league one, that's our sustainable level, the £3.7m budget out of a £11m+ turnover, minus the pissed off flexi ticket holders.

We went into last season with a budget people like you were moaning and complaining about. We ended up as champions. Learn something for goodness sake. You and your ilk are like a broken record. The same monotonous rubbish year in and year out.

You didn't listen to the podcast did you? Nah... You're much to stubborn to do that.

...and I'm sure you being, "right here" reassures everyone.

With such a massive rebuild to do on the smallest budget it's highly likely we will be relegated next season. The Championship is a lot different than L1. But an indicator of how things have actually improved will be how long it is before we return to this level again.  It's taken 13 years to get back to the second tier since we were last relegated from this level.  Argo don't do swift returns to the second tier but maybe it will only take us 7 years next time.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Angry wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

We enter the Championship hoping Schuey can work his magic and keep us up.  But what happened to accountability on our owners to make us a sustainable Championship club, shouldn't they be held to their promises?  Overachieving is not sustainability.  The minority expecting more during the good times aren't wrong, they're being realistic.  It's funny how certain admin have done a u-turn since the Stapleton days, telling us we should be happy while we await the inevitable return to League one, whether it be next year or 5 years time, when we're no better off and a few more lower league teams overtake us in the pyramid while we stand gawping.  We're a one city club, find the investment needed to progress!

i think the difference between now and then is the board are making the effort to get revenue streams into the club whether thats through sponsorship for the stands or the building projects like brickfields and the harpers park ones or hopefully when the faults are finally fixed we will start seeing income come in from the mankover's hospitality areas.

oh and not forgetting the investment from the us based investors that bought into the club last season so we are making steps to address the sustainability. More needs to be done of course and i believe that will come under this board but we are moving in the right direction its not a quick fix so we will have to play the long game to see us become sustainable.

all of the above wasnt even attempted by staplewallet while we where in the championship till 2nd to last season when it was too late to do anything hence why we hit the financial mire.

I could've accepted that if there was going to be some effort to fill the corners and get more bums on seats.  Instead I'm told it's not viable and I have to accept the lowest budget in the Championship, while being locked out.

i too would like to see the corners built should have been built alongside the mankover imo, but thinking about it if they decided to build those corners now just as we go up and we are struggling badly you know full well the fans will attack the board for building the corners over investing in the team as an excuse for our woes, for sure they will do that with the brickfields/harpers park projects when they get started so either way the board will get attacked.

those corners will be built but we cant blow the entire bank on everything till we start seeing the returns coming regularly that we want to allow us to cut the attendance figures again as parts of block one/barn park far end and the mankover by the taveners will be out of action while they are being constructed so have to pick the right time also.

So does being "sustainable" in the championship mean that, if Argyle do reach that status over the short or medium term, no upward long term progress is envisaged?

Greenskin wrote:

So does being "sustainable" in the championship mean that, if Argyle do reach that status over the short or medium term, no upward long term progress is envisaged?

you cant make a cake if you dont have the right ingredients. You have to lay the foundations down in order for there to be any short to medium term goals once you have achieved the short term aims then you can build up and up until the ultimate goal is achieved and the benefits are far more rewarding than wanting the short term fix that have no long term benefits hoping that works. Staplewallet did that and look where that got us. The board now are far more savvy i feel.

Again with the stands they will be done we cant cut the attendance in our first year in the championship its small enough as it is (thankyou very much james brent) and once we are established as a championship side which may not happen next season but in a couple seasons time all going well im sure they will be done as a matter of urgency as the attendance is too small and should be 25000 imo so all the stands need to be looked at.

To my mind being "sustainable" would be Argyle having a decent spell (10-15+ years) in the Championship with only minimal funding from the ownership. Every Club in the Division relies on backing from the owners to some degree so PAFC would have to as well.

The trouble with all the high-faluting talk about "revenue streams" "outside income" etc is that just like when the Kagami Board were advancing these ideas, there isn't an example of this working in practice anywhere in football-how many hospitality venues in the Westcountry generate enough profit to buy fund the transfer fee and salary of even a moderate CCC player?

As for the Brickfields purchase, I am mystified as to how sub letting sports pitches will cover the costs, let alone show a profit. The profit in property is made by buying and selling.

The only example of a self-sustaining football Club I can think of is Exeter City who generate income by developing talent. And unless we poach all their youth development dept. we don't have a hope in hell of competing with them in that field.

I think the sad reality these days is that every Club needs a sugar daddy to pour money in in order to progress. Luton Town may have broken through, but they could well end up like Wigan who despite a spell in the top League and a Cup win are now under a transfer embargo and desparetly seeking further funding. Even winning the Premier League doesn't guarantee long term success as any Leicester City fan will tell you.

Greenskin wrote:

So does being "sustainable" in the championship mean that, if Argyle do reach that status over the short or medium term, no upward long term progress is envisaged?

For me sustainable would be having a middlish budget to work with. We all know realistically it takes a few years to build a team capable of promotion which would be achievable with a mid table budget, as we've just seen in this season. What bothers me is we're almost certainly starting with a relegation budget with no intent to increase capacity which would increase the budget. It's the same old cycle as last time under Stapleton which is unlikely to end well. As one of the locked out former flexi ticket holders there isn't much to get excited about.

Angry wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

So does being "sustainable" in the championship mean that, if Argyle do reach that status over the short or medium term, no upward long term progress is envisaged?

you cant make a cake if you dont have the right ingredients. You have to lay the foundations down in order for there to be any short to medium term goals once you have achieved the short term aims then you can build up and up until the ultimate goal is achieved and the benefits are far more rewarding than wanting the short term fix that have no long term benefits hoping that works. Staplewallet did that and look where that got us. The board now are far more savvy i feel.

Again with the stands they will be done we cant cut the attendance in our first year in the championship its small enough as it is (thankyou very much james brent) and once we are established as a championship side which may not happen next season but in a couple seasons time all going well im sure they will be done as a matter of urgency as the attendance is too small and should be 25000 imo so all the stands need to be looked at.

You can't lay all the capacity issues at James Brent's table. Hallett and his 'savvy' team knew exactly what was what and went ahead with it.