I'm a Praaaaaaaper Fan and I post on ATD

And me.Love to here some details from Freathy about some e mails he received from Peter Jones at the time,too.

Me as well PP!

Me too. Unless it has a really sad ending. I'm quite sensitive and cry watching darts.

And I bet you cried watching Bambi !

Perhaps I'm not the only one who isn't in the Consortium know then. I am a little more interested in the where are they now rather than the history of what they proposed then but it would no doubt be an interesting read.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

Perhaps I'm not the only one who isn't in the Consortium know then. I am a little more interested in the where are they now rather than the history of what they proposed then but it would no doubt be an interesting read.

I heard about it Sensible but didn't know any details. The next thing was it was over and we carried on as we were!

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

And I bet you cried watching Bambi !

I did watching jungle book when I thought balloo was dead.

He is jock. Just after the final take he was trampled by a load of marching elephants. It was all very quick though and he didn't suffer.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

He is jock. Just after the final take he was trampled by a load of marching elephants. It was all very quick though and he didn't suffer.

Unlike Argyle fans over the years!

PlymptonPilgrim wrote:

If anyone's really interested I could post the whole story - when I've got a spare couple of hours!

I would be interested PP

For as long as I can remember Argyle has always been a club not highly capitalised. Consequently, any local cash and carry chap could own the club, and did, for years. And then they just sit on it, with little reason to move off the pot, having a right old local jolly that costs little to nothing and gives them a bit of attention.

It's always been thus, with little clamour to change things. This latest strange squire thing looking to embue a community with his own experimental idea of 'community' akin to Padstein, and adding about as much value added ( i.e. not a lot ), is likely to carry on for years and years, hence allowing a few moneyless fans of the same persuasion trying to hide a false start in getting in on the culture if they can, smelling an owner who has repeatedly said it's an empty directors' box up for being filled.
sadly, I'm not looking forward to it. I wish I was, but I have just heard the same old stuff being trotted out where the footie is concerned.

Penz wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Interesting that the Consortium could have bid to buy Argyle from the Administrator and didnt.

Two points there, Tony.

1...... it was trailed that the consortium thing was intended as an injection of cash to bump the playing side of the club, something the administration process was not about at all. That consortium were never trailed as property speculators.

2 ............ Even the likes of Todd/Gardner were reported as saying 'they couldn't get anywhere near the process'. If those fine gentlemen couldn't access the admin process, I'm sure nobody else would have been able to do so. .... they must have tried ever so hard to buy the club and put in the investment they had always wanted to, just like the penniless chap from Cornwall.

Evening PP, you are correct in the original intention of tthe Consortium, howeveer, as Argyle fans I would have thought that they would have been interested in buying Argyle out from the Administrator and not be lumbered with Stapes which was one of their original intentions. For me this is not about what they originally said they wanted to do, its about money and wanting to make Argyle into something better than they found them. The Consortium werent trailed as property Speculators? Well, to a greater or lesser extent everyone involved was and is but if thteir motives were pure there was no reason they had to follow suit.

To be honest, the thought of Todd/Gardner being involved again would have stopped me having a ST as I am sure it would have affected many others. So no loss there.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

There is no crime in admitting you don't know something but pretending you know everything is delusional and pretentious. You must have hours of fun in front of your very large mirror Tringreen.

Moi ?

I don't know a lot of things but I do know the history of missed opportunities at Home Park and I also can recognise small minded personal positioning when I see it.

I have tried to say my piece quietly and as eloquently as possible before but have found that the best way to get a reaction from the average Aviva and the slightest chance of the message getting through, is to adopt a more confrontational, nay arrogant persona.
Greenskin has been largely putting the same case out on Pasoti for years but gets absolutely nowhere by being reasonable.

It has become almost habitual but I find it fun and a way of coping with the enormous frustration of being a green for half a century. The last few years, the internet bullying, the blind faith superfan culture, have knocked the stuffing out of me and I can't find the desire to 'make the effort' very often.

Ciao

ps I remember PJ mailing me on Pasoti, basically to wind the likes of Freathy and me up to stir the crap on the farm . I do remember one message in the Autumn that Ollie departed. I was told that Holloway had asked Stapes for financial backing to go for the play offs at least. Stapes is supposed to have said he'd seek investment. When Ollie found out that he had done nothing and had no intention of doing anything a month or two later[Norwich at home I believe], he spat the dummy and the game was up.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

There is no crime in admitting you don't know something but pretending you know everything is delusional and pretentious. You must have hours of fun in front of your very large mirror Tringreen.

Definitely nothing wrong with admitting ignorance about something. But what about making provocative remarks about a subject which you subsequently admit ignorance of? Because that just looks like blindly ripping into people who don't share your point of view...

charleymouse wrote:

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

There is no crime in admitting you don't know something but pretending you know everything is delusional and pretentious. You must have hours of fun in front of your very large mirror Tringreen.

Definitely nothing wrong with admitting ignorance about something. But what about making provocative remarks about a subject which you subsequently admit ignorance of? Because that just looks like blindly ripping into people who don't share your point of view...

You are most definitely one astute observer, Mr Mouse.

tonycholwell wrote:

Penz wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Interesting that the Consortium could have bid to buy Argyle from the Administrator and didnt.

Two points there, Tony.

1...... it was trailed that the consortium thing was intended as an injection of cash to bump the playing side of the club, something the administration process was not about at all. That consortium were never trailed as property speculators.

2 ............ Even the likes of Todd/Gardner were reported as saying 'they couldn't get anywhere near the process'. If those fine gentlemen couldn't access the admin process, I'm sure nobody else would have been able to do so. .... they must have tried ever so hard to buy the club and put in the investment they had always wanted to, just like the penniless chap from Cornwall.

Evening PP, you are correct in the original intention of tthe Consortium, howeveer, as Argyle fans I would have thought that they would have been interested in buying Argyle out from the Administrator and not be lumbered with Stapes which was one of their original intentions. For me this is not about what they originally said they wanted to do, its about money and wanting to make Argyle into something better than they found them. The Consortium werent trailed as property Speculators? Well, to a greater or lesser extent everyone involved was and is but if thteir motives were pure there was no reason they had to follow suit.

To be honest, the thought of Todd/Gardner being involved again would have stopped me having a ST as I am sure it would have affected many others. So no loss there.

You're not actually suggesting that there could have been even the remotest possibility that-- had the club been marketed properly by Brendan or the Trust-- someone else other than JB might have been persuaded to register an interest in buying the Club? Especially for sweet FA up front and the rest as a promise over five years?

What heresy from one of the TINA brigade!

All I had ever heard about was that some mysterious Consortium had been out there begging to force Argyle into the Premiership. Given much information posted by people it sounded like an argument one comes up with and no facts attached. There are plenty who post put down like comments on here rather than argue a point so excuse me for thinking it might be the acceptable norm. Notice once some substance was put on the bones I accepted the existance of the Consortium and also admitted I was not on line at that time therefore genuinely had no knowledge of it. Also please note there appears to be a good few others who were not party to the info previously either.

I hardly call it "ripping into" unless "in one" is seen as the same. What about the poodle like constant putting down of people's opinion? I think there are plenty on here who are less than polite if they don't agree with something or jump on a bandwagon pasoti style. Many posters on here appear to have a style of posting which is used over and over. Well mine is to stick to my point and say so unless somebody else makes a point I can see and agree with. Now if that bores some people well tough that is me.

Grovehill wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Penz wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Interesting that the Consortium could have bid to buy Argyle from the Administrator and didnt.

Two points there, Tony.

1...... it was trailed that the consortium thing was intended as an injection of cash to bump the playing side of the club, something the administration process was not about at all. That consortium were never trailed as property speculators.

2 ............ Even the likes of Todd/Gardner were reported as saying 'they couldn't get anywhere near the process'. If those fine gentlemen couldn't access the admin process, I'm sure nobody else would have been able to do so. .... they must have tried ever so hard to buy the club and put in the investment they had always wanted to, just like the penniless chap from Cornwall.

Evening PP, you are correct in the original intention of tthe Consortium, howeveer, as Argyle fans I would have thought that they would have been interested in buying Argyle out from the Administrator and not be lumbered with Stapes which was one of their original intentions. For me this is not about what they originally said they wanted to do, its about money and wanting to make Argyle into something better than they found them. The Consortium werent trailed as property Speculators? Well, to a greater or lesser extent everyone involved was and is but if thteir motives were pure there was no reason they had to follow suit.

To be honest, the thought of Todd/Gardner being involved again would have stopped me having a ST as I am sure it would have affected many others. So no loss there.

You're not actually suggesting that there could have been even the remotest possibility that-- had the club been marketed properly by Brendan or the Trust-- someone else other than JB might have been persuaded to register an interest in buying the Club? Especially for sweet FA up front and the rest as a promise over five years?

What heresy from one of the TINA brigade!

Love it Grovey, love it:)

Complete nonesense, but it made me chuckle, thank you.

I am suggesting that according to Brendan the club was marketed comprehensively and only 3 "buyers" came forward. The former members of the Consortium did not collectively although Peter Jones was in the JB camp as a cheer leader from the off. They had an opportunity and did not pursue it.

There is always an alternative and on this occasion it was someone who gave an impression of being a fantasist and another who could not show he had 2 coins to rub together.

So, not a case of TINA but a simple dose of reality.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

All I had ever heard about was that some mysterious Consortium had been out there begging to force Argyle into the Premiership. Given much information posted by people it sounded like an argument one comes up with and no facts attached. There are plenty who post put down like comments on here rather than argue a point so excuse me for thinking it might be the acceptable norm. Notice once some substance was put on the bones I accepted the existance of the Consortium and also admitted I was not on line at that time therefore genuinely had no knowledge of it. Also please note there appears to be a good few others who were not party to the info previously either.

I hardly call it "ripping into" unless "in one" is seen as the same. What about the poodle like constant putting down of people's opinion? I think there are plenty on here who are less than polite if they don't agree with something or jump on a bandwagon pasoti style. Many posters on here appear to have a style of posting which is used over and over. Well mine is to stick to my point and say so unless somebody else makes a point I can see and agree with. Now if that bores some people well tough that is me.

Good for you SG. Now feck off

For anyone to have a pop at SG for ripping into someone on ATD is quite funny really, because we all know that he is merely fighting his corner, and giving back a bit of what is given out in much bigger doses by plenty on here, me included, and often by a pack of posters and not just one lone voice. He didn't have prior knowledge of the consortium, due to not being an online fan at the time, like myself, and he would be genuinely interested in seeing details of the rejected consortium.

Several others have expressed interest in seeing the details, and so would I if anyone has the time to post them on here, even if it is likely to rattle a few cages and stir up old emotions. If all is revealed, it will be interesting only, because that time has gone now. What would be interesting is to know how these people feel about Argyle now, and if they would ever approach Mr Brent with an offer of investment?

tonycholwell wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Penz wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Interesting that the Consortium could have bid to buy Argyle from the Administrator and didnt.

Two points there, Tony.

1...... it was trailed that the consortium thing was intended as an injection of cash to bump the playing side of the club, something the administration process was not about at all. That consortium were never trailed as property speculators.

2 ............ Even the likes of Todd/Gardner were reported as saying 'they couldn't get anywhere near the process'. If those fine gentlemen couldn't access the admin process, I'm sure nobody else would have been able to do so. .... they must have tried ever so hard to buy the club and put in the investment they had always wanted to, just like the penniless chap from Cornwall.

Evening PP, you are correct in the original intention of tthe Consortium, howeveer, as Argyle fans I would have thought that they would have been interested in buying Argyle out from the Administrator and not be lumbered with Stapes which was one of their original intentions. For me this is not about what they originally said they wanted to do, its about money and wanting to make Argyle into something better than they found them. The Consortium werent trailed as property Speculators? Well, to a greater or lesser extent everyone involved was and is but if thteir motives were pure there was no reason they had to follow suit.

To be honest, the thought of Todd/Gardner being involved again would have stopped me having a ST as I am sure it would have affected many others. So no loss there.

You're not actually suggesting that there could have been even the remotest possibility that-- had the club been marketed properly by Brendan or the Trust-- someone else other than JB might have been persuaded to register an interest in buying the Club? Especially for sweet FA up front and the rest as a promise over five years?

What heresy from one of the TINA brigade!

Love it Grovey, love it:)

Complete nonesense, but it made me chuckle, thank you.

I am suggesting that according to Brendan the club was marketed comprehensively and only 3 "buyers" came forward. The former members of the Consortium did not collectively although Peter Jones was in the JB camp as a cheer leader from the off. They had an opportunity and did not pursue it.

There is always an alternative and on this occasion it was someone who gave an impression of being a fantasist and another who could not show he had 2 coins to rub together.

So, not a case of TINA but a simple dose of reality.

Sorry Tony,not correct about Guilfoyle saying that the club had been marketed comprehensively.Here's what he said,posted for about the umpteenth time;

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

Greenskin wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Penz wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Interesting that the Consortium could have bid to buy Argyle from the Administrator and didnt.

Two points there, Tony.

1...... it was trailed that the consortium thing was intended as an injection of cash to bump the playing side of the club, something the administration process was not about at all. That consortium were never trailed as property speculators.

2 ............ Even the likes of Todd/Gardner were reported as saying 'they couldn't get anywhere near the process'. If those fine gentlemen couldn't access the admin process, I'm sure nobody else would have been able to do so. .... they must have tried ever so hard to buy the club and put in the investment they had always wanted to, just like the penniless chap from Cornwall.

Evening PP, you are correct in the original intention of tthe Consortium, howeveer, as Argyle fans I would have thought that they would have been interested in buying Argyle out from the Administrator and not be lumbered with Stapes which was one of their original intentions. For me this is not about what they originally said they wanted to do, its about money and wanting to make Argyle into something better than they found them. The Consortium werent trailed as property Speculators? Well, to a greater or lesser extent everyone involved was and is but if thteir motives were pure there was no reason they had to follow suit.

To be honest, the thought of Todd/Gardner being involved again would have stopped me having a ST as I am sure it would have affected many others. So no loss there.

You're not actually suggesting that there could have been even the remotest possibility that-- had the club been marketed properly by Brendan or the Trust-- someone else other than JB might have been persuaded to register an interest in buying the Club? Especially for sweet FA up front and the rest as a promise over five years?

What heresy from one of the TINA brigade!

Love it Grovey, love it:)

Complete nonesense, but it made me chuckle, thank you.

I am suggesting that according to Brendan the club was marketed comprehensively and only 3 "buyers" came forward. The former members of the Consortium did not collectively although Peter Jones was in the JB camp as a cheer leader from the off. They had an opportunity and did not pursue it.

There is always an alternative and on this occasion it was someone who gave an impression of being a fantasist and another who could not show he had 2 coins to rub together.

So, not a case of TINA but a simple dose of reality.

Sorry Tony,not correct about Guilfoyle saying that the club had been marketed comprehensively.Here's what he said,posted for about the umpteenth time;

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

Greenskin thank you for pointing that out to me.

However, this is from Graham Clark in Terraces on Pasoti on the 23.02.2012 as part of a much larger post trying to dispel some rumours:

"Others have implied that the club wasn't marketed properly. Brendan Guilfoyle marketed the club from early March until early May when he decided to go with BIL straight after the CVA meeting. They had an exclusive position until September when finally Guilfoyle conceded that the BIL deal was dead (if it was ever alive). Again he cast around for new interest before giving James Brent four weeks to complete the purchase of the club. The club and development opportunities were widely in the public domain. In truth the realisation by those who expressed interest was that the Football Creditor debt was too large, the development opportunity too little (particularly if the profits had to be shared with the Council) and negotiations with the secured creditors, including Lombard, too difficult."

Tricky one and as Graham points out the "club and development opportunities were widely in the public domain". There may be someone who missed it, but in the limited and closed worlds of football and property development on this scale that any serious player rwas left in the dark.

Ofcourse this would also rule out the Consortium being in the dark as their member, Peter Jones, was alread on board with the Contingency Group and would have told them.

Still, we are where we are.

Wonder why Guilfoyle changed his story? On March 8th,Guilfoyle states that he is not putting the club through marketing because Ridsdale and Hinchcliffe have done the work for him.Then Graham Clark states that the club WAS marketed from "early March",presumably on information provided by Guilfoyle.How early in March would that have been? March the 8th,when Guilfoyle made that statement,seems fairly early in the month to me.You don't think there could have been a bit of covering of tracks and wool over the eyes pulling on Brenda's part, having seen some reaction to his statement? Sounds plausible to me.Did Graham have any proof of this sudden change of procedure-was the information memorandum [whatever that may entail] actually produced after all and did he see written evidence of it or was it word of mouth only? And i don't accept that the "widest public domain" was ever explored.Sure,it would have been publicised in the sports pages of the national press [not to any particular extent,it must be said] but thats hardly a professional marketing job.And,dare i say it,were overseas climes,other than those already known to Ridsdale ever truly explored? I would doubt it very much.

Not having a pop at you Tony,i realise that Graham Clark would be in a much better position to answer most of the quesions and points above.I just don't want to see a situation whereby a botched administration process could be used an an excuse in future for seeking extra financial help,from whatever source and whereever, should we ever reach the second tier again.At least the apparent reluctance of some potential investors to take an interest in Argyle because of the financial situation that the club was in should not be a factor in future.Hopefully not,anyway.

Greenie

No offence taken, far to thick skinned:)

Edd Moore is writing a book about the Administration period which I thought was due out this year? Perhaps next, anyway, he's talking to everyone so should be a good read.

One of the best supported clubs in their division with the benefit of prime site development land and the whole deal supported by the local authority, yet only one interested party (who kept saying he wasn't interested) after more than nine months on the market?

I think it's self evident that the club wasn't properly marketed. And as Brendan didn't seem to be doing the marketing, why the hell didn't the Trust get off their collective backsides and go out and look for a buyer?


Or do we all know the answer?

tonycholwell wrote:

Greenie

No offence taken, far to thick skinned:)

Edd Moore is writing a book about the Administration period which I thought was due out this year? Perhaps next, anyway, he's talking to everyone so should be a good read.

Tone, it's probably been asked, (and answered) before, what WTF is the Cholwell/Hooper thing all about?