Genuine Question

So, I'm new here and reading through some of the posts with interest.

I understand the feeling that some people feel mugged by the current set-up, in that there are people at HP who will not have a word said against the current owners, management etc. As for Forza Verde, I think it is incredibly cheesy.

BUT

Putting aside personal distaste for 'organised' terrace fans groups (something more than slightly fascistic about it) and a 'jury's out' feeling on the current manager, I have to ask myself what alternative structure I would have voted for (in a world of free elections) over the current ownership. I can't think of one - not one that was realistic when we were genuinely close to extinction.

I'm interested to know - beyond calls of 'we're shit', 'the worst in Argyle history' etc - how anti-Brentians view an alternative. Did I miss something, or were we not, only months ago really, courting the prospect of a Kevin Heaney/Peter Ridsdale double act in charge of PAFC?

I get the objection that Brent has assumed control of something without putting anything tangible in but I'd like to hear what viable plans people could have put forward back then - and now.

Cheers and yours in Green

Personally I'm not anti-Brant as such, but I don't buy into this saintly image he's been given by the people who helped shoe-horn him into the hotseat with their endless support of him.

I don't even mind him making good money out of buying the club, which he certainly is with the sale of the car park and what he will make out of developing that land, plus the PCC contracts that have also landed in his lap since he took over.

What I would like to see is more investment in the club. A better, more experienced manager and coaching staff with experience who wouldn't have offered new contracts to all the fringe players like he did, leaving us with a bloated squad of similar standard players.

I would also like JB to pay the staff debt of quicker, instead of saddling the football club with that debt for 5 years. The amount owed in total is a drop in the ocean compared to what he will make out of all his upcoming development schemes.

What I do believe is that the club was deliberately undersold by the administrator and Peter Ridsdale, and then by some influential fans who scaremonged other potential bidders, so it was a no-brainer for James Brent to be hailed as the saviour. These people seem to be rewarded now by the club and we are saddled with debt and an owner who is only interested in property development.

These influential fans appear to have carte blanche to do what they like at Argyle now. Forza Verde? Family areas in block 17 of the Lyndhurst End? Murals for Darren Purse over many, many, many more deserving players, and the train wreck that is the PASB ffs?

There is still no-one with any previous experience of running a football club on board, as Peter Jones seems to have had his mouth taped over and his hands tied behind his back, and somebody at the club listened when it was suggested that a life-long supporter who had contributed an article in the match-day programme free of charge for years be removed, so they were. That stinks and is indicative of how Argyle is right now.

There are less attractive clubs than Argyle who get bought by people ready to splash out money to try and move up the leagues and build new stadiums etc. And all of a sudden these clubs have zoomed past us and are getting gates they could only have dreamed of years ago.

I'm thankful to the bottom of my heart that Ridsdale is no longer here, but that isn't because of James Brent at all, Ridsdale left to hatch some dastardly plan in Preston of his own accord. Brent was happy for the grinning shark to be here.

I don't rate Carl Fletcher as a manager, or Larrieu as a coach unfortunately, and at the end of last season there was the opportunity to replace them, or appoint someone with experience to assist them, but that wouldv'e cost money, so it didn't happen.

That's my beef with the current regime, but there is still the chance that Mr Brent could turn out to be the knight in shining armour he is portrayed as. We'll see I suppose.

Good post GJ

I'm now of the opinion that Ridsdale was parachuted in initially to try and preserve the financial interests of the old regime. There was no need for the club to be marketed, in fact it would be counter-productive to have any other bidder than Heaney and his mysterious backers.

It was a closed shop and the fact that there was a Yorkshire mafia and connections between Heaney and Stapleton's accountancy practice would seem to back this up.

You then have Ridsdale's scheme to buy the club for £1 and his desperate attempts to get that slum landlord Kassam involved before Ridsdale had no option (in order to preserve his reputation ) to back Brent.

At that stage debts had spiralled so far that in the timescales allowing Brent was the only show in town. I, like other fans, were convinced of this by prominent supporters on PASOTI and took part in many tactics anti Heaney and pro Brent. Some of these have either taken up positions within the club (President) or manage to have a home and away season ticket to the boardroom (Ian) or manage to be parachuted onto the PASB in a manner no-one understands (Lee). That indeed feeds the conspiracy theorists even more and understandably so.

What I would ask is this....

If the council had outlined in the Spring of 2011 the lengths they would go to preserve Plymouth Argyle could we have attracted other investors? Indeed if Ridsdale could buy the club for £1 why couldn't the Trust had worked with the council?

Unfortunately as we'll never know it serves both extremes of the argument well.

I have sympathy with many things you have written - from a purely day-to-day, week-to-week frustration angle of being a football fan, as much as anything else.

I guess the issue I have though is over the 'other options'. What were they? I don't remember any other viable options at the time - it was Brent or we were f**ked is how I remember it......and yes, there were people who were banging the drum endlessly for him but rightly so, given the circumstances.

I agree the administrator undersold the club but in the sense that they shut up shop as soon as BIL (good god) was the frontrunner.

It would be great if the staff debt was wiped away but it seems to me that the Brent regime is going to do everything based on affordability including - unfortunately - paying back those people who suffered under the previous regime. I understand the logic though....the aim is to extinguish the debt in the proper manner, balance the books and get back to an even keel. Ditto investment in the team. I don't agree he is only interested in property development but see why you would.

FV - agreed. Naff as you like.

For me, the danger in what you write is the line about less attractive clubs getting bought by people ready to splash out money etc. It's this type of 'investment' which has sent football to the dogs in the last 20 years. I would much rather Argyle kick around the lower leagues for a few more years but stabilise, than have the next idiot with some hare-brained scheme to climb aboard the gravy train come in to take us 'forward'.

I certainly don't regard Brent as a knight in shining armour - whether he succeeds or not as an owner (that measure of success being a competitive community-based football club) - but I do believe he was, remains, the best option of a bad lot......and I think he deserves more time to be hang himself or succeed.

I share your doubts about Fletcher but the season looks in the balance at the moment. A few more wins and who knows? I'd sack him purely for his painful interviews, mind you.

Perhaps I'm an idiot but I do buy Brent's 'social entrepreneur' sheen for the time being. Of course he wants to make money but - it seems - in an cleaner way than many others involved in the game.

An interesting thread, some very good posts, well done, a good read.

Nick Wall wrote:

I'm now of the opinion that Ridsdale was parachuted in initially to try and preserve the financial interests of the old regime..

Wow you mean at one stage you didn't think that Ridsdale was brought in to try and preserve the financial interests of the old regime?

Bogsider wrote:

Nick Wall wrote:

I'm now of the opinion that Ridsdale was parachuted in initially to try and preserve the financial interests of the old regime..

Wow you mean at one stage you didn't think that Ridsdale was brought in to try and preserve the financial interests of the old regime?

What I meant was that despite him claiming he didn't know who was behind BIL, I believe he did. They were also plainly linked to the previous board despite assertions they weren't. I didn't explain myself well Boggy

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

So, I'm new here and reading through some of the posts with interest.

I understand the feeling that some people feel mugged by the current set-up, in that there are people at HP who will not have a word said against the current owners, management etc. As for Forza Verde, I think it is incredibly cheesy.

BUT

Putting aside personal distaste for 'organised' terrace fans groups (something more than slightly fascistic about it) and a 'jury's out' feeling on the current manager, I have to ask myself what alternative structure I would have voted for (in a world of free elections) over the current ownership. I can't think of one - not one that was realistic when we were genuinely close to extinction.

I'm interested to know - beyond calls of 'we're shit', 'the worst in Argyle history' etc - how anti-Brentians view an alternative. Did I miss something, or were we not, only months ago really, courting the prospect of a Kevin Heaney/Peter Ridsdale double act in charge of PAFC?

I get the objection that Brent has assumed control of something without putting anything tangible in but I'd like to hear what viable plans people could have put forward back then - and now.

Cheers and yours in Green

Welcome to ATD Egbunike (I don't believe you're innocent! )

You can't think of an alternative structure? - It's been suggested that potential alternatives were put off by potential harassment and discouraged from entering the race to become the owners of PAFC. It's also been suggested that the club was purposely sold short when it came to advertising its sale and as well as a lack of encouragement from the "then", Trust leaders. - It would be speculation, but could the reason why you cannot think of an alternative be because you were not aware that a potential alternative may have existed? - It would have been difficult to come up with a viable plan back then if circumstances were withheld/unknown, in order to do so it would require a starting point and there isn't one.

As each day comes and goes my cynicism regarding Brent grows and, his alignments with unsavory characters hasn't helped, but he is the owner and there's not a lot we can do about that other than to encourage him to do his best for PAFC and also the City of Plymouth where his financial business dealings and land development projects are quite involved as they are throughout Devon. A watchful eye would do no harm, as citizens we are after all, James Brent's business partners and as Argyle fans we are James Brent's customers.

Nick Wall wrote:

What I would ask is this....

If the council had outlined in the Spring of 2011 the lengths they would go to preserve Plymouth Argyle could we have attracted other investors? Indeed if Ridsdale could buy the club for £1 why couldn't the Trust had worked with the council?

Unfortunately as we'll never know it serves both extremes of the argument well.

But at that point wasn't the council being assured by the Administrator that everything was going ahead as planned with BIL? What motivation did the council have until it was clear that the BIL deal had collapsed to commit public funds to buying back HP? That could only have happened if the alternative was liquidation.....prior to that, it was a purely private sector process.

Also, as much as I'd love to see a club truly owned by its fans, the council would have been crucified for spending money from the public purse on buying back the freehold and planning to work with an organisation which was basically a load of well-meaning amateurs. It had to be a public-private partnership.

[quote="GOB"]

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

Welcome to ATD Egbunike (I don't believe you're innocent! )

You can't think of an alternative structure? - It's been suggested that potential alternatives were put off by potential harassment and discouraged from entering the race to become the owners of PAFC. It's also been suggested that the club was purposely sold short when it came to advertising its sale and as well as a lack of encouragement from the "then", Trust leaders. - It would be speculation, but could the reason why you cannot think of an alternative be because you were not aware that a potential alternative may have existed? - It would have been difficult to come up with a viable plan back then if circumstances were withheld/unknown, in order to do so it would require a starting point and there isn't one.

As each day comes and goes my cynicism regarding Brent grows and, his alignments with unsavory characters hasn't helped, but he is the owner and there's not a lot we can do about that other than to encourage him to do his best for PAFC and also the City of Plymouth where his financial business dealings and land development projects are quite involved as they are throughout Devon. A watchful eye would do no harm, as citizens we are after all, James Brent's business partners and as Argyle fans we are James Brent's customers.

Cheers GOB....maybe not so Innocent - but certainly not deceitful.

This is where we enter rumour and conjecture though, isn't it? 'It's been suggested' etc - by whom, exactly? As an observer, it's only possibly to deal with sources as they are presented and proved. Yes, absolutely it's possible I can't think of a viable alternative plan because I wasn't aware that a potential alternative might have existed.....but equally, when it was clear BIL was never truly in the game, what was to stop such interested parties using all forms of information outlets to sing it from the rooftops? I don't remember anything like that - apart from Brent there was nada....and more importantly, there was no time left after the BIL debacle.

I absolutely agree people like Chris Webb, Graham Clark and Ian Newell had an agenda but I also believe that agenda extended as far as saving PAFC - and they were the people to get off their arses and do the work.

I confess to being an exile and am not currently party to the atmosphere at Home Park, so I reserve judgement on - months down the line - how those same characters (are they the unsavoury people to whom you allude?) have/haven't abused their position. For all I know, they could be akin to the pigs in Animal Farm.....

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

Nick Wall wrote:

What I would ask is this....

If the council had outlined in the Spring of 2011 the lengths they would go to preserve Plymouth Argyle could we have attracted other investors? Indeed if Ridsdale could buy the club for £1 why couldn't the Trust had worked with the council?

Unfortunately as we'll never know it serves both extremes of the argument well.

But at that point wasn't the council being assured by the Administrator that everything was going ahead as planned with BIL? What motivation did the council have until it was clear that the BIL deal had collapsed to commit public funds to buying back HP? That could only have happened if the alternative was liquidation.....prior to that, it was a purely private sector process.

Also, as much as I'd love to see a club truly owned by its fans, the council would have been crucified for spending money from the public purse on buying back the freehold and planning to work with an organisation which was basically a load of well-meaning amateurs. It had to be a public-private partnership.

This is a big point. If PCC had made it public knowledge that they would provide a large lump sum to buy Home Park, and lease it back at a sensible rental, which is the case now, that would suely have put such a dent in the overall debt that it could have looked a far more attractive investment than we kept seeing?

It doesn't matter that the administrator was making big noises about BIL having the funds in place, as everyone knew they didn't have the money and anyone with a bit of gumption could have called Guilfoyle's or Heaney's bluff.

All we kept seeing were shocking headlines about £17 million of debt and no money to pay wages, staff going unpaid, bills not being paid etc. It was a horror show. Ridsdale could not have painted a grimmer picture if he had tried. It was as if he wanted it known that there was no point in anyone being interested

Now spin it on it's head and if Ridsdale or Guilfoyle had been making noises about the potential at Argyle, the catchment area, how it was only recently we were in the Championship and challenging, the fact that the local council were amenable to looking favourably on any potential devlopment if it helped the club survive, then I would think that it would have looked a whole lot more rosy than the bleak outlook being painted by Ridsdale where he looked like an undertaker when facing the press!

Again this is only my opinion and I wasn't party to what was going on behind closed doors but it all looked mighty suspicious to me and I kept saying so on Pasoti.

[quote="Innocent Egbunike"]

GOB wrote:

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

Welcome to ATD Egbunike (I don't believe you're innocent! )

You can't think of an alternative structure? - It's been suggested that potential alternatives were put off by potential harassment and discouraged from entering the race to become the owners of PAFC. It's also been suggested that the club was purposely sold short when it came to advertising its sale and as well as a lack of encouragement from the "then", Trust leaders. - It would be speculation, but could the reason why you cannot think of an alternative be because you were not aware that a potential alternative may have existed? - It would have been difficult to come up with a viable plan back then if circumstances were withheld/unknown, in order to do so it would require a starting point and there isn't one.

As each day comes and goes my cynicism regarding Brent grows and, his alignments with unsavory characters hasn't helped, but he is the owner and there's not a lot we can do about that other than to encourage him to do his best for PAFC and also the City of Plymouth where his financial business dealings and land development projects are quite involved as they are throughout Devon. A watchful eye would do no harm, as citizens we are after all, James Brent's business partners and as Argyle fans we are James Brent's customers.

Cheers GOB....maybe not so Innocent - but certainly not deceitful.

This is where we enter rumour and conjecture though, isn't it? 'It's been suggested' etc - by whom, exactly? As an observer, it's only possibly to deal with sources as they are presented and proved. Yes, absolutely it's possible I can't think of a viable alternative plan because I wasn't aware that a potential alternative might have existed.....but equally, when it was clear BIL was never truly in the game, what was to stop such interested parties using all forms of information outlets to sing it from the rooftops? I don't remember anything like that - apart from Brent there was nada....and more importantly, there was no time left after the BIL debacle.

I absolutely agree people like Chris Webb, Graham Clark and Ian Newell had an agenda but I also believe that agenda extended as far as saving PAFC - and they were the people to get off their arses and do the work.

I confess to being an exile and am not currently party to the atmosphere at Home Park, so I reserve judgement on - months down the line - how those same characters (are they the unsavoury people to whom you allude?) have/haven't abused their position. For all I know, they could be akin to the pigs in Animal Farm.....

Yup, all difficult to argue with Egb.

At the end of the day it comes down to looking at the evidence, taking on board track record, assessing motive and evaluating past and present conduct, then you should get a general feel for the path that some have taken and are taking.

Greenjock wrote:

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

Nick Wall wrote:

What I would ask is this....

If the council had outlined in the Spring of 2011 the lengths they would go to preserve Plymouth Argyle could we have attracted other investors? Indeed if Ridsdale could buy the club for £1 why couldn't the Trust had worked with the council?

Unfortunately as we'll never know it serves both extremes of the argument well.

But at that point wasn't the council being assured by the Administrator that everything was going ahead as planned with BIL? What motivation did the council have until it was clear that the BIL deal had collapsed to commit public funds to buying back HP? That could only have happened if the alternative was liquidation.....prior to that, it was a purely private sector process.

Also, as much as I'd love to see a club truly owned by its fans, the council would have been crucified for spending money from the public purse on buying back the freehold and planning to work with an organisation which was basically a load of well-meaning amateurs. It had to be a public-private partnership.

This is a big point. If PCC had made it public knowledge that they would provide a large lump sum to buy Home Park, and lease it back at a sensible rental, which is the case now, that would suely have put such a dent in the overall debt that it could have looked a far more attractive investment than we kept seeing?

It doesn't matter that the administrator was making big noises about BIL having the funds in place, as everyone knew they didn't have the money and anyone with a bit of gumption could have called Guilfoyle's or Heaney's bluff.

All we kept seeing were shocking headlines about £17 million of debt and no money to pay wages, staff going unpaid, bills not being paid etc. It was a horror show. Ridsdale could not have painted a grimmer picture if he had tried. It was as if he wanted it known that there was no point in anyone being interested

Now spin it on it's head and if Ridsdale or Guilfoyle had been making noises about the potential at Argyle, the catchment area, how it was only recently we were in the Championship and challenging, the fact that the local council were amenable to looking favourably on any potential devlopment if it helped the club survive, then I would think that it would have looked a whole lot more rosy than the bleak outlook being painted by Ridsdale where he looked like an undertaker when facing the press!

Again this is only my opinion and I wasn't party to what was going on behind closed doors but it all looked mighty suspicious to me and I kept saying so on Pasoti.

Well, my point is that I don't think PCC could make it public knowledge until the Administrator - as the legally appointed master of the process - confirmed that the BIL deal had collapsed. Further, I don't think PCC was prepared to provide that lump sum whilst there was even a cat in hell's chance the BIL deal - or 'Monacogate' - might bear fruit.

The landscape shifted once Guilfoyle accepted the invevitable and effectively declared Heaney and co an utter joker.

I don't disagree the initial process was a stitch up.

I don't agree that the club "wasnt marketed". It was widely known that it was for sale at a knockdown price. Everybody who followed any reputable football news source would have known the club was up for grabs but nobody stepped forward and when Brent was about to take over he was gazumped by Heaney promising £1m.

Is ATD growing up? You have posted 5 times on this thread including the opening one and nobody has posted a yet. You are priviledged indeed Innocent. Perhaps it's your eloquence. What you are suggesting as other people have suggested before is that the suspicion of Brent and his take over and motives are based on feeling rather than any positive fact. None of us know if the marketing was done properly for sure but most seem to assume it wasn't on here. They may well be right but could equally be wrong and there wasn't anyone else willing around. I too have not heard of anyone else's interest in buying Argyle other than the publicised ones that were on the table originally.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I don't agree that the club "wasnt marketed". It was widely known that it was for sale at a knockdown price. Everybody who followed any reputable football news source would have known the club was up for grabs but nobody stepped forward and when Brent was about to take over he was gazumped by Heaney promising £1m.

Maybe they just werent allowed into the bidding process?

And maybe they didn't exist Bogsider. Each way is as possible as the other isn't it?

Bogsider wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I don't agree that the club "wasnt marketed". It was widely known that it was for sale at a knockdown price. Everybody who followed any reputable football news source would have known the club was up for grabs but nobody stepped forward and when Brent was about to take over he was gazumped by Heaney promising £1m.

Maybe they just werent allowed into the bidding process?

Like Buttivant? Consider his relationship with Wrexham FC. I'm glad he was kept out. Who else was there? I don't recall anybody claiming that they were excluded apart from him.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

Is ATD growing up? You have posted 5 times on this thread including the opening one and nobody has posted a yet. You are priviledged indeed Innocent. Perhaps it's your eloquence. What you are suggesting as other people have suggested before is that the suspicion of Brent and his take over and motives are based on feeling rather than any positive fact. None of us know if the marketing was done properly for sure but most seem to assume it wasn't on here. They may well be right but could equally be wrong and there wasn't anyone else willing around. I too have not heard of anyone else's interest in buying Argyle other than the publicised ones that were on the table originally.

Here's a fact for you to throw around then Sensie, Brent has asset stripped the club by trousering the car park for his pension fund. How does this aid Argyle? The council effectively bought that land for him, I have to pay into my pension fund why should Brent be subsidised by us the club and the council? Stapletons plans were always for the land to be developed around the club, and to build a hotel, live music venue and event arena to provide non match day income for the club to use on the field to progress up through the leagues. Brent's plan is to give us the stadium (I haven't seen the plans or the timescale for this although the initial transfer of the land to pension fund took place in about 5 minutes) are based on him having the hotel and I believe the attached facilities. Are we being mugged? Shut that stable door will you, I just saw a horse galloping down Alma Road.

Iggy wrote:

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

Is ATD growing up? You have posted 5 times on this thread including the opening one and nobody has posted a yet. You are priviledged indeed Innocent. Perhaps it's your eloquence. What you are suggesting as other people have suggested before is that the suspicion of Brent and his take over and motives are based on feeling rather than any positive fact. None of us know if the marketing was done properly for sure but most seem to assume it wasn't on here. They may well be right but could equally be wrong and there wasn't anyone else willing around. I too have not heard of anyone else's interest in buying Argyle other than the publicised ones that were on the table originally.

Here's a fact for you to throw around then Sensie, Brent has asset stripped the club by trousering the car park for his pension fund. How does this aid Argyle? The council effectively bought that land for him, I have to pay into my pension fund why should Brent be subsidised by us the club and the council? Stapletons plans were always for the land to be developed around the club, and to build a hotel, live music venue and event arena to provide non match day income for the club to use on the field to progress up through the leagues. Brent's plan is to give us the stadium (I haven't seen the plans or the timescale for this although the initial transfer of the land to pension fund took place in about 5 minutes) are based on him having the hotel and I believe the attached facilities. Are we being mugged? Shut that stable door will you, I just saw a horse galloping down Alma Road.

Another way of looking at it is that the Brent deal enabled the ground to come back into public hands, something I feel much more comfortable with.....imagine if the NWO had succeeded - would you really have been happy with Home Park belonging to Mastpoint, or similar? I'm relieved that PCC are now the custodians again and can act to ensure the precious covenants on the football ground will remain in place.

I think the car park was a small price to pay and at least something useful might be done with it.

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

I have sympathy with many things you have written - from a purely day-to-day, week-to-week frustration angle of being a football fan, as much as anything else.

I guess the issue I have though is over the 'other options'. What were they? I don't remember any other viable options at the time - it was Brent or we were f**ked is how I remember it......and yes, there were people who were banging the drum endlessly for him but rightly so, given the circumstances.

I agree the administrator undersold the club but in the sense that they shut up shop as soon as BIL (good god) was the frontrunner.

It would be great if the staff debt was wiped away but it seems to me that the Brent regime is going to do everything based on affordability including - unfortunately - paying back those people who suffered under the previous regime. I understand the logic though....the aim is to extinguish the debt in the proper manner, balance the books and get back to an even keel. Ditto investment in the team. I don't agree he is only interested in property development but see why you would.

FV - agreed. Naff as you like.

For me, the danger in what you write is the line about less attractive clubs getting bought by people ready to splash out money etc. It's this type of 'investment' which has sent football to the dogs in the last 20 years. I would much rather Argyle kick around the lower leagues for a few more years but stabilise, than have the next idiot with some hare-brained scheme to climb aboard the gravy train come in to take us 'forward'.
I certainly don't regard Brent as a knight in shining armour - whether he succeeds or not as an owner (that measure of success being a competitive community-based football club) - but I do believe he was, remains, the best option of a bad lot......and I think he deserves more time to be hang himself or succeed.

I share your doubts about Fletcher but the season looks in the balance at the moment. A few more wins and who knows? I'd sack him purely for his painful interviews, mind you.

Perhaps I'm an idiot but I do buy Brent's 'social entrepreneur' sheen for the time being. Of course he wants to make money but - it seems - in an cleaner way than many others involved in the game.

In what way has football gone to the dogs solely in the last 20 years? Wracking up debt has always,repeat always, been a feature of professional football in my time as a supporter and always will be.Accrington Stanley went bust in the 1960's,Chelsea,Sheffield United,Luton were in severe trouble in the 1970's,Bristol City in the 1980's etc.If any sort of progress is to be made,then financial investment of one sort or another is a must and if you read my signature,Mr Brent has stated that it will be forthcoming [and he has also said that the club has budgeted to make a loss this season,as was the case last season]-if it isn't,then Argyle will be kicking around the lower leagues for a good deal longer than you may think.The situation is bad enough now-Argyle have yet again been overtaken by a clutch of clubs such as Reading,Blackpool,Hull,Cardiff and Swansea who, by appropriate investment and ambition at the right time,have established themselves as outfits that are very unlikely to be in the lower leagues for many years to come-exactly the same scenario happened in the 1960's when clubs like Ipswich,Southampton,Norwich,Palace,QPR etc,whose history was no better [in some cases significantly inferior] seized their moments and have reaped the benfits ever since.Argyle's demise was not brought about by overspend as such but by bad timing,lack of real intent and shocking decision making-you certainly can't say that football has gone to the dogs in the aforementioned cities in comparison.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

Is ATD growing up? You have posted 5 times on this thread including the opening one and nobody has posted a yet. You are priviledged indeed Innocent. Perhaps it's your eloquence. What you are suggesting as other people have suggested before is that the suspicion of Brent and his take over and motives are based on feeling rather than any positive fact. None of us know if the marketing was done properly for sure but most seem to assume it wasn't on here. They may well be right but could equally be wrong and there wasn't anyone else willing around. I too have not heard of anyone else's interest in buying Argyle other than the publicised ones that were on the table originally.

There you go again.It was a fact that the marketing wsn't done properly because Guilfoyle said in public that Ridsdale and his cohort had already done the work.You really ought to change your user name to Illresearchedgreen.Wouldn't like to go into a board meeting with a dossier of "facts" provided by yourself.

There was no London consortium.Honest.

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

Iggy wrote:

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

Is ATD growing up? You have posted 5 times on this thread including the opening one and nobody has posted a yet. You are priviledged indeed Innocent. Perhaps it's your eloquence. What you are suggesting as other people have suggested before is that the suspicion of Brent and his take over and motives are based on feeling rather than any positive fact. None of us know if the marketing was done properly for sure but most seem to assume it wasn't on here. They may well be right but could equally be wrong and there wasn't anyone else willing around. I too have not heard of anyone else's interest in buying Argyle other than the publicised ones that were on the table originally.

Here's a fact for you to throw around then Sensie, Brent has asset stripped the club by trousering the car park for his pension fund. How does this aid Argyle? The council effectively bought that land for him, I have to pay into my pension fund why should Brent be subsidised by us the club and the council? Stapletons plans were always for the land to be developed around the club, and to build a hotel, live music venue and event arena to provide non match day income for the club to use on the field to progress up through the leagues. Brent's plan is to give us the stadium (I haven't seen the plans or the timescale for this although the initial transfer of the land to pension fund took place in about 5 minutes) are based on him having the hotel and I believe the attached facilities. Are we being mugged? Shut that stable door will you, I just saw a horse galloping down Alma Road.

Another way of looking at it is that the Brent deal enabled the ground to come back into public hands, something I feel much more comfortable with.....imagine if the NWO had succeeded - would you really have been happy with Home Park belonging to Mastpoint, or similar? I'm relieved that PCC are now the custodians again and can act to ensure the precious covenants on the football ground will remain in place.

I think the car park was a small price to pay and at least something useful might be done with it.

I have a real problem giving the only asset that the club has to a multi millionaire to aid his pension fund. the mast point point is irrelevant, it didn't happen. As for something usefull I would regard the music venue hotel belonging to the club, as in the model at Norwich, to be much more useful to the club itself. If I was to help myself to any of the money or assets that belong to the club then I would be in the courts and rightly so. the fact that the asset stripping has been done by a millionaire ex banker is fine apparently. As for anybody else trying to get rich off the sale of any other parts of the ground we had to unleash the dogs of war, but with Brent Whallah it's fine, why do I know it's fine? Because he has a legion of foot soldiers to plead his case for him (in case you haven't noticed he doesn't engage with us the fans).

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

For me, the danger in what you write is the line about less attractive clubs getting bought by people ready to splash out money etc. It's this type of 'investment' which has sent football to the dogs in the last 20 years. I would much rather Argyle kick around the lower leagues for a few more years but stabilise, than have the next idiot with some hare-brained scheme to climb aboard the gravy train come in to take us 'forward'.

Welcome and thanks for joining, you've added to the debate in a rational and intelligent manner.

I'm sorry to selectively quote (you can't get away with that on Pasoti ) but although you are quite correct it highlights why there is a anti owner (any owner) feeling that is expressed on here.

For us oldies to be where we are now makes us more than angry, we all know it's not Brent's fault, but the scenario of slow and steady consolidation and then...what...is too depressing not to scrutinise and complain about.

At the risk of boring everybody by repeating myself, my first game in 1962 saw us beat Preston 7-1, my two great uncles who lived in Peverell Park Road took me and both were lifelong supporters in their 60's. My Uncle Billy said to me "we've never been in the1st Division, we nearly made it last year, so maybe this is the season". If you look at the details of season 61/2, especially the last 6 games on GOS Still makes me cry you'll see what I mean. 50 years on and that aspiration is more of a pipedream than it's ever been. I'm now approaching the age my uncles were then and all I can look back on are occasional highlights in a lifetimes worth of, at best, mediocraty. There were opportunities to grasp the mettle under Waiters and Holloway and to a lesser extent, The Ciderman but it always ends up same old Argo.

Greenskin can present a much more cogent argument for where we could/should be with his analysis of Swansea and Norwich, for example. We've suffered under owner after owner failing to do the job they took on. That's now Brent's job and is why he'll never have an easy ride from some of us. We all like to moan about Portsmouth, but I tell you what, as a supporter I'd quite happily take where they are now for the chance to have experienced seasons in the top flight, European competition and an FA Cup win. The debts they've incurred, the people they've bankrupted would not weigh heavily on my conscience because success as a football supporter is what it's all about. If I were to win xillions on the Euro lottery, I'd quite happily (now) piss it all up against the Plymouth Argyle wall just for me.