Brent can't find right Chairman

Damon would have been a dead cert for the GasBoard if he'd decided to stand - instead we get lumbered with Mr Huff and Puff!

You really cant have Chairman who has no belief in the strategic direction of the owner!

As for GasBoard I don't accept its validity.

Guess you lot will have to put up with me a little bit longer.

No problemo Damon you are always a good read

It certainly is a very sad state of affairs. I really wonder what Brent really thinks and what his plans really are. The way things are headed we'll end up with the lunatics actually owning the asylum and attendances of 3k in the BSP .
It doesn't bgbear thinking about too much

Still, we'll have bigger flags than our opposition and England's 13th largest city club will be oh so impressive taking 500 Avivas to Braintree

Tringreen wrote:

It certainly is a very sad state of affairs. I really wonder what Brent really thinks and what his plans really are. The way things are headed we'll end up with the lunatics actually owning the asylum and attendances of 3k in the BSP .
It doesn't bgbear thinking about too much

Still, we'll have bigger flags than our opposition and England's 13th largest city club will be oh so impressive taking 500 Avivas to Braintree

Not to mention the Nerd fests, Zee Zan, and awards for the best fan/s in the league

Sorry, is it National Bullshit Week and I missed the announcement?


Over a year to find a Chairman for a football club? Someones having a laugh surely?

Brent's putting money into the club because attendances are "just under" the breakeven figure? This might be a bit more believable if JB was to say what the breakeven figure is. Is it 6301 and JB's having to fork out the extra £20 per game?

Losing money because the overheads are too high? Well you own the Club JB, that's in your control surely? Why's the overheads so high, you don't even employ enough staff to send out the season tickets without getting the gullible to give a hand. I suspect that you'll try to get the new stand built on the "Petrocelli" system and ask the fans to "bring a brick" every time they turn up at Home Park. Hey you missed a trick letting the manager sign a fireman, I bet you wish he could unearth another Tony Book so you could get him to build the stand before flogging him off.

Trying to "enhance the matchday experience" Does he really not get it? Does he really think anyone goes to Home Park because of the pasties? To paraphrase Bill Clinton (and JB should have this writ large on his office wall)

IT'S ABOUT THE FOOTBALL, STUPID

As for DL and why the Stapes Board wouldn't look at outside investment, his statement just confirms tha Board were more interested in their personal status and situation than in allowing the club to move forward.


A club that came out of Administration just a year before Argyle has just announced the appointment of one of the most charismatic managers in the country, any bets that the next manager argyle appoint won't even be a household name in his own house?

Just where did i say we wouldnt look at outside investment?

I said we WERE looking at outside investment to move the club forward.

Maybe Brent hasn't found a chairman because nobody wants to work for him because they see his plan as a complete joke.

I think Grovehill's suggesting that investment was being sought too late and only if the current directors could stay in position............. the japs got conned when the club was already in trouble and had sold the crown jewels to make the books look good.

Surely a decent Chair will require a decent salary is that where the problem lies?

So is the head hunting company employed to find a new Chairman not turning anyone up, or does no one want to get involved with our nice little club?

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Just where did i say we wouldnt look at outside investment?

I said we WERE looking at outside investment to move the club forward.

Damon,you mention that the board members were seeking investment back in the early CCC days.On a general basis and ignoring any of the details of what happened at the time,why do think it has always appeared to be so difficult to attract the appropriate investment to Plymouth Argyle? I was reading yesterday that Mr Palladino and his consortium have put in a £30m bid for Birmingham.Now,bizarre as it may seem,i would regard Argyle as being a club which could achieve just as much as Birmingham given the right circumstances-clubs of basically the same raw material as Argyle,such as Saints,Ipswich,Norwich,Swansea,Cardiff etc have shown the way over many years.I'm not specifically talking about Palladino but it strikes me as people of his type seem to be unaware of what really could be achieved down here with a bit of real money.Any idea as to why that should be?

Greenskin in the conversations i had it was our location that was the problem. Rangell was totally focussed on investment into a London club. Hard Rock Corp basically had all of Europe to look at to roll out their hotel concepts and Plymouth just didnt hack it in their eyes.

Not wanting to put this all on a lack of support from fans, but the weekend after Ollie left and Bulpin and Breaker led the team to victory at Sheff Utd and 4th place in the Championship we could only get 12.000 - 4th in the Championship, playing good football and only 12,000 at a Saturday home game (i had left the Board by this time).

investors want a return. A football club, especially one stripped of its property assets can never offer that. I am afraid that short of one of us winning the Euromillions on Tuesdaywe are going to be a 'Community Club' for some time. All the more reason for the Community to be inclusive, not divisive.

Oh well, i wonder if nools best pals the chuclke bro's could buy out the banker!

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Greenskin in the conversations i had it was our location that was the problem. Rangell was totally focussed on investment into a London club. Hard Rock Corp basically had all of Europe to look at to roll out their hotel concepts and Plymouth just didnt hack it in their eyes.

Not wanting to put this all on a lack of support from fans, but the weekend after Ollie left and Bulpin and Breaker led the team to victory at Sheff Utd and 4th place in the Championship we could only get 12.000 - 4th in the Championship, playing good football and only 12,000 at a Saturday home game (i had left the Board by this time).

investors want a return. A football club, especially one stripped of its property assets can never offer that. I am afraid that short of one of us winning the Euromillions on Tuesdaywe are going to be a 'Community Club' for some time. All the more reason for the Community to be inclusive, not divisive.

This is what has always bugged me with Brent. IMO it is not ok for him to asset strip the club because he saved us, why should he? Why should anybody be able to do this? When Heaney wanted to do it we had to call in the dogs of war, now that Brent has done it we should applaud him and wish him well? Brent is looking after Brent, he is not a guardian on the club, he is a property developer, end of.

The reasons the support is not there have been explained many times. Stapleton made a big fuss about moderate attendance figures and was supported by the Pasoti Politburo.
Until it sinks in that our history, or rather the lack of one is the problem, history will continue to repeat itself, at some time in the distant future.
Even with Holloway performing miracles, I and others could see what was coming next.
Cash backed ambition would change things but only top flight exposure will cement the fanbase.

Iggy wrote:

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Greenskin in the conversations i had it was our location that was the problem. Rangell was totally focussed on investment into a London club. Hard Rock Corp basically had all of Europe to look at to roll out their hotel concepts and Plymouth just didnt hack it in their eyes.

Not wanting to put this all on a lack of support from fans, but the weekend after Ollie left and Bulpin and Breaker led the team to victory at Sheff Utd and 4th place in the Championship we could only get 12.000 - 4th in the Championship, playing good football and only 12,000 at a Saturday home game (i had left the Board by this time).

investors want a return. A football club, especially one stripped of its property assets can never offer that. I am afraid that short of one of us winning the Euromillions on Tuesdaywe are going to be a 'Community Club' for some time. All the more reason for the Community to be inclusive, not divisive.

This is what has always bugged me with Brent. IMO it is not ok for him to asset strip the club because he saved us, why should he? Why should anybody be able to do this? When Heaney wanted to do it we had to call in the dogs of war, now that Brent has done it we should applaud him and wish him well? Brent is looking after Brent, he is not a guardian on the club, he is a property developer, end of.

But some people have looked him in the eyes More like they were promised position and influence if they backed him. Very sad. Very naive but very predictable.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Greenskin in the conversations i had it was our location that was the problem. Rangell was totally focussed on investment into a London club. Hard Rock Corp basically had all of Europe to look at to roll out their hotel concepts and Plymouth just didnt hack it in their eyes.

Not wanting to put this all on a lack of support from fans, but the weekend after Ollie left and Bulpin and Breaker led the team to victory at Sheff Utd and 4th place in the Championship we could only get 12.000 - 4th in the Championship, playing good football and only 12,000 at a Saturday home game (i had left the Board by this time).

investors want a return. A football club, especially one stripped of its property assets can never offer that. I am afraid that short of one of us winning the Euromillions on Tuesdaywe are going to be a 'Community Club' for some time. All the more reason for the Community to be inclusive, not divisive.

I've never swallowed the "crowds were to blame"argument.As has been pointed out before,the football at HP under Holloway wasn't really that good in 2007/8 apart from a real destruction job on Norwich in Holloway's last match- a tour de force which bore all the hallmarks of a developing,true promotion chasing team.You can bet your bottom dollar that if that team had been kept together under H and the genuine challenge maintained [i'm convinced it would have been] the gates would have crescendoed after xmas-they always do in successful Argyle seasons.And there were many other clubs who went on to reach the premier from an equal or worse fan base than ours-Blackpool the prime example but there were other such as Stoke,Swansea,Cardiff and Burnley [who had a home gate of 10000 in March of their promotion season].

You say Investors want a return-i can't understand what Reading,Hull,Cardiff,Swansea,Bournemouth,Blackpool even Fleetwood and Crawley FFS,had to offer in terms of that potentiality that Argyle didn't.Still can't believe that a wide ranging,extensive marketing job wouldn't pay dividends-other clubs have overcome the location factor-what advantage would Sawnsea have location wise compared to Plymouth?

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Yes I was on Board when the Consortium made its offer. If we look just at what the offer entailed as opposed to the ludicrous shannanigans before we even saw the offer document it stated that 3 of the then 5 member board were to be replaced. No discussions, no negotiations. The Consortium required that Stapleton and Wrathall bought out Gill, Dennerley and myself then handed over the shares to the Consortium in return for the Consortium investing their cash.

A number of hings to consider. Firstly maybe the 3 didnt want to go at that time. It was a divide and conquer offer but we were quite a tight unit at that time. I cannot stress enoigh the importance of a strong unity in the Boardroom. Look what happened later when we had 3 way splits between Directors.

Secondly and I only speak for myself here, it would have been important for me to know who I was handing over the reins to. I knew the Chair was to be the woman from the National Lottery but just who else made up the Consortium and the personalities wh were to serve on the Board were not made clear. Also remember that we had a system of one man one vote at the time. Paul and Tony would have been in the minority.

Then there was the question of the valuation of the Club, the 3 being bought out agreeing a valuation on shares and then the 2 buying us out agreeing that valuation and actually having the money to buy them. When both Nick and I left we had no need to formally value the company. We had a price in mind and it was settled with a handshake.

Make no mistake the way of doing business had made this a hostile offer. Normally on a hostile takeover the buyer will make increasing offers to the person selling the shares until that person says yes. The Consortium did not wish to enter those negotiations. I had put my life savings into the football club. I was not wanted on the board for my cash, but for other attributes I could bring to the table. We all thought the divide and conquer theme to the offer was completely out of order.

Despite the general belief that we were not actively looking for outside investment there were also other avenues being pursued. In addition to my trips to the States Phil was talking with a prominent firm of football 'dealmakers' and Paul was also talking to a couple of very wealthy individuals.

we knew investment was needed at that time to push us on, but we were financially sound and did not have a desperate need for a cash injection. When things are desperate you do desperate things. I wasnt around but Kagami, Synan, Todd and Gardner all smacked of desperation.

To try and force people who do not have that desperate need into a corner will not work. That was the Consortiums error.

The comments in bold certainly seem to point to there being more interest in people keeping their positions than improving the club's.

The underlined paragraph must rank along side the CPer's "there was no one but Brent"

PS, None of my business and you don't need to answer if you don't want to, but did you make money out of your time on the Board?

Yes i sold my shares for more than i paid for them. But at the same time i was working a minimum of 30 hours a week at the club. And when i bought the shares we were a struggling championship club. When i sold them we considered a top half established club, therefore the shares were worth more.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Yes i sold my shares for more than i paid for them. But at the same time i was working a minimum of 30 hours a week at the club. And when i bought the shares we were a struggling championship club. When i sold them we considered a top half established club, therefore the shares were worth more.

The 'established Championship club' is another misnomer in my opinion. It was oft used alongside the organic model/ year on year progress.

There is no such thing as being established, when you have no money in the boardroom and no top flight history with the associated , developed fanbase.

Pulis and then Holloway were outstanding managers and both knew the club didn't have the money to progress. Once you try to be 'established' and tread water, the inevitable slide is just round the corner as your best staff get picked off.

I welcome and appreciate Damon's contribution here however Some re writing of history has Taken place. When we got promoted with record season ticket sales we bought a bunch of Scottish journeymen. Makel, Milne, Crawford. Swansea and Blackpool realised that you have you have to capitalise on momentum. We didn't.

Fwiw I don't believe the 'discussions' that took place, a group of provincial businessmen opt of their depth hoping that it would make them rich. But All credit to Damon for engaging discussion here no one else has.

Bogsider wrote:

I welcome and appreciate Damon's contribution here however Some re writing of history has Taken place. When we got promoted with record season ticket sales we bought a bunch of Scottish journeymen. Makel, Milne, Crawford. Swansea and Blackpool realised that you have you have to capitalise on momentum. We didn't.

Fwiw I don't believe the 'discussions' that took place, a group of provincial businessmen opt of their depth hoping that it would make them rich. But All credit to Damon for engaging discussion here no one else has.

Stevie Crawford came in for a lot of stick after leaving us, and a fair bit during his 6 months here, but he only started 19 games in the Championship and scored 6 goals.

We got him on a free transfer, and sold him for £80,000, and his only problem was homesickness. A similar thing happened to him earlier in his career when he left Millwall for the same reason. He scored 11 goals for Millwall in 40 games as well before he went back to Scotland and Millwall got £360k for him from Hibs after getting him on a free transfer.

I know it was rumoured that he was on £8,000 a week playing for us and only lasted 6 months, but I always felt the stick he got was a bit unfair.

A pretty decent striker on his day who regularly scored in the Scottish Premier League for Dunfermline, who were hardly a big club. He's one that I would exempt from the "Scottish journeymen" tag. He'd had 4 clubs before us, and was only 30 when we signed him.

There have been a lot of clubs who wanted him during his career, but he didn't enjoy life in England.

The others you named I would agree with.

Greenjock wrote:

Bogsider wrote:

I welcome and appreciate Damon's contribution here however Some re writing of history has Taken place. When we got promoted with record season ticket sales we bought a bunch of Scottish journeymen. Makel, Milne, Crawford. Swansea and Blackpool realised that you have you have to capitalise on momentum. We didn't.

Fwiw I don't believe the 'discussions' that took place, a group of provincial businessmen opt of their depth hoping that it would make them rich. But All credit to Damon for engaging discussion here no one else has.

Stevie Crawford came in for a lot of stick after leaving us, and a fair bit during his 6 months here, but he only started 19 games in the Championship and scored 6 goals.

We got him on a free transfer, and sold him for £80,000, and his only problem was homesickness. A similar thing happened to him earlier in his career when he left Millwall for the same reason. He scored 11 goals for Millwall in 40 games as well before he went back to Scotland and Millwall got £360k for him from Hibs after getting him on a free transfer.

I know it was rumoured that he was on £8,000 a week playing for us and only lasted 6 months, but I always felt the stick he got was a bit unfair.

A pretty decent striker on his day who regularly scored in the Scottish Premier League for Dunfermline, who were hardly a big club. He's one that I would exempt from the "Scottish journeymen" tag. He'd had 4 clubs before us, and was only 30 when we signed him.

There have been a lot of clubs who wanted him during his career, but he didn't enjoy life in England.

The others you named I would agree with.

Good post about Crawford- except I'd go as to say that Milne didn't fall into that category either. Looked very lively, clever and technically good when he played. Only trouble was he never did. Had a gaping injury which ruled him out from October-April and was never really explained properly. I liked the look of him hugely when we played. Think a much better version of Feeney, not physically great, not a goal machine but bags of energy and good on the ball, despite not scoring very many.

Bollocks 'homesickness' he couldn't keep his dick in his trousers allegedly.