Change of Venue - ATD Q&A With James Brent

I'm happy to help when I can and depending on what's needed and if I can make a worthwhile contribution.

shonbo wrote:

I'm happy to help when I can and depending on what's needed and if I can make a worthwhile contribution.

Unfortunately, you have not made enough posts to be considered this year but if the mod team needs to bring in new mods, you will be able to stand in a snap election.

No probs Trin, having seen some of the challenges faced on this site just thought I'd offer an extra pair of hands to help out. I'll have more time on my hands as my pasoti account is now inactive and I cannot be arsed to do anything about it
PS 1 more post

shonbo wrote:

No probs Trin, having seen some of the challenges faced on this site just thought I'd offer an extra pair of hands to help out. I'll have more time on my hands as my pasoti account is now inactive and I cannot be arsed to do anything about it
PS 1 more post

Haha! 100 posts and 3 months membership.Think you are on 94 now ! The bad guys will try to infiltrate and corrupt, it's what they do best, that's why we need some sort of constitution and trustees/keyholders to step in if any mole or moderating team tries to restrict the freedoms and inclusivity so cherished on here.
Every democracy needs safeguards.

Meanwhile, keep up the good work. Your wit and obvious dislike of corrupt practice is most welcome.

Make me blush. Oops that's another one

Quick Update:



Rick Cowdery has replied to my email - basically he's up to his neck in work prior to the Cheltenham game, so reviewing my report is slightly lower on the list of priorities as a result. It's easy for us regular punters to forget how much work guys like Rick (and undoubtedly every other member of staff) put into each match day.

He's said that Peter and James would also like to have a quick Butcher's at the report also, so expect something tangible once the Cheltenham game is out of the way.

Your patience is appreciated.

I was going to wait until Andy got the report up before I commented on the meeting, but I might have forgotten everything by then!

James Brent is certainly a one off, not many owners would bother to engage with so many, so often. He is personable, friendly and impressive in his clarity of thought. I get the impression he's very much a figures man and that's got to be good, I suppose. As a person with no previous interest in football or Argyle he certainly fits the description of a reluctant owner and has no intention of wasting money on this venture. I found the answers about the cross fertilisation from the other aspects of the development and the club a bit wooly but am willing to take him at his word. When we had a chat he was determined that this wasn't a dynastic affair, there's no way he'd hand on a football club to his children, which is eminently sensible seeing how owners can go from hero to zero in a short period of time and the vilification heaped upon them by disgruntled/disappointed supporters is unlike any other business, except maybe banking and it seems his withdrawal from that business was well timed.

I have my reservations about the whole fan engagement agenda and hopefully Andy's transcript will explain his thinking better than I can. What I don't quite get is how he his so enthusiastic about a supervisory board holding the statutory board to account for the decisions they take and yet he is absolutely resolute that the statutory board would be selected on merit and there would be no place for a supporters representative on that body even if the fanbase (in one way or another...my interpretation of how the Trust offer may proceed...owned 20% of the club). What's the difference between decisions being influenced by the supervisory board or a statutory board member?

I guess I'm just an old fart but all the talk of enhancing the customer experience and fan engagement leaves me a bit cold. I'd rather the whole focus was on establishing the structure that put a winning team onto the pitch. Peter seemed convinced that Carl Fletchers background with Bournemouth and West Ham made him instinctively a proponent of good football and it was expected now that this seasons objective had been met we might expect some different fare next season.

Peter also strongly made the point that by the time the end game had unfolded it was James or nothing and we owe him all for the survival of the club. My view is that he drove a hard bargain and will continue to take the same tough approach going forward as Oddball found out when asking if any further payments would be made to Inscapes!

As ever in football we can't draw any firm conclusions now. James' regime will be judged by what happens on the pitch so I hope his stock goes from strength to strength. I'm very encouraged by his determination to get the new grandstand moving within 2 years and if I'm sure of anything it's that commitment.

We are undoubtably lucky to have him as an owner and he is determined to drive things forward his way, with his principles, and I wish him all the best. It was a very enjoyable evening, I'd liked to have asked a lot more questions but (as Peggy might confirm ) I'd hogged the floor long enough. Many thanks to Andy for arranging it.

PS I've never seen Rick so relaxed at a supporters meeting and James made it quite clear both to me and the meeting that he counted Chris and Ian as personal friends. Nobody was so impolite as to comment on that.

There's nothing I would disagree with in your comments, Charlie. (Apart, of course, you being an old fart.)

It's the next two or three years that will really enable us to judge whether he has been good for the club but, with reservations and given where we have had to start from, he has done a good enough job so far.