It's imminent.......

What do you think we should do then Gob and how big exactly. You mention 20 years, I said 35 years which is going back a long way and OK let's go back to when I first watched Argyle 46 years even. Off the top of my head and I am sure greensonscreen will give accurate answers I remember Blackburn in the Mariner/Rafferty season 28,000, Colchester the promotion clincher the same season 21,000, maybe one other that season, a game against Swindon way back in about 1969 the week after they beat Arsenal in the League cup final about 23,000, a Boxing Day clash with Torquay 21,00 about 1968, the Bristol City promotion clincher in the Tynan era with a supposed 21,000 which was more like 27,000, a couple of sell outs at 20,000 against Leeds and West Ham and the 19,800 which would have been more against QPR if we had the space available. Chuck in FA Cup ties against Everton twice, Derby and Watford if we had more room and it is still hard to find 10 to 12 occasions in 46 years that we needed more than 20,000 places. All bar the QPR game are many years ago. Surely 20,000 is enough especially if the corners will still be available to add several thousand more seats to should the need arise as Stoke have recently done.

swampy wrote:

What do you think we should do then Gob and how big exactly. You mention 20 years, I said 35 years which is going back a long way and OK let's go back to when I first watched Argyle 46 years even. Off the top of my head and I am sure greensonscreen will give accurate answers I remember Blackburn in the Mariner/Rafferty season 28,000, Colchester the promotion clincher the same season 21,000, maybe one other that season, a game against Swindon way back in about 1969 the week after they beat Arsenal in the League cup final about 23,000, a Boxing Day clash with Torquay 21,00 about 1968, the Bristol City promotion clincher in the Tynan era with a supposed 21,000 which was more like 27,000, a couple of sell outs at 20,000 against Leeds and West Ham and the 19,800 which would have been more against QPR if we had the space available. Chuck in FA Cup ties against Everton twice, Derby and Watford if we had more room and it is still hard to find 10 to 12 occasions in 46 years that we needed more than 20,000 places. All bar the QPR game are many years ago. Surely 20,000 is enough especially if the corners will still be available to add several thousand more seats to should the need arise as Stoke have recently done.

The truth is, I don't know Swampy. But I do know that if we have even just a relative spell of success then 20,000 will not be big enough for a few occasions and, if we have a prolonged spell of success, 20,000 won't be big enough for many occasions. If we ever do reach the Premier then I doubt that even 25,000 would be large enough and a successful run in the Premier would be completely unknown territory.

When/if we have our usual few years of glory as per the ususl, then locking fans out of Home Park will be a huge turn off.
I would suggest that we must have at least a 25,000 seater with 'genuine' ability for an expansion.

We could of course just make HP a 10,000 capacity, it's been very rare that we have risen above that over the past few years.

It winds me up when people talk about expanding capacity "as and when the need arises in the future."

FFS, if you get to a point where "the need arises", and the expansion hasn't been done, then you've missed the boat and it's too f*cking late!

You HAVE TO do the work PRIOR to it actually being needed. Then, hey presto, when it's needed, it is there!

swampy wrote:

What do you think we should do then Gob and how big exactly. You mention 20 years, I said 35 years which is going back a long way and OK let's go back to when I first watched Argyle 46 years even. Off the top of my head and I am sure greensonscreen will give accurate answers I remember Blackburn in the Mariner/Rafferty season 28,000, Colchester the promotion clincher the same season 21,000, maybe one other that season, a game against Swindon way back in about 1969 the week after they beat Arsenal in the League cup final about 23,000, a Boxing Day clash with Torquay 21,00 about 1968, the Bristol City promotion clincher in the Tynan era with a supposed 21,000 which was more like 27,000, a couple of sell outs at 20,000 against Leeds and West Ham and the 19,800 which would have been more against QPR if we had the space available. Chuck in FA Cup ties against Everton twice, Derby and Watford if we had more room and it is still hard to find 10 to 12 occasions in 46 years that we needed more than 20,000 places. All bar the QPR game are many years ago. Surely 20,000 is enough especially if the corners will still be available to add several thousand more seats to should the need arise as Stoke have recently done.

You could go back through the relatively recent history of clubs with new,adequate capacity stadia like Swansea,Cardiff,Hull etc and ask how many times they attracted crowds of 20000 plus in the last 30 years or whatever.The answer would have been not many-did Reading attract that many gates of 20000 plus before they built the Madjeski? 2000 plus,more like.

I dont get this Brent owes people money he's not responsible for the muppets who nearly destroyed the club, its a shit system and not fair i agree but thats the way it works, as for other fans who gives a fvck what they think! i want brent to build a team first thats my main concern if he can do that and build a stand then fine if not he will get all the stick he can handle! to be honest my veiw is if you dont get your wages i would have jacked straight away not let them get away without paying me than have to chase the arseholes for the money!

It might well wind you up but the point is I have gone back 46 years and the occasions are very rare that we have exceeded 20,000 spectaors. Is it better to spend money we don't really have on a white elephant or spend the same considerable amount of money trying to put together the structure and team to warrant that big a stadium? It is a conundrum and the answer is not obvious.
Czarcasm-firstly, what capacity do you think we should build? The plan is 20,000 with the ability to add I am guessing 3 or 4,000 by eventually filling in the 2 corners should likely demand warrant it. Those extra 3 to 4,000 seats will cost an awful lot of money even if the structure is put in place as MK Dons did.
Looking at average Premier attendances last year, forget the top 10 from Everton and Villa upwards all of whom averaged 33,000 upwards which we will never achieve. From 11th placed Stoke at 27,225 to relegated Wolves at 26,000 right down to QPR at 17,800 attendances were somewhere about what we might get IF we ever reach the promised land. I would think we would get attendances at least as much the same as Fulham, Bolton,WBA, Blackburn etc all who were around the 23-25,000 mark with Norwich, Wolves and Stoke slightly higher and Swansea, Wigan and QPR lower.

Greenskin wrote:

swampy wrote:

What do you think we should do then Gob and how big exactly. You mention 20 years, I said 35 years which is going back a long way and OK let's go back to when I first watched Argyle 46 years even. Off the top of my head and I am sure greensonscreen will give accurate answers I remember Blackburn in the Mariner/Rafferty season 28,000, Colchester the promotion clincher the same season 21,000, maybe one other that season, a game against Swindon way back in about 1969 the week after they beat Arsenal in the League cup final about 23,000, a Boxing Day clash with Torquay 21,00 about 1968, the Bristol City promotion clincher in the Tynan era with a supposed 21,000 which was more like 27,000, a couple of sell outs at 20,000 against Leeds and West Ham and the 19,800 which would have been more against QPR if we had the space available. Chuck in FA Cup ties against Everton twice, Derby and Watford if we had more room and it is still hard to find 10 to 12 occasions in 46 years that we needed more than 20,000 places. All bar the QPR game are many years ago. Surely 20,000 is enough especially if the corners will still be available to add several thousand more seats to should the need arise as Stoke have recently done.

You could go back through the relatively recent history of clubs with new,adequate capacity stadia like Swansea,Cardiff,Hull etc and ask how many times they attracted crowds of 20000 plus in the last 30 years or whatever.The answer would have been not many-did Reading attract that many gates of 20000 plus before they built the Madjeski? 2000 plus,more like.

Not quite sure what point you are making. The clubs you mention would only get a 20,000 plus crowd for games in the Premier league or for an occasional promotion decider. Reading only attracted gates of 20,000 plus when they were in the Premier league or an odd game like this season when they were clinching promotion. The Reading who attracted 3 or 4,000 back in the old 4th division at Elm Park is a far cry from the Reading of today. Since those days back in the 60's and 70's Reading has grown enormously as a town and was ripe for a new stadium to attract people to watch top class football being in a relatively affluent part of the country easily reachable from all the London area particularly for both home and away fans. Still the capacity is only 24,200 not much different to what would be achieved by filling in the 2 corners at Home Park in the future when required. Phase 1 also has the mean to expand if ever needed just as Reading's ground does.

swampy wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

swampy wrote:

What do you think we should do then Gob and how big exactly. You mention 20 years, I said 35 years which is going back a long way and OK let's go back to when I first watched Argyle 46 years even. Off the top of my head and I am sure greensonscreen will give accurate answers I remember Blackburn in the Mariner/Rafferty season 28,000, Colchester the promotion clincher the same season 21,000, maybe one other that season, a game against Swindon way back in about 1969 the week after they beat Arsenal in the League cup final about 23,000, a Boxing Day clash with Torquay 21,00 about 1968, the Bristol City promotion clincher in the Tynan era with a supposed 21,000 which was more like 27,000, a couple of sell outs at 20,000 against Leeds and West Ham and the 19,800 which would have been more against QPR if we had the space available. Chuck in FA Cup ties against Everton twice, Derby and Watford if we had more room and it is still hard to find 10 to 12 occasions in 46 years that we needed more than 20,000 places. All bar the QPR game are many years ago. Surely 20,000 is enough especially if the corners will still be available to add several thousand more seats to should the need arise as Stoke have recently done.

You could go back through the relatively recent history of clubs with new,adequate capacity stadia like Swansea,Cardiff,Hull etc and ask how many times they attracted crowds of 20000 plus in the last 30 years or whatever.The answer would have been not many-did Reading attract that many gates of 20000 plus before they built the Madjeski? 2000 plus,more like.

Not quite sure what point you are making. The clubs you mention would only get a 20,000 plus crowd for games in the Premier league or for an occasional promotion decider. Reading only attracted gates of 20,000 plus when they were in the Premier league or an odd game like this season when they were clinching promotion. The Reading who attracted 3 or 4,000 back in the old 4th division at Elm Park is a far cry from the Reading of today. Since those days back in the 60's and 70's Reading has grown enormously as a town and was ripe for a new stadium to attract people to watch top class football being in a relatively affluent part of the country easily reachable from all the London area particularly for both home and away fans. Still the capacity is only 24,200 not much different to what would be achieved by filling in the 2 corners at Home Park in the future when required. Phase 1 also has the mean to expand if ever needed just as Reading's ground does.

You seriously can't see the point? And why single out Reading? Why not also mention Hull,Swansea and Wigan? The obvious point is that you've based your argument for a "build as we go" method on attendances in the previous 30 years,those clubs didn't [and a good thing too,as they were attracting far lower attandances than Argyle at the time]-they built their stadia and showed self confidence in what they could achieve and were rewarded accordingly.

And BTW,how has the current three sides of our ground got "ability to expand"? I remember at the time wondering how the hell it could be achieved and i can't recall any adequate or feasible answers coming forth.

Greenskin wrote:

And BTW,how has the current three sides of our ground got "ability to expand"? I remember at the time wondering how the hell it could be achieved and i can't recall any adequate or feasible answers coming forth.

Now you have explained yourself more clearly in the follow up post I can see your point, it was not clear to me from your initial post and I am pleased my confusion caused you such merriment. The clubs you are giving as examples all had stadiums built from scratch, a cheaper option than refurbishinbg an existing stadium and also were ground sharing with succesful top tier Rugby clubs. They had the funds available to do it at the time although time will tell if the likes of Cardiff overstretched themselves as Hull appeared to have previously. As previously stated our ground is planned for 20,000 in 2 years approx. It is understood the structure will be in place to add several thousand extra seats in 2 remaining corners should it be necessary which it certainly isn't in the lowest tier of the football league where I don't think any of the other clubs were when they built new stadiums.
My understanding has always been that when Phase 1 was built all 3 sides could be increased upwards during a close season should it be necessary. I didn't intentionally single Reading out. You lumped the other 3 together then mentioned Reading so I just answered accordingly and as a relatively new town size wise I think it is a little different anyway to the others. I personally think the club are going about expanding in the right way and looking at the comments on various forums it would appear you are in the minority with your view. That doesn't make you right or wrong, only time will tell it is all about opinions and I won't be so disrespectful as to LOL at your reply.

Greenskin wrote:

And BTW,how has the current three sides of our ground got "ability to expand"? I remember at the time wondering how the hell it could be achieved and i can't recall any adequate or feasible answers coming forth.

I thought the existing grand-stands were actually built so that additions could be made. I had always assumed these would be in the form of additional tiers.

Charlie Wood wrote:

tcm wrote:

totally predictable responce from atd users

Err, um...aren't you an ATD user, Mike, or have I missed something.

I suggest you try to debate the point instead of asking everybody else what they would do.

iam with the brent plan,but,thanks for suggesting i debate this is atd,debate? like i said predictable,and yes iam a atd user WTF has that got to do with anything?iam just enjoying watch a bunch of middle aged tossers have a row about nothing,quality,

Mike, I think you're missing something.....

SufferedSince68 wrote:

I dont get this Brent owes people money he's not responsible for the muppets who nearly destroyed the club, its a shit system and not fair i agree but thats the way it works, as for other fans who gives a fvck what they think! i want brent to build a team first thats my main concern if he can do that and build a stand then fine if not he will get all the stick he can handle! to be honest my veiw is if you dont get your wages i would have jacked straight away not let them get away without paying me than have to chase the arseholes for the money!

It's a requirement for all clubs exiting administration to settle (or make arrangements to settle) all "Football Creditor" debts. FC debts are what is owed to other clubs, player and staff. They are debts accrued by the previous owners but become the responsibility of the new owners.

When Hotel Man first started talking about buying the club, he was going to pay FC debts in full at the time of taking over the club.

By the time he bought the club, he was in a position to say that if the FC creditors didn't accept a pittance up front and the rest over 5 years, he wouldn't do the deal and would let the club go into liquidation (Yeah, he really loves PAFC that much) There were also the comments from Ridsdale to at least two FC creditors to the effect that if they didn't sign (for a pittance and the balance over 5 years) they would be blamed for the demise of the club. Due to the weakness of Hotel Man's business plan at that time, the Football League said that they were taking "a leap of faith" in allowing him to buy the club. Hotel Man has now transferred the ownership of all the tangible assets that the club had to either the local Authority or to himself, without, as far as I am aware, making any move to repay any of the FC debt early.

To me, the fact that he is now going to use the profits from the development of the land he sold to himself, to build a new stand, rather than pay the poor sods who have been waiting patiently for their wages, is not acceptable.

He has certainly acted within the law, and within the terms of the agreement under which he bought the business, but whether he has acted honourably or ethically is another matter.

HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PAYMENT OF UNPAID WAGES TO STAFF AND RATHER THAN PAY THEM HE IS USING PROFITS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT OF CLUB ASSETS TO HIS OWN BENEFIT AND TO BUILD A STAND THAT COULD WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE STAFF HAVE BEEN PAID WHAT THEY ARE DUE.


I agree with Suffered, the staff should never have agreed to work without wages-the club would have been sold far sooner and probably with a better outcome. However, they acted with the best of motives-trying to keep PAFC going- they have my respect.

However I (and I think no one else should) have no respect for that group of people (lets for convenience sake call them the CPers) who created an ideal situation for the club to be taken over by someone who would rather see the club fold than pay people what he had already agreed to pay them, and who now talks about "playing by the rules" and "things don't work like that"

The Mad Stad is probably my favourite ground that Argyle could have aspired to replicate.

24,000 capacity, with no stupid idea about half-arsed 'build some now, and finish the corners at some point (maybe) in the future'.

Brent does appear to be a'do-er', so I do believe that he will build a new stand, as opposed to talking about doing it and having it put back year on year, under Stapleton.

I just hope it isn't in keeping with the asthetically awful effort that Phase1 turned out to be.

swampy wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

And BTW,how has the current three sides of our ground got "ability to expand"? I remember at the time wondering how the hell it could be achieved and i can't recall any adequate or feasible answers coming forth.

Now you have explained yourself more clearly in the follow up post I can see your point, it was not clear to me from your initial post and I am pleased my confusion caused you such merriment. The clubs you are giving as examples all had stadiums built from scratch, a cheaper option than refurbishinbg an existing stadium and also were ground sharing with succesful top tier Rugby clubs. They had the funds available to do it at the time although time will tell if the likes of Cardiff overstretched themselves as Hull appeared to have previously. As previously stated our ground is planned for 20,000 in 2 years approx. It is understood the structure will be in place to add several thousand extra seats in 2 remaining corners should it be necessary which it certainly isn't in the lowest tier of the football league where I don't think any of the other clubs were when they built new stadiums.
My understanding has always been that when Phase 1 was built all 3 sides could be increased upwards during a close season should it be necessary. I didn't intentionally single Reading out. You lumped the other 3 together then mentioned Reading so I just answered accordingly and as a relatively new town size wise I think it is a little different anyway to the others. I personally think the club are going about expanding in the right way and looking at the comments on various forums it would appear you are in the minority with your view. That doesn't make you right or wrong, only time will tell it is all about opinions and I won't be so disrespectful as to LOL at your reply.

Fair enough,knuckle rap accepted,but Hull were definitely in the fourth tier when their stadium was built and Swansea clinched promotion from the fourth tier in the last ever match at the Vetch Field.

Remember Darlington, I'm saying no more

Much as I should like to climb on board with Grovey and his slagging of the Harry Potter lookalike but FFS man, after all the shiite they suffered the best result the staff can get now is a long and successful career with a decent pension at the close of play, Brent seems to be putting together an off field structure that looks pretty ficking impressive to me, a lively new hotel come conferencing centre which adds a nice few thousand to your capacity would put you right up there with MK Dongs, of course you have a long way to go to match them on the field.

fridgey wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

fridgey wrote:

Ok well I do believe a consortium existed but as a matter of interest how much was the London consortium willing to put in? I assume that it must of been a shed load and details of that investment was made known?
Of course one consortium does not constitue a que of buyers does it. So are you now saying we missed our opportunity back then and we now up the creak or are you aware of more of them.

Details of investment were made known but everything got hushed up. Stapleton and his board were only interested in their own individual shareholdings, didn't give a flying one about the supporters. The end result was Stapleton and his board wouldn't talk and went on to make their £2m from Japan. The rest is history. It's comical, do you laugh about it?

Yes mate, my house pretty much stinks on urine 24/7 from me wetting myself over Argyles plight.
Stapleton totally and utterly bollocksed it up, of that there can be no doubt, the people who may or may not have taken over may or may not of been a huge success (see how many may or may nots there are there) Anyway, back to now, are you saying we should at least give Brent a go?

We're now left with no other choice than to give Brent a go, he's responsible for our debts, isn't he?

As I previously stated, I'm encouraged the up-to-date 20k capacity excludes the corners. With Brent's willingness to talk to all concerned, I'd be surprised if there wasn't further discussion with all concerned before the build goes ahead. We really need those corners done at the same time if at all possible!

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Much as I should like to climb on board with Grovey and his slagging of the Harry Potter lookalike but FFS man, after all the shiite they suffered the best result the staff can get now is a long and successful career with a decent pension at the close of play, Brent seems to be putting together an off field structure that looks pretty ficking impressive to me, a lively new hotel come conferencing centre which adds a nice few thousand to your capacity would put you right up there with MK Dongs, of course you have a long way to go to match them on the field.

But there is no linking of the profits from the hotel to increased revenue for the club.

Just build a new grandstand FFS and be happy with that! We wont need a 25k plus stadium for years. How often was HP sold out in the Championship?? (even when we were nudging the play-offs). Get real, we are not a big league club, just a big L2 club and maybe in L1. We were never seen as a big club in the Championship were we? Lets walk before we try and run - both on and off the pitch. If we hit the big time and become an established Premier league club, there might be a need for a 30k capacity HP. Even then, it would only be full when the big teams rolled into town. 30k crowd for Plymouth V Wigan, QPR etc. in the premier league? dream on guys and girls....Steady she goes, the good ship Argyle!

OK, here's real!

Demolish the existing Grandstand, build hospitality or whatever it is that Brent requires and leave it like that, we have no need for a new grandstand, do we?

Captain Spudgun wrote:

Just build a new grandstand FFS and be happy with that! We wont need a 25k plus stadium for years. How often was HP sold out in the Championship?? (even when we were nudging the play-offs). Get real, we are not a big league club, just a big L2 club and maybe in L1. We were never seen as a big club in the Championship were we? Lets walk before we try and run - both on and off the pitch. If we hit the big time and become an established Premier league club, there might be a need for a 30k capacity HP. Even then, it would only be full when the big teams rolled into town. 30k crowd for Plymouth V Wigan, QPR etc. in the premier league? dream on guys and girls....Steady she goes, the good ship Argyle!

Just the type of thinking that has held the club back for 90 years.Did Reading build the Madjeski on the basis of their previous 80 odd years of non achievement and gates averaging about 4000?

Welcome to ATD BTW.

Yeah Reading pack em in don't they? Their ground isn't huge, just modern!!!!

Captain Spudgun wrote:

Just build a new grandstand FFS and be happy with that! We wont need a 25k plus stadium for years. How often was HP sold out in the Championship?? (even when we were nudging the play-offs). Get real, we are not a big league club, just a big L2 club and maybe in L1. We were never seen as a big club in the Championship were we? Lets walk before we try and run - both on and off the pitch. If we hit the big time and become an established Premier league club, there might be a need for a 30k capacity HP. Even then, it would only be full when the big teams rolled into town. 30k crowd for Plymouth V Wigan, QPR etc. in the premier league? dream on guys and girls....Steady she goes, the good ship Argyle!

Keep Argyle Crap!