Some Argyle facts (summary of Ed Shilabeer's meeting)

Summary of Ed Shillabeer's meting with JB/ Argyle board

In terms of our concerns ES outlined that: -
• The current year loss is greater than budgeted for a number of reasons, one of which is attendances.
• This loss has been funded by non-interest bearing loan(s) from James Brent and his Akkerron Group of
companies.
• The club are not budgeting a loss for 2013/14. There are no more planned redundancies.
• All assumed debts from the administration period have been paid and are planned to continue to be
met. Funding of this will not come from "forced" player sales.
• Matchday (and non-matchday), conferencing and banqueting income from generated from the new
Grandstand will benefit the club.
• The club is within to the 55% Fair Play cap. The club is close to the limit but there is sufficient scope to
fund some new players for John Sheridan.

Posts : 983 Join date : 2012-04-24

Chemical Ali wrote:: Summary of Ed Shillabeer's meting with JB/ Argyle board

In terms of our concerns ES outlined that: -
• The current year loss is greater than budgeted for a number of reasons, one of which is attendances.
• This loss has been funded by non-interest bearing loan(s) from James Brent and his Akkerron Group of
companies.
So it's a loan which Argyle are going to have to pay back.
• The club are not budgeting a loss for 2013/14. There are no more planned redundancies.
Better hope we don't get relegated and that our budgeting process is more sensible next season
• All assumed debts from the administration period have been paid and are planned to continue to be
met. Funding of this will not come from "forced" player sales.
I believe that there is a lump sum of £2m which has to be paid at the end of the 4/5 years (agreed period). I believe from a question someone asked for me at the Cherry Tree meet, that this is going to be paid via a loan if funds aren't available (which they are unlikely to be without 'forced player sales').
• Matchday (and non-matchday), conferencing and banqueting income from generated from the new
Grandstand will benefit the club.
• The club is within to the 55% Fair Play cap. The club is close to the limit but there is sufficient scope to
fund some new players for John Sheridan.

Posts : 2345 Join date : 2011-05-10 Age : 55

Chemical Ali wrote:: Summary of Ed Shillabeer's meting with JB/ Argyle board

In terms of our concerns ES outlined that: -
• The current year loss is greater than budgeted for a number of reasons, one of which is attendances.
• This loss has been funded by non-interest bearing loan(s) from James Brent and his Akkerron Group of
companies.
• The club are not budgeting a loss for 2013/14. There are no more planned redundancies.
• All assumed debts from the administration period have been paid and are planned to continue to be
met. Funding of this will not come from "forced" player sales.
• Matchday (and non-matchday), conferencing and banqueting income from generated from the new
Grandstand will benefit the club.
• The club is within to the 55% Fair Play cap. The club is close to the limit but there is sufficient scope to
fund some new players for John Sheridan.

how can the debts have been paid AND still be being paid.
Foggy here innit

Posts : 2291 Join date : 2012-01-24

So, in a nutshell, the puchase of the club was mostly financed by the generous council tax payers of Plymouth buying the football ground.

The really valuable part of the property is now JB's retirement fund.

All the money lost since the club came out of Administration will be added to the millions of pounds of debt that the club came out of Administration with.

The football Club, which two years ago, had massive debts and owned it's ground and a development site, now has to pay rent, has no realisable assetts and has slightly less massive debts- but they are growing every day.

That's progress for you!

Posts : 3040 Join date : 2011-11-23

Chemical Ali wrote:: • This loss has been funded by non-interest bearing loan(s) from James Brent and his Akkerron Group of
companies.

'sfunny, whenever I raised the issue of Harry not putting a penny of his own money onto the deal I was immediately set upon by the hounds of hell, now we see they are just pulling a bank job, hardly surprising mind. Debts are not being paid off they are merely being serviced and shuffled about a bit until Harry's pension fund scoops the lottery win at which time his affable beneficence may be tested somewhat.

Guest

There's a few very concerning issues in that little lot!

Posts : 3191 Join date : 2011-12-02

• The club are not budgeting a loss for 2013/14. There are no more planned redundancies.

That just means a reduced budget for 2013/14 based on the actual crowds and income for this year. It will be an austerity budget and that has got to have a knock on effect on quality of players recruited (and a smaller squad - though thats not a bad thing) and that on top of the huge rebuilding process that Sheridan or A.N. Other are going to have to go through

• The current year loss is greater than budgeted for a number of reasons, one of which is attendances.
• This loss has been funded by non-interest bearing loan(s) from James Brent and his Akkerron Group of
companies.

Attendences are unlikely to increase next year unless we are challenging for promotion. Seasin ticket sales are going to be key after the Brent bounce this year. And any going for promotion missives will be taken with a huge doze of salt.

Is it the additional loss which is covered by loans or is it the whole amount ie the budgeted shortfall that Brent knew about and said he would cover coming out of admin and the unbudgetted amount because of the attendence figure cock up.

I always assumed perhaps naively that the budgetted loss was just a pure cash input with no strings attached.

Posts : 1201 Join date : 2011-12-23

And that Dougie is, I believe, the 1st success of the PASB - the word 'funded' can no longer be used - it is a loan and a loan from other JB companies (albeit at 0% interest). It is also a larger loan than the amount repaid by the club to the other inherited debt. Together with the sale of Land assets it is probable that our Balance Sheet is in a worse state today than on Day 1 of JBs tenure.

Posts : 3191 Join date : 2011-12-02

Did Brent tell the PASB the magnitude of the loan or just that it was bigger than the inherited debt.

It's a worry because either we have to fly up the leagues, rapidly increase off field income, persuade more jaded Plymouthians through the turnstyles or Brent to sell to a minted sugar daddy to get out of this financial malaise.

Dougie wrote:: Did Brent tell the PASB the magnitude of the loan or just that it was bigger than the inherited debt.

It's a worry because either we have to fly up the leagues, rapidly increase off field income, persuade more jaded Plymouthians through the turnstyles or Brent to sell to a minted sugar daddy to get out of this financial malaise.

It's alright though. Murals are being prepared as we speak and the nool is concentrating on the commercial side and auctioning tat to nikkkkkkk.

Get some class into the joint Mr Brent. This is getting beyond a joke.

Guest

So basically it is no different to when Dan was chairman and used Rotolok to offset the debt as a loan, which of course had to be repaid aswell as the value of the club at that time

Is this what 'sustainability' means?

No, didn't think so. Give it 2 years and we'll be back into admin.

Guest

Does anyone know what the figures are for the debt owed to the GT's to date and the debt owed to Brent to date?

Guest

Incredible we expect anything different from a guy groomed at one of worlds most toxic bank groups, but don't worry boys, it will all be ok! Rolling Eyes

» Saltash 0 Argyle 1 summary
» Argyle 2 truro 1 summary
» Argyle 1 Rotherham 4 ( and observations on Saturday's meeting)
» Some Facts!
» True Facts About John Sheridan